Asian Angle | Malaysia’s PM term limits could backfire unless election cycles are set
To secure his legacy, Anwar Ibrahim must ensure his reform doesn’t accidentally encourage the very political instability he seeks to prevent
The proposed prime ministerial term limit of 10 years or two terms would curb the concentration of power in an individual and encourage party leadership succession. Yet the benefits of achieving these through legislation may be overstated; parliamentary systems provide certain checks and balances absent in presidential systems, where term limits are the norm.
But there are pitfalls to instituting the prime ministerial term limit without at the same time legislating fixed parliamentary terms – also promised in PH’s 2022 manifesto. The two reforms are conceptually linked; pursuing one without the other could increase political instability.
The complication begins with the way the limit is framed, in both duration (10 years) and number of terms (two). Malaysia’s parliamentary system, which follows the Westminster model, does not operate on a fixed electoral cycle. After a general election, the king appoints as prime minister whichever member of parliament he regards commands majority support in the House of Representatives. The newly formed parliament can last up to five years from its first sitting, but the prime minister may call an election before then or be forced out if he loses his majority. In short, the durations of both parliament and the prime ministership are indeterminate.