The guided democracy of our national parties

The guided democracy of our national parties



Thursday, 11 Sep 2025 8:40 AM MYT

SEPTEMBER 11 — Bersatu means united. When Muhyiddin Yassin and Mahathir Mohamad proceeded to form a splinter party in 2016, they had less illusions about a united front but were rather fixated on picking up the last word in Umno’s Malay name — Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu — to pick up Malay support.

Sounds the same, can be the same later. Displace Umno and rename Bersatu Umno. Potato, potato… tomato, tomato.

Muhyiddin and Mahathir have experience in this method. Stratagem, misdirection and patience that the people forget over policy, purpose and consistency.

In short, the breakaway party was indifferent about unity and far more obsessed with eventual dominance.

Nine years later, one centenarian founder less, the party is at the precipice of an open revolt.

Apparently, 120 — more than half of the party— division leaders signed statutory declarations (SDs) opposing the president. A commotion broke out at the party assembly on Sunday when Muhyiddin delivered his address.

There are two things to examine, one, Bersatu’s ponderous view of democracy and process, and two, the way other major parties gleefully rub their hands sensing the implosion of an arch-rival.



Bersatu leaders poses for group pictures during the party’s annual general assembly at IDCC in Shah Alam September 7, 2025. The author argues the party’s crisis is less about revolt than a long-standing disdain for internal democracy. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa


‘Government of the people, as long as they are my people’

Leave the party’s advocacy on the national stage aside.

Let’s ask a basic question. Why was there no contest for the two top posts last October?

There was discord over 18 months following the 2022 General Election — which witnessed Bersatu Sabah morph into Gerakan Rakyat Sabah (GRS), Semenanjung and Labuan MPs desert for federal funding and loss after loss at by-elections — which in normal organisations demands change.

The answer won’t flatter.

The top leaders of Bersatu do not believe votes should decide who runs the party. Certainly not votes by members. They like outcomes known upfront, and power retained in safe hands. Power is deliberated by a cabal within.

That does not mean they trust each other in the cabal or supreme council, just that 40 or 50 is more manageable than half a million members.

Malaysian politics is about elites equipped to use the masses as statistical support not as equals inside their party.

So, when rumours swirl about a Bersatu leadership switch, those inside the cabal shout even louder their love for their supreme leader. Which they did in mid-2024.

The supreme council issues a statement: No contest for top two. Appeasements were outstanding, Hamzah Zainudin was a heavyweight operator, and Azmin led a small army out of PKR.

Arrangements were made for sitting deputy president Ahmad Faizal Azumu or Peja to demote himself to vice-president, to accommodate Hamzah who went on to become leader of the Opposition. Azmin Ali gets the secretary-general post to reflect his CV.

These months before the party elections. Did they need to bother with the elections? Might as well ask the group of elders, wise men, veterans or the boot room or whatever to call them, to just decide for the rest.

Firstly, for any president of any party — including the breakfast pancake club — to tell the party members what is good for them, and then decide in small rooms for the whole party that he should carry on as president uncontested is unethical. It probably merits the Registrar of Societies to look at it.

The counter argument is not that Muhyiddin asked for obedience. Of course not, a pal gets up during the supreme council and presents the need for stability and the clique gets clicking and those opposed stay quiet and echo the sentiment. “We all love Muhyiddin, oh we do!” is shouted in unison.

Even within the cabal, the decision is guided. The members mean even less.

The real problem with the approach is that it lacks legitimacy. It’s not really democratic, is it?

And in the 1970s that was perfectly fine since the number of graduates in the Umno assembly hall could be tallied on a sheet of paper.

The membership adhered, and the top leadership circle concurred like British schoolboys to avoid playground fights.

The system worked when most members could be asked to shut up. Even the leadership circle could be stared into complying. The Asian way, no open revolt.

Except, today the disagreements are widespread, within the top circle. Fifty years of school and modernisation does change culture.

Back to the SDs, even if there were only 12 SDs, it could not have been generated without the instructions and financing of one or few inside the supreme council.

Those division chiefs dare not affix their signatures if a proper godfather or payung was absent.

So, there you have it, Bersatu — out of power for three years — was already ripe for discontent.

However, the play acting within the supreme council and the over-the-top public obeisance to the leader, do not only make leadership changes messy, they stunt the organisation.

Instead, the prevailing culture promotes hypocrisy as a key advancement tool, and defends it as just game play, nothing serious.

If to lie is the basis for survival, everyone lies. Well, at least those still with a pulse inside the organisation.

The persistent lying are the building blocks for eventual internal coups, party hopping and a permanent cold war.

Things may accelerate further, an impending trigger point is upon Bersatu. The Sabah state elections.

Sabah voters are historically volatile. But they are not going to forget that Bersatu leaders ditched the party in 2022 and that Bersatu today is fragmented. Nor will they just go with the new and improved Bersatu candidates for voting day later this year.

When Bersatu collapses in the Sabah polls, Bersatu cannot just speak its way to the general election.

Those other parties

The other national parties quietly punch their hands in the air. If Bersatu falls, the Unity Government can be the only group left with the capacity to rule.

But that does not mean they can brag about their own parties being exempt from feudalism, guided processes and a general disdain for democracy.

The PKR election in May advertised how choice is subverted by undue influences from top leadership. Rafizi Ramli was already toast when two-thirds of the divisions mysteriously backed a candidate who did not even forward her name at that point to become deputy party president.

The top leadership and the division delegates were guided to “do the right thing” for the party as decided by the better and mature heads.

In Umno’s case, we have to go back a few years to the time Zahid Hamidi went turbo and sacked or suspended those capable of unseating him in an Umno election. PAS’ elected leaders are still under the dictates of the cleric council, enough said.

Does DAP get a standing applause for being the exemplar of democratic virtues inside Pakatan?

No. The party still uses the socialist structure that they inherited from their original party, People’s Action Party — which now currently perfects the art of pretending to be an equal opportunity democracy while they choke off opponents.

In DAP Malaysia’s elections, the delegates vote in the central executive committee, which then goes into a conclave to correct the order, contrary to the delegation vote the wiser heads can decide what is best for the party.

Any party which circumvents the support of the members and employs undue influences to contain democratic overzealousness is compromising its legitimacy.

A lack of legitimacy always invites resentment and general cloak and dagger rubbish.

That is why, while a lot of folks from Pakatan Harapan have their schadenfreude moment seeing Bersatu get unhinged and its president walking around with a copy of Macbeth, when it comes to legitimacy and the respect for the will of the members, the Orange gang are just as adept to suppress democratic ideals to sustain an elitist core intent on keeping itself on top.

Democracy is so 1776

If the top leaders of the various national parties were brought into a hall, they’d agree a lot on the need to corral their members to their power designs ad infinitum.

To them, competition is good except it is not.

Members are central to the party, as long as they stay 100 kilometres away from the party.

United means to back the right leader, which they will politely inform the masses who that person is.

Muhyiddin’s predicament probably resurfaces at all the other national parties cyclically.

Their commitment to avoid having a party of empowered members leads to the feudalism which in the good times serves them splendidly.

In the bad times, they lead to messy power disputes where all the fighting is in the shadows while all combatants hug each other in the light.

The bad news for readers is that they are forewarned about the sequels which make us all squirm. For now, it is Bersatu’s turn on the stove.