Ramasamy on Ayer Kuning byelection

Murray Hunter


Ramasamy on Ayer Kuning byelection

P Ramasamy
Apr 28, 2025



PSM team in Ayer Kuning


PAS loss in Ayer Kuning

PAS Vice President, Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, appears to be in a state of denial when explaining his party's defeat in the recent Ayer Kuning by-election. Compared to the last general election, PAS lost approximately 800 votes.

Meanwhile, candidate National Line (BN) from Umno emerged victorious, doubling his majority from the previous matches.

The Socialist Party Malaysia (PSM) candidate, despite successfully doubling his support, eventually lost his deposit, gaining only 1,106 votes.

Tuan Ibrahim blames PAS's defeat not to the pig farm controversial issue, but to the low voting percentage, claiming many PAS supporters did not vote.

However, this reason is very flawed. If true low voting percentage becomes a factor, the increase in voting turnout may only add to Umno's winning majority.

In other words, higher turnout is not necessarily in favor of PAS.

Tuan Ibrahim's explanation is nothing more than a mere wishful thinking.

If PAS or its merger, the National Alliance (PN), takes a more inclusive approach, perhaps they can draw some support from Chinese and Indian voters.

Unfortunately, by raising trivial issues like pig farming, the party has only succeeded in isolating itself from the Chinese community.

Why PAS chose to highlight this issue is hard to understand — perhaps as an effort to strengthen support for Muslim Malays. However, politically, this strategy eats itself.

Compare to the recent Sungai Bakap by-election, in which Indian voters supported PAS candidates as the party fought for abandoned Tamil schools issue. In fact, Urimai at that time had urged Indian voters not to choose the PKR candidate from the PH merger.

In Ayer Yellow, such an inclusive approach is hardly visible.

If PAS and PN want to remain relevant and competitive in Malaysia's national politics, they need to discuss seriously. Enough with the empty excuses and baseless rationalization — it's time for a critical re-evaluation.

PAS’ defeat in Ayer Kuning: Time for serious soul-searching

PAS deputy president Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man seems to be caught in a state of denial when explaining his party’s defeat in the recent Ayer Kuning by-election.

Compared to the last general election, PAS lost about 800 votes.

Meanwhile, the Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate from Umno emerged victorious, doubling his majority compared to the previous contest.

The Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) candidate, despite managing to double his support, ultimately lost his deposit, securing just 1,106 votes.

Tuan Ibrahim attributed PAS’ loss not to the controversial pig farm issue, but to low voter turnout, claiming that many PAS supporters failed to show up at the polls.

However, this reasoning is fundamentally flawed. If low turnout was indeed a factor, higher voter turnout might just as likely have widened Umno’s margin of victory.

In other words, a larger turnout would not necessarily have favored PAS.

Tuan Ibrahim’s explanation amounts to little more than wishful thinking.

Had PAS or its coalition, Perikatan Nasional (PN), adopted a more inclusive approach, it might have garnered some support from Chinese and Indian voters.

Unfortunately, by raising a non-issue like pig farming, the party only managed to alienate the Chinese community.

Why PAS chose to highlight this issue is difficult to understand — perhaps it was an attempt to consolidate Malay Muslim support. However, politically, the strategy backfired.

Contrast this with the recent Sungai Bakap by-election, where Indian voters supported the PAS candidate because the party championed the cause of an abandoned Tamil school. In fact, Urimai had urged Indians not to vote for the PKR candidate of the PH-led coalition at that time.

In Ayer Kuning, however, PAS’ inclusiveness was noticeably absent.

If PAS and PN aspire to remain relevant and competitive in Malaysian national politics, serious soul-searching is required. Enough with the excuses and baseless rationalizations — it’s time for a critical reassessment.