DAP has long argued for MACC reform, including placing the commission under parliamentary oversight, strengthening security of tenure for the chief commissioner, and separating investigative authority from political control over prosecution.

WHEN DAP Secretary-General Anthony Loke warned on Dec 9, 2025 that the party would reassess its position in the unity government if “meaningful reforms” were not delivered within six months, it sounded like a long-overdue attempt to reassert the party’s reformist spine.

But deadlines only matter when the public knows exactly what is being measured. Without a clear, written and time-bound reform checklist, DAP’s ultimatum risks being dismissed as political posturing rather than a serious governing demand.

This is not about semantics. It is about credibility. Reform cannot remain a flexible slogan that shifts with coalition arithmetic. If DAP wants Malaysians to take its warning seriously, it must do what genuine reform movements do: name the reforms, name the laws, name the institutions, and name the deadlines.

The unity government may be fragile. But reform has always been inconvenient. That was the moral bargain voters accepted when DAP asked for their trust.

If DAP is serious about “meaningful reforms”, it should publish a reform list that is specific, testable and non-negotiable. At minimum, it should include the following six items.

DAP also cannot credibly argue that these reforms are too complex or politically impossible to deliver within six months. The party has been in government for seven years, first under Pakatan Harapan and now within the unity administration.

If institutional reform was truly its core mission, these issues should have been prioritised from the moment power was secured. Instead, many were deferred, diluted or quietly side-lined.

Claiming that six months is insufficient today only reinforces the perception that reform urgency emerges when political leverage is threatened, not when responsibility is assumed.

Corruption reform: MACC independence, Ismail Sabri, and the Sabah mining exposè

Any reform agenda that does not begin with corruption is already compromised.

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) remains structurally vulnerable to executive influence. Regardless of how often the government declares its commitment to clean governance, enforcement that lacks institutional independence will always be perceived as selective.

DAP has long argued for MACC reform, including placing the commission under parliamentary oversight, strengthening security of tenure for the chief commissioner, and separating investigative authority from political control over prosecution.

These reforms are not cosmetic. They are structural necessities if corruption is to be tackled consistently rather than episodically.

The urgency of MACC reform is underscored by the unresolved contradictions in recent high-profile cases.

One of the most damaging is the RM169 million linked to former Prime Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob. Large sums of cash were seized and subsequently forfeited. Yet what the public has not seen is prosecution, charges, or a courtroom examination of evidence.

The uncomfortable question remains: how can someone allegedly linked to RM169 million return the money and walk away effectively uncharged? Can others do so too or is it only a privilege for Members of Parliament whose vote at the Dewan Rakyat is depended upon by the Government?

Returning funds does not equate to accountability. Without prosecution, forfeiture risks becoming a substitute for justice rather than a step towards it. DAP’s silence on this case has been conspicuous and damaging.

Compounding this credibility gap is the Sabah mining scandal exposed through a series of videos released by businessman Albert Tei.

Despite multiple video revelations allegedly implicating 15 politicians, only two have been charged. Several others named continue to hold senior positions in the Sabah government, including a deputy chief minister and key ministerial posts. To top it all, one of the two was recently appointed to an important GLC position. And DAP said nothing…yet.

Tei has publicly challenged Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to demonstrate that anti-corruption enforcement is not constrained by political considerations. That challenge remains unanswered.

These three elements, MACC structural weakness, the Ismail Sabri case, and the Sabah mining expose, are not separate issues. They form a single corruption credibility test. If DAP’s six-month ultimatum does not confront them directly, it will be seen as rhetorical rather than reformist.

Separation of power between the Prime Minister and the Finance Ministry

Closely linked to corruption risk is the concentration of power at the apex of government.

DAP itself once strongly condemned the practice of the Prime Minister also assuming the role of Finance Minister, warning that it undermines parliamentary oversight and increases the risk of abuse.

That principle does not lose validity simply because political circumstances have changed.

Any credible reform checklist must therefore include a firm commitment to separate these two offices, supported by a clear timeline and institutional safeguards to prevent future reconsolidation of power.

Without structural limits, clean governance becomes dependent on personal restraint rather than system design, a fragile foundation for reform.

Recognition of the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC)

Another reform DAP can no longer afford to treat as optional is the recognition of the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC).

For decades, UEC recognition has been framed not as a cultural concession, but as an education and meritocracy issue. DAP has repeatedly argued that students should not be disadvantaged by the education system they are born into.

If the party remains sincere about equal opportunity, UEC recognition, whether through public university entry, teacher training pathways, or professional accreditation, must be clearly stated rather than vaguely implied.

Ambiguity will only reinforce perceptions that politically sensitive reforms are quietly abandoned after power is secured.

A warning from history: the toll abolition promise

DAP should also reflect candidly on its own record of unfulfilled pledges.

For years, the party promised nationwide toll abolition once it entered government. That pledge featured prominently in campaigns and manifestos, yet disappeared after power was attained.

That experience continues to shape public scepticism today. It raises a blunt question DAP must confront: will the reforms promised under this six-month ultimatum suffer the same fate, remembered only as casualties of political compromise?

Justice issues that appear forgotten after power was gained

There is a deeper concern DAP must address: the perception that urgency on justice issues diminished after becoming government.

Justice for Teoh Beng Hock was once central to DAP’s moral narrative. Today, accountability remains elusive and public pressure appears muted.

The same applies to the disappearances of Pastor Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat. A public inquiry found state involvement, yet no senior official has been held responsible.

Silence in government carries more weight than outrage in opposition. A reform party cannot afford to appear selective in its pursuit of justice. 

Reform cannot be conditional on political survival

If corruption enforcement is calibrated to political risk rather than legal principle, DAP’s six-month deadline will achieve nothing of substance.

Reform will be seen not as a principle, but as a tactical exercise.

If this is the price of remaining in power, DAP must confront a difficult question: has it become what it once opposed?

Put it in writing or lose public trust

DAP supporters are not demanding perfection. They are demanding clarity and consistency.

Anthony Loke’s six-month clock started on Dec 9, 2025, with June 30, 2026 identified as the point of reckoning.

As of Jan 20, 2026, 161 days remain.

If by then MACC reform remains stalled, corruption cases unresolved, and structural power concentration intact, the ultimatum will expire without meaning.

The great DAP leader Karpal Singh once said: “There are no permanent friends or foes, only permanent principles.”

Giving up permanent principles for new-found friends will be hypocrisy of the highest degree.

If DAP constantly flip flops, it risks losing something far more serious than votes – its moral authority.

The clock is ticking.

— Datuk Seri Ashraf Abdullah was former Group Managing Editor of Media Prima Berhad’s Television Networks. - Malaysian Gazette, 22/1/2026