By P Waytha Moorthy
The prime minister plays a central constitutional role in advising key appointments to the judiciary and the inspector general of police.
That he remains in this position while also a defendant before the same judicial and civil system he helps shape is untenable and compromises the very institutional integrity he claims to protect.
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s public admission in the Yusoff Rawther case -that high office must be shielded from litigation to protect our constitutional system – confirms a direct conflict of interest with his exclusive power under the Constitution to appoint judges and the inspector general. Integrity now demands his resignation.
Anwar’s position risks eroding public confidence in the impartiality of Malaysia’s legal and Justice system
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN), CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a pledge or schedule an auto donation to Aliran every month or every quarter
- Become an Aliran member
This statement is made in my personal capacity as a citizen responsible for upholding the Federal Constitution.
I call upon Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to take an immediate leave of absence from his official duties or as a matter of principle offer his immediate resignation pending the resolution of the civil suit filed against him by his former staff member Muhammed Yusoff Rawther.
As head of the cabinet in a “unity government”, Anwar is mandated with an exclusive power under Article 122 of the Federal Constitution in advising the Agong on the appointments of Federal Court judges, Court of Appeal judges and High Court judges.
The Constitution provides that the king must accept the advice of the prime minister upon consulting the Conference of Rulers.
Apart from this, currently there are impending vacancies in (unless the tenure is extended by the king) for the position of:
- Chief justice
- Court of Appeal president
- Chief judge of Malaya
- Chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak
Based on these vacancies the prime minister would play a crucial role in the appointment (within the next few weeks) of those vacancies mentioned above as well as appointments or extensions of nine Federal Court Judges, nine Court of Appeal judges and probably at least 12 High Court judges, not to mention judicial commissioners.
The fact that Prime Minister Anwar remains in this position while also a defendant before the same judicial system he helps shape is untenable and compromises the very institutional integrity he is supposed to protect.
Further as head of the executive, he also advises the Agong on the appointment or extension of the position of inspector general of police, whose term expired on 22 June.
It must be noted that Yusuf Rawther alleges that he was framed by the police in the criminal investigations and eventual charges levelled against him after the appointment of Anwar as PM.
Prime Minister Anwar’s exclusive constitutional authority to recommend the appointments of almost three quarters of the vacancies (which are pending and currently due) in the judiciary and the appointment of the inspector general places him in direct and serious conflict of interest, particularly as he remains an active litigant in ongoing civil suits.
This duality fundamentally undermines the principles of natural justice and the separation of powers. By holding influence over the very institutions – the judiciary and the police -that are tasked with adjudicating and investigating matters in which he is personally involved, Anwar’s position risks eroding public confidence in the impartiality of Malaysia’s legal system. This situation underscores the need for accountability.
No individuals should possess the power to shape the leadership of institutions responsible for holding them accountable.
What is especially alarming is the prime minister’s blatant attempt to mislead the Malaysian public following the High Court’s June decision to dismiss his application to refer questions of immunity to the Federal Court.
Instead of accepting the court’s decision with accountability, he deflected responsibility onto the judiciary – effectively inviting the courts to determine whether a civil suit compromises his capacity to govern or threatens constitutional order.
In doing so, he has made two dangerously misleading claims, which I quote directly from media reports:
- “This matter has never been about seeking personal immunity or escaping legal scrutiny. It concerns the integrity of our constitutional system.”
- “[It concerns] the need to ensure that high public office is protected from litigation that may be strategically timed, politically motivated, or institutionally disruptive.”
Let us be absolutely clear: the second statement is a deliberate falsehood designed to manipulate public perception.
The lawsuit filed by Yusoff Rawther predates Anwar’s appointment as prime minister on 24 November 2022.
It is therefore factually inaccurate to portray this legal action by Yusoff Rawther as a politically timed or institutionally disruptive move targeting a sitting head of the cabinet.
By asserting that litigation against a public officeholder is inherently “disruptive”, Anwar reveals a dangerous conflation between personal legal accountability and institutional stability.
Worse, he tacitly admits he is unable to discharge his responsibilities effectively while under legal scrutiny – which is precisely why he must take leave, not seek immunity.
In truth, it is not the civil suit that threatens public trust, but the prime minister’s refusal to step aside while under legal challenge – despite holding influence and sanctioned by the Constitution to exercise exclusive power to advice the king over judicial appointments and government institutions.
This refusal raises grave concerns about the independence of Malaysia’s judiciary, the credibility of the executive branch, and the principle of parliamentary accountability.
The prime minister’s fragile parliamentary footing – his party holds only 31 seats, together with Pakatan Harapan 79 – compounds the problem. His government is sustained through cooperation with political rivals.
Maintaining leadership under these legal shadows risks destabilising the coalition and eroding public faith in governance.
Let it be stated unequivocally: no public official, including the prime minister, should be shielded from legal accountability through the misuse of institutional language or legal manoeuvres.
Seeking judicial protection while in power only reinforces the perception that the system is being twisted to protect one individual rather than serve the nation.
Taking leave or offering to resign would:
• Reaffirm the principle that no one is above the law
• Protect judicial independence at a critical juncture
• Restore public confidence in the executive
• Safeguard the unity and stability of Malaysia’s government
Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy is a longtime activist.
AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama
- Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
- Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
- Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
- Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
- Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
