1 of 26

FROM REFORMASI TO GOVERNANCE

Evaluating Legal & Administrative Change in Malaysia Under the Unity Government

(December 2022 – December 2025)

Dr Kamarul Zaman Haji Yusoff

Director, Institute of Malaysian Political Analysis (MAPAN)

Universiti Utara Malaysia

14 January 2026

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

20-slide deck

2 of 26

What this talk does

1

Restate the GE15 Reformasi baseline

Why it matters: promises are the democratic + moral basis of Reformasi legitimacy.

2

Evaluate what changed (Dec 2022–Dec 2025)

Delivered vs partially implemented vs deferred (and what each category means).

3

Explain why reform is structurally hard

Coalition veto players + economic pressures + ethnopolitical risk framing (postnormal times).

Central argument

The mixed reform record is best read as a case study in how Reformasi ideals collide with institutional inertia, coalition politics, and postnormal governance conditions — not as a simple “success vs failure” story.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Roadmap

3 of 26

GE15 Reformasi baseline (2022)

Rule of law + integrity

MACC appointment oversight Multi-partisan vetting of key enforcement roles

Asset declaration (ministers/MPs/senior officials + spouses/family)

FOI + tighter OSA

Procurement reform

Whistleblower protection

Independent Ombudsman

AG–PP separation

Democracy + Parliament

Term limits (PM/MB/CM)

Fixed-Term Parliament Act

Parliamentary Services Act

Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO)

Political Funding Act

Equal Constituency Development Funds (CDF)

Malapportionment deviation cap (30%)

Speech-law review

Rights + federalism + digital

Gender-equal citizenship amendment (Art. 15(2))

MA63 commitments

Sabah 40% claim

35% MPs from Sabah/Sarawak

KL local democracy

UEC recognition

UUCA autonomy

Digitising government: access to administration via smartphone

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Baseline promises

4 of 26

5 of 26

6 of 26

7 of 26

Evaluation lens (Dec 2022–Dec 2025)

Delivered

Law/policy enacted + operationalised (at least minimally).

Examples

Art. 15(2) amendment

Procurement architecture (FRA + Procurement Act)

Media Council Act

MA63 progress signals

Partially implemented

Normatively “yes”, but constrained by timelines, capacity or scope.

Examples

Whistleblower protections strengthened but still channel-dependent

Parliamentary Services Act passed, but implementation delayed

Deferred/abandoned

High-conflict reforms postponed to preserve coalition survival and control.

Examples

MACC appointment oversight

Political Funding Act

Equal CDF

Key caution: passage of a law = political victory; building the machinery = administrative struggle.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Framework

8 of 26

Scorecard summary (Dec 2022–Dec 2025)

7

Fulfilled

5

Promised for 2026

14

Yet to be fulfilled

Delivered (selected)

Art. 15(2) gender-equal citizenship amendment

Procurement reform (FRA 2023 + Procurement Act 2025)

Whistleblower Act amendments (July 2025)

Parliamentary Services Act 2025 (implementation pending)

Media Council Act 2025

Sabah 40% claim: legal recognition + no federal appeal

MA63 implementation mechanisms (MTPMA63)

Promised for 2026 (reset)

FOI Act + tighter OSA controls

Independent Ombudsman Act

10-year/two-term limits (PM/MB/CM)

Separate AG advisory role from PP prosecution

Digital government: access the administration via smartphone

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Scorecard

9 of 26

Delivered reform #1

Gender-equal citizenship (Federal Constitution, Article 15(2))

What changed

Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2024 passed by Dewan Rakyat (17 Oct 2024) and Dewan Negara (4 Dec 2024).Gendered wording “whose father” replaced with a neutral formulation (“of whose parents one at least”).Effect: children born abroad to Malaysian mothers gain automatic citizenship on the same basis as fathers.

Why it matters (governance lens)

Corrects formalised gender discrimination embedded in constitutional text.Shows deep legal change is possible when injustice is clear and coalition-wide consensus is achievable.Illustrates incrementalism: not retroactive; accompanied by other citizenship adjustments that complicate rights impact.

Delivery mechanics

Clear moral clarity

+ sustained advocacy

Two-thirds majority

+ broad parliamentary buy-in

Low “identity backlash”

relative to other reforms

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Delivered

10 of 26

Delivered reform #2

Reform of public procurement: disciplining the “money machinery”

Two linked reforms

Fiscal Responsibility Act 2023 (Act 850)

A “self-binding” law: declares fiscal targets, standardises reporting, and demands justification for deviation.Shifts macro-fiscal management from executive convenience → rules + oversight.Makes prudence monitorable (answerability culture), even when politics pressures for short-term relief.

Postnormal trade-off: fiscal discipline (long horizon) vs subsidies/cost-of-living (immediate survival).

Government Procurement Act 2025

Disciplines discretion where leakages happen: tenders, exemptions, negotiations.Key governance feature: contestability (review panel + appeal tribunal pathways).Moves procurement toward procedural fairness, reason-giving, and legal accountability.Adds “teeth”: punishable breaches, interference, and conflict-of-interest failures.

Reformasi → governance architecture: constrain discretion with law, process, and enforceability.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Delivered

11 of 26

Partially implemented reform

Whistleblower Protection Act amendments (passed 23 July 2025)

What improved

Clarified protected disclosure procedures and definitional coverage.Reiterated prohibitions against retaliation (formal integrity signal).Strengthened the compliance framing within official channels.

Where it still falls short

Manifesto ambition: protect disclosures to the media when internal channels fail.Current model remains channel-dependent (where/how you disclose) rather than harm-/public-interest-dependent.Assumes enforcement agencies are trusted and insulated—often exactly what whistleblowers doubt.

Analytical takeaway: stronger integrity rhetoric, but protection still vulnerable when disclosure must go public to be effective.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Partial

12 of 26

Capacity reform with an execution gap

Parliamentary Services Act 2025: autonomy in practice, not just on paper

Why PSA 2025 matters

Parliament cannot check the executive sustainably if its staffing, finance, logistics and operations remain executive-dependent.PSA 2025 restores a parliamentary service framework so the legislature can run its own administrative machinery.Administrative dependence is a quiet tool of executive dominance; autonomy increases Parliament’s “institutional horsepower”.

Intention → execution gap

Law passed: 5 March 2025

Stated activation timeline: Expected May 2027

Implementation work:

Appointments + terms of service

Disciplinary procedures

Consultations with central agencies

Organisational structure build-out

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Capacity

13 of 26

Delivered Reform (Incremental Liberalisation)

Media governance: Malaysian Media Council Act 2025

What the reform signals

Independent statutory body for ethical journalism and peer-based accountability.

A shift in tone: From direct executive control toward professional self-regulation.

Aligns with democratic media-governance best practices (normatively).

Structural limit

Did not repeal/override coercive ecosystem: CMA 1998 (MCMC), PPPA 1984 and other enforcement powers.

Media governance becomes dual-layered: self-regulation + state enforcement.

Council guidance cannot neutralise executive discretion over licensing, takedowns, investigations and prosecutions.

Analytical takeaway: an important institutional layer — but no paradigmatic power shift without legal repeal and enforcement-culture change.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Delivered

14 of 26

Delivered In Principle

Sabah 40% net revenue entitlement (Art. 112C + Tenth Schedule)

What changed (2022–2025)

High Court recognition (17 Oct 2025): Sabah’s claim is constitutionally grounded and justiciable.

Federal Government chose not to appeal (AGC statement, 11 Nov 2025) and committed to negotiations.

Shift in discourse: from centre–state confrontation → cooperative constitutionalism (rights acknowledged, fiscal sequencing).

Why this is analytically important

Difference between formal fulfilment vs substantive delivery: litigation halted and claim recognised, but fiscal transfer still phased.

Non-appeal is a governance signal: legal process allowed to stand as a negotiation platform.

A Reformasi-style move: respect constitutional entitlement while managing budget constraints.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Federalism

15 of 26

Delivered Directionally

Implementing MA63 as a “living” constitutional commitment

Institutional platform

MTPMA63 chaired by the Prime Minister to oversee structured implementation.

Technical committee chaired by DPM II (Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof) with regular progress reporting.

Moves MA63 from symbolic rhetoric → measurable governance process.

Observable outcomes (illustrative)

Settled items: Recognition of state JKR as technical departments; gas regulation powers; IRB Act amendments for state representation.

Transparency initiative: MA63 status dashboard via BHESS portal (progress visibility).

Overall pattern: Deliver what is negotiable now; defer what needs constitutional debate + broad support.

Analytical takeaway: negotiated federalism in motion — progress is real, but completion is structurally long-term.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

MA63

16 of 26

Reforms Promised For 2026 (The “Reset”)

From aspiration to delivery discipline (explicit execution window)

Five headline commitments

1

Freedom of Information (FOI) Act + tighter OSA controls

Transparency reform with security safeguards to reduce bureaucratic resistance.

2

Independent Ombudsman Act

Institutionalise administrative justice + non-judicial redress for maladministration.

3

10-year / two-term limits (PM/MB/CM)

Anti-entrenchment governance; self-limiting executive power.

4

Separate AG advisory role from PP prosecution

Strengthen prosecutorial independence; reduce conflict-of-interest structures.

5

Digital government: access to the entire administration via smartphone

Service delivery + reduced bureaucracy; “all urusan online” except where law requires otherwise.

Treat these as “new promises”: Explicit timelines + lessons from 2022–2025 constraints + reform fatigue realities.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

2026 reset

17 of 26

2026 promise spotlight

Digitising government: “Access to the entire administration via smartphone” (Promise 37)

What this promise means (governance)

Shift the default mode of government from counter-based bureaucracy → mobile-first service delivery.

Reduce approval friction: Fewer steps, clearer tracking, shorter processing time.

Increase transparency + accountability: citizens can monitor status, requirements and timelines.

Reduce burden on civil servants by automating routine drafting and workflow triage (AI-assisted administration).

Anchor in Amanat Tahun Baharu 2026 (5 January 2026)

“KSU, KP pastikan semua urusan online,

melainkan yang terikat dengan peraturan undang-undang…

Kita harus mulakan jawapan-jawapan surat

dengan deraf awal itu artificial intelligence (AI).”

Why the push intensifies in 2026

Civil service wage revision raises public expectations → faster approvals + less bureaucracy.

Digitalisation becomes the “delivery multiplier” when fiscal space and manpower are tight.

Digital-first is politically visible (quick wins) without immediately triggering identity backlash.

Analytical takeaway: Digital reform is both administrative modernisation and a coalition-friendly strategy for measurable performance.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Promise 37

18 of 26

Why reform is hard: the constraint map

Three structural pressures that widen the “promise → delivery” gap

Postnormal times

Complexity + uncertainty + speed + simultaneous crises

Design/intent ≠ outcomes (implementation chasm)

Economic pressures

Cost of living dominates attention

Subsidies + cash transfers absorb bandwidth

Fiscal constraints limit reform space

Coalition + identity politics

Multiple veto players

Ethnopolitical risk framing

Reform sequencing for survival

Bottom line: Reformasi ambition can exceed reform capacity — especially when stability, survival and identity competition set the “political cost ceiling”.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Constraint map

19 of 26

Postnormal times and the governance gap

Conceptual lens from Anwar Ibrahim’s “Rethinking Ourselves”

Core idea

In postnormal conditions (complexity + uncertainty + speed), the gap widens between sound policy design and effective implementation.

“Good intentions and sound policies do not automatically translate into just outcomes.”

“Power, institutions, and entrenched interests often stand in the way of meaningful reform.”

“There is frequently a wide gap between what is promised and what can actually be delivered.”

“Reform is not merely a matter of ideas, but of navigating structures that resist change.”

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Postnormal lens

20 of 26

Coalition politics and veto players

Stability, bargaining, and reform sequencing under the Unity Government

Coalition heterogeneity

Unity Government assembled for stability after a hung parliament.

Divergent incentives: Reformist parties (PH) vs veto-prone partners with entrenched networks (e.g., UMNO) and regional bargaining priorities (GPS/GRS).

Veto players exist formally (Cabinet/Parliament) and informally (bureaucratic elites, enforcement agencies).

Sequencing logic

Phase 1: Survival + stability

Phase 2: Low-conflict enabling reforms

Phase 3: High-impact / high-conflict reforms

High-impact reforms are sequenced last because they constrain executive discretion and disrupt patronage networks.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Coalition constraint

21 of 26

Ethnopolitical contestation and risk framing

How “technical” reforms become identity threats

Mechanism

In Malaysia, many administrative reforms are debated through an ethnic–religious lens, escalating the perceived political cost of reform.

Malapportionment (30% deviation cap)

Risk framing:

Reframed as weakening rural Malay representation / “diluting Malay power”.

Repeal/review speech laws (Sedition, CMA, PPPA)

Risk framing:

Reframed as permitting insults to Islam/royalty; “order” narrative crowds out rights.

UEC recognition (with BM credit condition)

Risk framing:

Reframed as privileging non-Malays and undermining national language/integration.

KL local democracy (DBKL)

Risk framing:

Reframed as loss of Malay administrative control over a symbolic capital city.

Pattern: neutral reforms → symbolic contestation → reform delayed/diluted/sequence-shifted to avoid backlash.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Ethnopolitical lens

22 of 26

Deferred in the name of political survival

Four core Reformasi promises that threaten executive discretion

1

Parliamentary oversight for MACC Chief Commissioner appointment

Dilutes PM discretion over a powerful enforcement body; triggers coalition trust issues and elite resistance.

2

Multi-partisan vetting of key enforcement appointments (PP, MACC, EC, IGP)

Transfers appointment power to Parliament; increases uncertainty and reduces executive crisis-management leverage.

3

Political Funding Act

Disrupts informal funding channels and patronage networks that sustain party machinery—an existential threat to resource-dependent actors.

4

Equal Constituency Development Funds (CDF) for all MPs

Removes a critical tool for maintaining loyalty and bargaining support in a fragmented coalition parliament.

Shared feature: Each reform weakens patronage mechanisms and empowers oversight — so “survival” becomes the ultimate veto player.

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Deferred

23 of 26

Closing Synthesis

Malaysia (stability-first incrementalism) vs Indonesia (rapid legal overhaul) — and the 2026 test

Malaysia (2022–2025)

Cautious sequencing to preserve coalition stability.

Delivered enabling reforms;

Deferred high-conflict structural reforms.

Risk: Reform fatigue when legitimacy is judged by subsidies/service delivery instead of institutions.

Indonesia (illustrative contrast)

Rapid, sweeping legal overhaul (criminal + procedural reforms).

Risk: Legitimacy backlash when reforms expand state power without safeguards.

Rights-based mobilisation becomes the constraint, not coalition veto players.

Shared lesson

Reform delayed too long erodes trust; Reform accelerated without safeguards provokes backlash.

The 2026 “reset” is Malaysia’s execution test: Can Reformasi be institutionalised before the window closes?

MAPAN • Universiti Utara Malaysia

Conclusion

24 of 26

25 of 26

26 of 26