Now That Sabah Lags Far Behind Sarawak, Why Cant Compare?

Borneo Herald 

7.35PM MYT, 4-8-2026

Daniel John Jambun agrees to disagree with Datuk Masidi Manjun's logic..

INANAM : Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) refers to the statement by Sabah Deputy Chief Minister II Datuk Masidi Manjun that love for Sabah and loyalty to Malaysia are inseparable.

BoPiMaFo agrees that Sabahans should not be forced to choose between loving Sabah and being loyal to Malaysia.

Sabah is part of Malaysia. Wanting Sabah to be prosperous, respected and fairly treated should strengthen Malaysia, not weaken it.

However, loyalty to Malaysia cannot mean remaining silent about Sabah’s continuing poverty, inadequate infrastructure, limited financial capacity and failure to obtain the full benefit of its natural resources.

Loyalty is not silence. Patriotism is not submission. National unity cannot require Sabahans to accept inequality without question.

WHY SHOULD SABAH NOT BE COMPARED WITH SARAWAK?

Sabahans are sometimes discouraged from comparing Sabah’s performance with Sarawak because the two States supposedly have different circumstances, priorities and challenges.

Certainly, Sabah and Sarawak are not identical.

But they remain the closest and most legitimate benchmarks for comparison.

Both are Bornean territories that participated in the formation of Malaysia in 1963. Both possess substantial petroleum, gas, timber, agricultural land, biodiversity, tourism potential, maritime resources and strategic geographical positions.

Both entered Malaysia with constitutional safeguards and expectations of security, development and meaningful self-government.

Yet, after more than six decades, Sarawak has acquired substantially greater financial capacity, stronger State institutions and considerably more influence over its economic resources.

The question Sabahans are entitled to ask is therefore straightforward:

How did two resource-rich Bornean partners within the same Federation arrive at such different financial and developmental positions?

This is not an expression of jealousy towards Sarawak.

It is a demand for accountability from those who have governed Sabah.

THE FINANCIAL GAP CANNOT BE IGNORED

Sabah’s 2026 State Budget projects revenue of approximately RM6.43 billion, against total estimated expenditure of approximately RM6.40 billion.

Sarawak’s 2026 Budget, in comparison, projects revenue of approximately RM13.05 billion—more than twice Sabah’s projected revenue. Sarawak has also allocated approximately RM9.3 billion for development purposes alone.

Sarawak’s development allocation alone is therefore considerably larger than Sabah’s entire annual State Budget.

These figures do not mean that every Sarawak policy is perfect or that Sarawak has resolved all its social and economic challenges.

But they demonstrate a fundamental truth:

«Possessing natural resources is not enough. What matters is whether a State has the political determination, negotiating strength, competent institutions and long-term strategy to convert those resources into lasting public wealth.»

Sarawak has pursued new sources of State revenue, strengthened State-owned institutions, expanded its participation in petroleum and gas, and invested heavily in infrastructure and strategic industries.

It has also demonstrated that a Bornean government can negotiate firmly with the Federal Government without being disloyal to Malaysia.

SABAH AND SARAWAK HAVE SIMILAR RESOURCES — BUT DIFFERENT OUTCOMES

Sabah also possesses enormous petroleum and gas resources, extensive agricultural land, forests, minerals, fisheries, tourism assets and renewable-energy potential.

For decades, Sabah has contributed enormous wealth to the national economy.

Yet many Sabahans continue to experience unreliable water and electricity supplies, deteriorating roads, inadequate rural connectivity, limited employment opportunities and persistent poverty.

The proper question is not whether Sabah and Sarawak are exactly the same.

The proper question is whether Sabah has:

- defended its constitutional and financial rights as firmly as Sarawak;

- managed its resources as strategically as Sarawak;

- established equally capable State institutions;

- developed comparable recurring sources of State revenue;

- reinvested sufficient resources into infrastructure and human development; and

- maintained a consistent, long-term economic strategy beyond electoral cycles.

These are legitimate public questions that should be answered with facts, policies and measurable outcomes—not dismissed as regionalism or disloyalty.

SABAH ALSO CARRIES AN EXCEPTIONAL NON-CITIZEN POPULATION BURDEN

Any fair comparison must also recognise that Sabah carries a demographic and immigration burden of a magnitude not experienced by Sarawak on the same scale.

Official population estimates for 2025 place Sabah’s total population at approximately 3.76 million. The available official data also establish that Sabah has an exceptionally high non-citizen population compared with the rest of Malaysia.

The Department of Statistics Malaysia previously reported that Sabah alone accounted for more than half of Malaysia’s non-citizen population in the relevant demographic reporting period.

The scale is extraordinary. Recent official estimates have placed Sabah’s non-citizen population at more than one million, representing approximately one-quarter of the State’s population.

Sarawak also has non-citizens, including lawful foreign workers and other migrants. It would therefore be inaccurate to say that Sarawak has no non-citizens.

The accurate and strategically important point is this:

«Sabah carries a vastly larger non-citizen population, both numerically and proportionately, than Sarawak.»

This exceptional demographic situation places additional pressure on Sabah’s:

- hospitals and public-health services;

- schools and educational resources;

- water, electricity and sanitation systems;

- housing and local-government services;

- employment market and wage levels;

- policing and border security;

- immigration enforcement; and

- limited State and federal development resources.

Not every non-citizen is undocumented, and lawful foreign workers make important contributions to Sabah’s economy.

Nevertheless, a population situation involving more than one million non-citizens cannot be dismissed as an ordinary administrative issue.

It is a matter of public finance, national security, border control, sovereignty and the long-term demographic character of Sabah.

THIS IS A FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY, NOT SABAH’S BURDEN ALONE

Sabah’s geographical proximity to the southern Philippines and Indonesia gives it international maritime and land-border responsibilities unlike those faced by most other States.

Border security, citizenship, national registration and the control of undocumented migration are predominantly federal responsibilities.

Yet Sabahans bear many of the direct social, economic and infrastructural consequences.

Sabah’s hospitals, schools, roads, utilities and local authorities must serve a population far greater and more complex than the registered citizen population alone would suggest.

The Federal Government must therefore explain:

1. the verified number of Malaysian citizens, lawful foreign residents and undocumented persons presently residing in Sabah;

2. the estimated annual cost incurred by public institutions in serving and managing Sabah’s non-citizen population;

3. the amount of additional federal funding allocated specifically to meet those costs;

4. the measures being implemented to secure Sabah’s borders and enforce its immigration safeguards;

5. the progress made in addressing the findings of the Royal Commission of Inquiry concerning immigrants in Sabah; and

6. the safeguards established to protect the integrity of Sabah’s identity-registration and electoral systems.

Sabah cannot be expected to carry a major national border and immigration burden while receiving development resources that remain inadequate to address its basic infrastructure needs.

THE DEMOGRAPHIC BURDEN MAKES THE COMPARISON MORE URGENT

Sabah’s extraordinary population pressures do not make comparison with Sarawak inappropriate.

They make the comparison even more necessary.

Sabah has:

- substantially lower State revenue;

- weaker infrastructure;

- greater dependence on federal funding;

- persistent poverty and rural underdevelopment; and

- an exceptional non-citizen population burden.

Despite all this, Sabah is expected to manage its responsibilities with a financial capacity far below Sarawak’s.

The appropriate response is not to tell Sabahans to stop comparing.

The appropriate response is for the Sabah and Federal Governments to explain what additional revenue, institutional powers and development resources will be provided to overcome these disadvantages.

SARAWAK’S PROGRESS SHOULD BE STUDIED, NOT RESENTED

BoPiMaFo does not advocate hostility or rivalry between Sabah and Sarawak.

Sabah should welcome Sarawak’s progress.

Sarawak has demonstrated what can be achieved when a Bornean government adopts a consistent State-centred strategy, strengthens its own institutions, generates recurring revenue, negotiates firmly with Putrajaya and reinvests substantial funds into development.

Sabah should study Sarawak’s achievements in:

- expanding State-generated revenue;

- building commercially capable State institutions;

- securing a greater role in petroleum and gas;

- creating downstream and value-added industries;

- accumulating strategic investments and assets;

- maintaining policy continuity;

- investing heavily in roads, utilities and rural infrastructure; and

- asserting State rights through negotiation, legislation and legal proceedings.

Sabah need not copy every Sarawak policy.

But it would be irresponsible not to learn from a neighbouring Bornean partner that has obtained significantly greater financial and political leverage within the same Federation.

SABAH’S LEADERS MUST ANSWER THE REAL QUESTIONS

Instead of discouraging comparisons, the Sabah Government should answer:

Why is Sabah’s projected State revenue less than half Sarawak’s?

Why is Sarawak able to allocate approximately RM9.3 billion for development while Sabah’s entire annual State Budget is only about RM6.4 billion?

Why has Sabah not built equally powerful and profitable State institutions?

Why has Sabah not developed revenue mechanisms comparable with those successfully pursued by Sarawak?

Why does resource-rich Sabah continue to experience serious water, electricity and road failures?

Why has Sabah remained so dependent on federal allocations when so much petroleum, gas, timber and other wealth has been extracted from the State?

What is Sabah’s measurable plan to close the revenue, infrastructure and development gap with Sarawak?

These questions should not be dismissed as opposition politics.

They concern the future of every Sabahan.

LOVING SABAH REQUIRES MORE THAN SLOGANS

Flying the Sabah flag, singing patriotic songs and declaring love for Sabah are meaningful expressions of identity.

But love for Sabah must also be demonstrated through action.

It means protecting Sabah’s constitutional rights.

It means securing Sabah’s 40 per cent constitutional entitlement.

It means obtaining a fair return from petroleum, gas and other natural resources.

It means strengthening Sabah’s institutions and preventing waste, leakage and misuse of public funds.

It means providing reliable water, electricity, roads, schools and healthcare.

It means protecting Sabah’s borders and the integrity of its population records.

It means creating properly paid employment so that young Sabahans are not compelled to leave their homeland merely to find a future.

Above all, it means holding leaders accountable for the condition of the State they govern.

LOYALTY MUST BE RECIPROCAL

BoPiMaFo agrees that Sabahans can love Sabah and remain loyal to Malaysia.

But loyalty cannot flow in only one direction.

If Sabah is expected to remain loyal to the Federation, the Federation must remain loyal to the constitutional promises, financial safeguards and founding commitments made to Sabah.

Malaysia must honour Sabah’s rights not merely through ceremonial speeches, but through law, revenue, institutional respect and genuine development.

Sabah’s own political leaders must likewise demonstrate loyalty to the people by defending the State’s interests without fear, favour or excessive dependence on federal political approval.

A stronger Sabah will not weaken Malaysia. A stronger Sabah will strengthen Malaysia.»

But allowing one of Malaysia’s most resource-rich territories to remain poor and underdeveloped will ultimately weaken confidence in the Federation.

COMPARISON IS THE BEGINNING OF IMPROVEMENT

There is nothing wrong with comparing Sabah with Sarawak.

Governments routinely compare revenue, investment, economic growth, infrastructure, employment, education and poverty precisely because comparison reveals weaknesses and encourages improvement.

The dangerous act is not comparison.

The dangerous act is asking Sabahans to stop comparing, stop questioning and simply accept that Sabah’s condition is unavoidable.

Sabah’s underdevelopment is not inevitable.

Sabah possesses the resources, strategic position and human talent to become one of the most prosperous territories in this region.

What Sabah requires is stronger leadership, cleaner governance, competent institutions, a long-term economic strategy and the political determination to defend its lawful interests.

BoPiMaFo therefore states:

«Comparing Sabah with Sarawak is not an act of disloyalty. It is an exercise in democratic accountability.»

«We compare because Sabah can and must do better.

We compare because Sabahans deserve honest answers.

We compare because poverty, failing infrastructure and financial weakness must never be accepted as the permanent destiny of resource-rich Sabah.

The uncomfortable question is not why Sabahans continue to compare Sabah with Sarawak.

The real and unavoidable question is:

Why has resource-rich Sabah been allowed to fall so far behind its Bornean neighbour—and what will the Sabah and Federal Governments do, within a clear and measurable timeframe, to close that gap?»

Daniel John Jambun is President of

Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)#Borneo Herald™

Sarawakians Beginning to Ask Openly Why Minority Melanaus Dominate Top Posts

Borneo Herald 

9.00PM MYT, 3-8-2026

Is Tan Sri Abang Zohari's conscience now being questioned by disenfranchised Sarawakian Dayaks?

By Jayden Lisandu

KOTA KINABALU: What began as just murmurings behind walls, on Melanaus dominating top posts in Sarawak, is now coming into the open with no lesser than a Dayak profesor recently raising its significance to the state's geopolitics.

Datuk Prof Dr Jayum Jawan of Universiti Putra Malaysia highligthed what he saw as anomally for the majority Dayaks being sidelined in the Sarawak civil service in favour of the minority Melayu Melanaus. 

The Melanaus who traditionally are coastal dwellers, form only about six percent of Sarawak's total population of 2.5 millions, however the ethnic has held power in the state for a very long period.

The Melayu Melanaus refer to Muslim Melanaus, as there are also Christian Melanaus in the Borneo state.

A well known Sarawak activist, Robert Saweng, in a statement in Kuching today too has called on the Premier, Tan Sri Abang Zohari Openg, to be more open, transparent and measurable in the matter.

"As Prof Dr Jayum has consistently emphasised, the Dayak community is not asking for special privileges, but for fairness, justice and equal opportunities to progress.

"I welcome the Premier's assurance that appointments in the Sarawak Civil Service are based on merit, qualifications and capability, however meritocracy must be transparent, measurable and open to public scrutiny," he said.

Saying it has been an open secret that Dayaks especially are not happy with their current disenfranchised situation, Robert suggested that one way Sarawak could restore trust is by forming an Independent Equal Opportunity Oversight Committee.

"I am not calling for ethnic quotas or preferential treatment. I am calling for justice, equal opportunity and a transparent system where every qualified Sarawakian has a fair chance to serve and contribute to the state's development," the activist said.

According to Robert, recent publicly circulated data on 46 selected top positions in Sarawak indicates that 74% are held by Malay/Melanau/Muslim (MMM), while Dayaks and Chinese each hold 13%. 

He argued that although these figures should be officially verified, they reinforce the need for greater transparency in public appointments.

The issue is not about questioning the competence of any individual or targeting any ethnic community, he further argued.

"It is about ensuring that every qualified Sarawakian—especially those from rural and interior communities—has an equal opportunity to compete and advance based on merit.

"Many talented Sarawakians, particularly from the Dayak community, continue to face structural challenges, including unequal access to quality education, internet connectivity, professional mentoring and interview preparation," he added.

Robert stressed that education remains the foundation for social mobility, while balanced development and equal access to economic opportunities are essential if all communities are to compete fairly.

"The Sarawak Government should publish comprehensive data on recruitment, promotions and senior appointments. 

"Transparency will strengthen public confidence and demonstrate that meritocracy is being practised fairly and consistently," he said adding that the oversight committee he proposed must apply a holistic merit framework that values academic achievement, leadership, rural service and community contribution.

"An annual public report on recruitment and promotions are needed, and an outreach and preparation programmes for graduates from rural and interior areas should be there," said Robert.

The activist also said that true meritocracy is measured not only by who succeeds, but by whether every qualified Sarawakian has been given a fair opportunity to succeed.

Meanwhile, Borneo Herald also received persistent comments on why the very top posts in Sarawak seem to have avoided qualified Dayaks, for a very long time.

For records no Dayak currently or recently occupied the posts of state Governor or TYT, Premiership, Speaker, State Secretary and State Attorney.#~Borneo Herald™

Everything Turns Bad in Sabah, Whose Fault?

Borneo Herald

12.05PM MYT, 3-8-2026

By Daniel John Jambun, Inanam

BORNEO's Plight in Malaysia Foundation refers to the Daily Express forum article dated 2 August 2026, entitled “Filipinos in Sabah feel let down by Marcos.”

The writer, speaking as a Filipino living in Sabah, expressed disappointment that Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr allegedly failed to confront serious public concerns surrounding corruption and a multibillion-peso flood-control controversy.

Every person has the right to demand honesty, accountability and good governance from his or her government. Ordinary Filipinos should not be blamed for the corruption, poverty and political failures that compel many of them to seek employment and security outside their homeland.

However, this article raises a larger and more uncomfortable question for Sabah:

Why are so many citizens of the Philippines compelled to depend upon Sabah for employment, livelihood, education, healthcare and survival while the Philippine Government continues to maintain a territorial claim over Sabah?

DO NOT SPEAK FOR EVERY FILIPINO IN SABAH

The article repeatedly uses the expression “we Filipinos in Sabah,” although it appears to be the opinion of an individual writer rather than a statement issued by a recognised organisation or based upon a community survey. The newspaper itself states that the views are those of the writer.

The writer is entitled to express disappointment with President Marcos. Nevertheless, no individual should automatically be understood as representing every Filipino residing in Sabah.

More importantly, any public discussion must distinguish between:

1. Philippine nationals who enter and work lawfully in Sabah;

2. persons possessing valid refugee or other recognised documentation;

3. children facing genuine documentation or statelessness problems; and

4. undocumented migrants who entered, remained or worked in Sabah in breach of Malaysian immigration laws.

Human dignity must be protected, but different legal categories cannot be deliberately blurred.

MANILA MUST ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS OWN CITIZENS

The writer states that Filipinos in Sabah work hard, abide by Malaysian laws and send money home to support their families.

Where this is true, their lawful contributions should be recognised. Workers must not be exploited, abused or denied wages merely because they are foreigners.

But the Philippine Government cannot be satisfied merely to receive remittances while Sabah carries the social, economic, administrative and security consequences of a large foreign population.

Manila has a duty to:

- properly identify and document its nationals;

- provide effective and accessible consular services;

- cooperate with Malaysia in preventing illegal entry;

- facilitate the lawful recruitment of workers;

- receive and reintegrate citizens who are repatriated;

- address the poverty and corruption that force its people abroad; and

- resolve the documentation of children before another generation is trapped in legal uncertainty.

The welfare of Philippine citizens in Sabah is first and foremost the responsibility of the Philippine Government. Sabah cannot be expected to become the permanent solution to another country’s governance failures.

SABAHANS MUST NOT BE MADE FOREIGNERS IN THEIR OWN HOMELAND

Sabah has long carried an immigration and demographic burden unlike that faced by most other parts of Malaysia.

This issue affects public healthcare, schools, housing, employment, security, electoral integrity and the future political character of Sabah.

Sabahans are therefore entitled to demand complete transparency concerning:

- the number of foreign nationals residing in Sabah;

- their countries of origin;

- their immigration and documentation status;

- the number of dependants and locally born children;

- enforcement and repatriation figures; and

- any citizenship or identity documents issued to persons whose original status may be questionable.

Compassion must never be manipulated into a justification for uncontrolled migration, unlawful documentation or demographic transformation.

Sabahans must not be marginalised, displaced or made to feel like foreigners in their own homeland.

THE CONTRADICTION OF THE PHILIPPINE CLAIM

The deepest contradiction is this:

The Philippines cannot continue asserting a territorial claim over Sabah while depending upon Sabah to shelter, employ and support large numbers of Philippine citizens whom Manila has failed to protect adequately at home.

Sabah is not Philippine territory.

Sabah is not an extension of the Philippine welfare system.

Sabah is not a political bargaining chip.

The Philippine Government should formally and permanently abandon its claim over Sabah and respect the political choice and dignity of the people of Sabah.

A government genuinely concerned about its citizens in Sabah should prioritise consular assistance, lawful documentation, labour protection and bilateral cooperation—not preserve a claim that undermines trust and keeps an unnecessary historical dispute alive.

PUTRAJAYA MUST ALSO ANSWER

Responsibility does not lie with Manila alone.

The Federal Government must explain how Sabah reached its present demographic situation despite Sabah’s constitutional safeguards over immigration.

Putrajaya must disclose whether federal agencies have fully protected Sabah’s special immigration position and whether citizenship, identity documents or electoral registration were ever obtained through fraud, political interference or administrative abuse.

The Federal Government must never impose policies upon Sabah that could convert temporary foreign presence into permanent political power without the informed consent of the people and Government of Sabah.

Sabah’s immigration safeguards were intended to protect the character, security and interests of Sabah. They must be implemented in substance, not merely acknowledged on paper.

HUMANITY WITHOUT SURRENDERING SOVEREIGNTY

BoPiMaFo rejects hatred, collective blame and hostility against ordinary Filipinos.

Many are themselves victims of poverty, conflict, corruption and failed governance. Every person, irrespective of nationality, must be treated humanely and according to law.

But humanity does not require Sabah to surrender its sovereignty, immigration safeguards or the future of its Indigenous peoples.

Our position is clear:

Protect lawful workers. Prevent exploitation. Document genuine citizens. Repatriate those without a lawful right to remain. Prosecute document fraud. Secure Sabah’s borders. Defend the political rights of Sabahans.

President Marcos should listen to the disappointment expressed by his citizens abroad. But he must do more than deliver speeches.

He must confrontin corruption, create opportunities at home, accept responsibility for Philippine nationals overseas and abandon the territorial claim that continues to insult the sovereignty and dignity of Sabah.

The people of Sabah may extend humanity to those in need.

But Sabah must never be required to pay indefinitely for the failures of Manila and Putrajaya.

Daniel John Jambun is President of 

Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)#Borneo Herald™

Larry Sng Reads Recent Election Results As Precursor to BN-PN Federal Govt

Borneo Herald 

1.55PM MYT, 2-8-2026

By Larry Sng, Kuching

BASED on the recent State election results for both Johor and Negeri Sembilan, I believe the BN - PN formula will form the next Federal government and possibly win a clean sweep of all the State elections in the Penisular.

The total combined seats won by BN and PN in 2022 is 98. The magic number to form government is 112. Only 14 additional parliamentary seats needed.

Discounting the political alignment of East Malaysian parties from Sabah and Sarawak, I believe that based on the current trajectory, it is highly likely that BN - PN will easily form the simple majority post GE16.

That would also mean that GPS and GRS will no longer play the role of king maker.#~Borneo Herald™

Larry Sng is President of Parti Bangsa Malaysia (PBM) and also an MP for Julau, Sarawak.

Sanusi's Tanah Melayu Narrative Misunderstands Malay History

Borneo Herald 

5.36PM MYT, 27-7-2026

                                Tian Chua

By Tian Chua, Kuala Lumpur 

THE speech by Kedah Menteri Besar Datuk Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor is problematic not simply because his remarks may be perceived as insulting Malaysian citizens of Chinese or Indian descent. 

The deeper problem lies in a fundamental misconception of Malay history and identity itself.

I do not intend to label Sanusi’s speech as racist. It was delivered on an election platform, where political figures often use strong language and emotional appeals to mobilise supporters. 

A firebrand politician like Sanusi is known for such rhetoric and sensationalism is expected in political campaigning.

Let us examine his exact words: “Malays have no other land. Malays only have this Tanah Melayu. Indians have India, Chinese have China, Cambodians have Cambodia, and the Siamese have Thailand. Where do the Malays go? Malays are only here.”(“Melayu tak ada dah tanah. Melayu ada Tanah Melayu ini saja. Orang India ada India, orang Cina ada China, orang Kamboja ada Kamboja, orang Siam ada Thailand. Melayu di mana? Melayu di sini saja.”)

At first glance, this sounds like simple, emotive logic. It is designed to evoke a sense of insecurity and urgency among Malays by suggesting that they must protect their only homeland. 

The Kedah Menteri Besar’s aim is clearly to rally the Malay electorate by framing their rights as tied exclusively to a single, irreplaceable homeland. There is no doubt that simplicity and emotional intensity are powerful tools for mobilising support.

However, the historical premise behind his argument is seriously flawed—not because it is offensive, but because it distorts historical and anthropological reality.     

Clarifying the Definition of “Malay” From a legal perspective, Malays are recognised as the majority indigenous people of the Malay Peninsula, with a special constitutional definition tied to language, culture, the Islamic faith, and customary practices. 

Historically, Malays have deep roots in Malaysia and the wider Malay world long before the arrival of European colonial powers. Calling this land Tanah Melayu is largely a matter of semantics; acknowledging this history should not be controversial.

However, recognising the historical and cultural connection between Malays and Tanah Melayu does not mean that Malaysia as a modern nation-state belongs exclusively to one ethnic group. 

The Federation of Malaysia was founded through the independence struggle of the peoples of Malaya and Borneo, uniting diverse ethnic communities. 

Citizenship in the federation is based on allegiance to the Constitution. All citizens who call this country home are part of the shared national story. 

This is why Sanusi’s statement is perceived as provocative: it risks creating the impression that some citizens have a less legitimate claim to belonging than others. 

I do not think Sanusi necessarily intended to deny the citizenship of non-Malays or question their loyalty. Rather, his strategy is to invoke emotion by arguing that Malays have no other homeland besides Tanah Melayu.  

But this very logic becomes dangerous when it echoes a Zionist-style narrative—the idea that one ethnic group has an exclusive, timeless claim to a land while ignoring centuries of demographic and political evolution.

Flawed Assumption of “One People, One Homeland”

The problem is that this argument relies on an oversimplified understanding of the historical evolution of states and societies.

The most problematic aspect of Sanusi’s narrative is the assumption that every ethnicity naturally corresponds to a single modern nation-state: Chinese have China. Indians have India. Cambodians have Cambodia. Siamese haveThailand.

This sounds intuitive, but it does not reflect historical reality. Modern nation-states are political creations shaped by centuries of migration, empire-building, colonial boundaries, and socio-economic development.

They do not perfectly correspond to ethnic or cultural groups. China officially recognises itself as a multiethnic state consisting of more than 50 distinct ethnic groups.

India is among the most culturally and linguistically diverse nations on Earth. Cambodia is home to a Khmer majority, but Khmer communities have historically extended into what are now Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar and Laos. 

The Tai peoples, meanwhile, founded numerous kingdoms across mainland Southeast Asia that later evolved into the modern states of Thailand (formerly Siam) and Laos. 

Even the term “Indian” does not fit neatly into Sanusi’s equation. In the Malaysian context, Indian ethnicity implies various communities with ancestral origins in different parts of the South Asian subcontinent, including areas that today belong to India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

Therefore, the idea that every people has a single exclusiveà homeland is historically untenable.

Malay World Is Larger Than Tanah Melayu

Sanusi’s fallacious logic only perpetuates ignorance about Malay history. In truth, Malay identity has never been confined to the borders of modern Malaysia.

Throughout history, Malay civilization developed across a vast maritime region known todayas the Malay Archipelago or Nusantara. 

The ancestors of the Malays built great polities andkingdoms—Srivijaya, Langkasuka, Melaka, Brunei, Jambi-Riau, and numerous Malaysultanates—whose territories extended far beyond present-day Malaysia.

The legacy of these civilisations laid the foundation for multiple modern nation-states, including Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, Singapore, the Philippines and parts of mainland Southeast Asia. 

In other words, the homeland of the Malays extends well beyond Tanah Melayu. The division of this wider Malay world into separate political entities was largely a consequence of European colonialism, not intrinsic ethnic destiny.

Therefore, if history is the basis of identity, then Malay history itself demonstrates that the Malay homeland is far broader than Tanah Melayu alone.

Connection to the Austronesian Heritage 

A wider historical perspective reveals an even greater story. The Malays are part of the broader Austronesian family, a vast linguistic and cultural community whose origins and expansion span several millennia. 

The Austronesian-speaking peoples accomplished perhaps the greatest maritime migration in human history.

Over at least 5,000 years, Austronesian seafarers explored and settled a vast area spanning over half of Earth’s circumference, estimated roughly 120 million square kilometres (30% of the earth’s ocean surface).

They did not merely settle new lands; they built extensive trading networks, spread agricultural and maritime technologies, and nurtured vibrant cultures. 

Their reach extended from Taiwan in the north to New Zealand in the south, from Madagascar in the west to Hawaii and Easter Island in the east. 

To put this in perspective, the total region is larger than the entire land area of Asia and Africa combined. In term of inhabited land mass, it is estimated to be the size of India. 

No other ancient civilisational traditions attained such an immense geographical expanse. The Malays of Tanah Melayu are inheritors of this incredible civilisational legacy. 

It is a history of exploration, commerce, and cultural exchange. The Austronesian pioneers have created a cosmopolitan world characterised by diversity rather than insularity.

Malay civilization is part of this extraordinary heritage. Malays should take pride in these remarkable achievements, rather than reducing them to a narrow, fearful narrative.

Instead of portraying Malays as a people with nowhere else to go, history tells a far more inspiring story: Malays belong to a great civilization with deep roots, extensive connections,and illustrious traditions.

A Future Built on Confidence, Not Fear

Whether one calls it Tanah Melayu or otherwise, this land has been shaped by many histories and communities. It is a country of abundance that thrives best when it embraces diversity and inclusivity. 

It is unbecoming for politicians to continually stoke fear and hostility in the competition for influence and power. It is futile for Malaysians of different ethnic backgrounds to quarrel over who belongs here.

Successful nation-building requires every citizen to understand their shared responsibility for the future. Malay heritage deserves recognition and pride. But genuine pride does not require fear of others. 

A civilization confident in its own destiny does not need to define itself through exclusion. With such a rich and brilliant history behind us, we should look forward to building a great country where all citizens, regardless of origin, can call home. 

That should be the true spirit of our nation, rooted in the history of Tanah Melayu.

Tian Chua is a former MP for Batu and once served as vice president of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)#~Borneo Herald™

Israel Answers NY Mayor Mamdani's Threat to Arrest Netanyahu

Borneo Herald 

5.46AM MYT, 23-7-2026

               Israel Ambassador Danny Danon 

Speech by Danny Danon at the United Nations yesterday

🇮🇱 Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, warning the New York mayor Zohran Mamdani who said he is going to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu for a genocide in Gaza:

“Mr Mamdani, you have chosen the opposite of democracy.

You have chosen collaboration with terror.

Well, Mr Mamdani, I have news for you.

Your threat has no legal basis.

We all know that the United States is not a member of the ICC.

We have all read the UN headquarters agreement. Muamar Gadhafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Yasser Arafat, they all stood at this podium.

They were dictators and sponsors of terror.

Benjamin Netanyahu is not.

He is the elected Prime Minister of a democracy fighting terror.

Yet you, Mr Mamdani, pretend he's the one who should be arrested for standing here.

Your sweat is empty.

It's a political theater designed to excite your radical base and distract from your failures in running this city.

We have seen this playbook before.

Like Mr Karim Khan from the ICC, Mr Mamdani attacks Israel leader to distract from his own failures.

Your grand election promises remain slogans.

Instead of delivering for New Yorkers, you target Israel.

So spare us the threat.

The person who should be arrested is not our Prime Minister. It's you, Mr Mamdani.

So let me make it very clear.

Prime Minister Netanyahu will come to New York.

He will stand at this very podium.

He will speak for the State of Israel.

He will defend the people of Israel.

And there is nothing you can do to stop him.”#~Borneo Herald™

Anwar Harus Letak Jawatan Kata Aktivis Susulan Gesaan MP PKR Anwar 'Resign' Menteri Kewangan

Borneo Herald 

9.13PM MYT, 22-7-2026

Dr Kanul Gindol kata kedudukan Anwar Ibrahim semakin sukar dipertahankan.

Oleh Jayden Lisandu

KOTA BELUD : Aktivis terkenal Sabah, Dr Kanul Gindol, berkata Perdana Menteri, Datuk Anwar Ibrahim, perlu meletak jawatan sebagai Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan berikutan 'skandal' RM200 juta wang KWAP lesap dalam pelaburan yang hampir tak wujud.

"Saya bersetuju dengan gesaan pemimpin PKR seperti MP Pasir Gudang agar Anwar meletak jawatan sebagai Menteri Kewangan gara-gara isu KWAP atau Kumpulan Wang Persaraan yang lesap dalam pelaburan di Indonesia itu.

"Lebih dari itu, saya percaya Anwar sepatutnya turut meletak jawatan Perdana Menteri kerana kuasa Perdana Menteri adalah lebih besar dan tinggi dari Menteri Kewangan yang juga dirinya sendiri. Kedudukannya sukar dipertahankan," katanya mengulas isu itu.

Dr Kanul pernah menjadi Setiausaha Perhubungan Negeri PKR Sabah pada tahun 2006-2007, dan Setiausaha Politik Datuk Dr Jeffrey Kitingan ketika itu Naib Presiden PKR.

Di KUALA LUMPUR semalam, MP PKR, Hassan Abdul Karim, menggesa Anwar berhenti sebagai Menteri Kewangan selepas RM200 juta wang KWAP rugi dalam syarikat teknologi akuakultur Indonesia, eFishery, yang didakwa gagal.

Hassan mendakwa berlaku kecuaian besar dari aspek tadbir urus, kawalan serta proses membuat keputusan oleh Lembaga Pengarah, Panel Pelaburan dan pengurusan tertinggi KWAP sehingga dana persaraan penjawat awam terdedah kepada risiko.

Beliau menyifatkan isu berkenaan sebagai perkara serius kerana KWAP dipertanggungjawabkan mengurus dana yang melibatkan kepentingan jutaan penjawat awam.

Menurut Hassan, pengalaman terdahulu berkaitan kontroversi SRC International sepatutnya menjadi pengajaran kepada KWAP supaya memperkukuh sistem kawalan dalaman dan penilaian pelaburan.

“Tidak serik dan mempelajari isu skandal SRC International oleh Lembaga Pengarah, Panel Pelaburan dan Pengurusan tertinggi KWAP, kini mereka yang diamanahkan oleh negara melakukan kesalahan yang sama,” katanya.

Beliau menggesa Perdana Menteri yang juga Menteri Kewangan supaya mengarahkan siasatan forensik terhadap keputusan pelaburan berkenaan dan mengambil tindakan termasuk pemecatan sekiranya terdapat unsur kecuaian fidusiari, kegagalan tanggungjawab atau pelanggaran prinsip akauntabiliti.

Hassan turut mendakwa oleh kerana KWAP berada di bawah tanggungjawab Kementerian Kewangan, Anwar perlu mengambil tanggungjawab politik dengan melepaskan jawatan sebagai Menteri Kewangan sebagai tanda akauntabiliti.#~Borneo Herald™

Kenapa Orang Asing Kini Lebih Ramai Daripada Orang Asal Sabah?

Borneo Herald 

10.27PM MYT, 21-7-2026

Oleh Daniel John Jambun, Inanam

TIMBALAN Perdana Menteri, Datuk Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, adalah tepat apabila menyatakan bahawa Jabatan Imigresen mesti berkembang menjadi sebuah institusi yang profesional, berteknologi tinggi dan dipacu oleh risikan, yang mampu melindungi keselamatan negara sambil memudah cara pertumbuhan ekonomi yang sah.

Namun, bagi Sabah, isu imigresen tidak boleh dibincangkan semata-mata dari sudut pelepasan sempadan yang lebih pantas, peningkatan kecekapan atau kemudahan ekonomi.

Imigresen tidak dapat dipisahkan daripada keselamatan Sabah, integriti demografinya, sistem kewarganegaraan dan masa depan pilihan rayanya.

Perlindungan terhadap keselamatan Sabah dan kepentingan imigresennya yang tersendiri merupakan sebahagian daripada jaminan asas dan susunan perlembagaan yang menjadi landasan kepada persetujuan Borneo Utara untuk menyertai pembentukan Malaysia pada tahun 1963.

Artikel V Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 menghendaki peruntukan perundangan khas berkaitan kemasukan ke Sabah dan Sarawak. Artikel VIII pula menghendaki kerajaan-kerajaan berkenaan mengambil segala tindakan perundangan, eksekutif dan tindakan lain yang perlu untuk melaksanakan jaminan, aku janji serta syor yang terkandung dalam Laporan Jawatankuasa Antara Kerajaan.

Ini bukan janji berbentuk istiadat atau simbolik semata-mata. Ia merupakan sebahagian daripada tawar-menawar perlembagaan asas yang menjadi landasan penubuhan Malaysia.

Namun, lebih enam dekad kemudian, kedudukan demografi di Sabah menimbulkan persoalan yang tidak lagi boleh dielakkan.

Menurut Jabatan Perangkaan Malaysia, anggaran penduduk bukan warganegara di Sabah pada tahun 2025 adalah kira-kira 1,040,200 orang. Ini bermakna lebih sejuta orang yang tinggal di Sabah direkodkan sebagai bukan warganegara Malaysia.

Pada masa yang sama, angka demografi yang dikaitkan dengan DOSM meletakkan jumlah gabungan penduduk komuniti utama Momogun atau Orang Asal—khususnya masyarakat Kadazan, Dusun dan Murut—pada kira-kira 767,345 orang, atau sekitar 22.4 peratus berdasarkan klasifikasi statistik yang berkaitan.

Secara ringkasnya, anggaran jumlah penduduk bukan warganegara di Sabah kini melebihi jumlah gabungan komuniti pribumi Momogun tersebut.

Perbandingan ini seharusnya menggoncang hati nurani setiap kerajaan yang bertanggungjawab.

Bagaimanakah Sabah boleh sampai ke tahap di mana penduduk bukan warganegara menjadi lebih ramai daripada sebahagian besar penduduk pribuminya sendiri?

Bagaimanakah perubahan demografi ini berlaku dalam tempoh beberapa dekad?

Berapa ramaikah yang memasuki Sabah secara sah?

Berapa ramaikah yang terus tinggal selepas permit mereka tamat tempoh?

Berapa ramaikah yang dilahirkan di Sabah tanpa status kewarganegaraan mereka diselesaikan dengan sewajarnya?

Berapa ramaikah yang memasuki Sabah melalui laluan tidak berdokumen atau rangkaian penyeludupan migran yang terancang?

Berapa ramaikah yang memperoleh dokumen pengenalan melalui penipuan, rasuah, pengisytiharan palsu atau penyelewengan pentadbiran?

Dan yang paling penting, pihak berkuasa manakah yang bertanggungjawab membiarkan keadaan ini berkembang dan berterusan?

Perlu ditegaskan bahawa seseorang yang diklasifikasikan sebagai bukan warganegara tidak semestinya seorang pendatang tanpa izin. Sabah mempunyai ramai pekerja asing yang sah, penduduk tetap, pelajar, pelabur, pasangan kepada warganegara serta individu lain yang keberadaan mereka dibenarkan secara sah.

Walau bagaimanapun, apabila jumlah penduduk bukan warganegara yang direkodkan melebihi sejuta orang, Kerajaan tidak boleh menolak persoalan sah mengenai penguatkuasaan sempadan, tinggal melebihi tempoh permit, penghijrahan tidak berdokumen, penipuan dokumen dan kesan demografi jangka panjang terhadap Sabah.

Di manakah jaminan keselamatan yang telah diberikan kepada Sabah?

Di manakah perlindungan imigresen yang berkesan yang dijanjikan kepada Sabah ketika ia bersetuju membentuk Malaysia?

Di manakah akauntabiliti terhadap puluhan tahun kemasukan secara haram, dokumentasi pengenalan yang meragukan dan dakwaan yang masih belum diselesaikan berkaitan isu yang lazim dikenali sebagai “Projek IC”?

Sistem imigresen yang profesional mesti mampu mencegah kemasukan haram, mengenal pasti mereka yang tinggal melebihi tempoh permit, membongkar sindiket penyeludupan migran dan penipuan dokumen, serta memastikan rekod imigresen tidak boleh dimanipulasi sebagai laluan untuk memperoleh dokumen pengenalan atau kewarganegaraan.

Jabatan Imigresen tidak dengan sendirinya memberikan kewarganegaraan atau mendaftarkan pemilih. Dokumentasi pengenalan dan pentadbiran kewarganegaraan pada asasnya melibatkan Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara, manakala pendaftaran pemilih berada di bawah tanggungjawab Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya.

Namun, agensi-agensi ini membentuk satu rangkaian pentadbiran yang saling berkaitan.

Rangkaian itu tidak boleh sesekali membenarkan mana-mana individu bergerak daripada kemasukan secara haram, kepada dokumentasi yang meragukan, seterusnya memperoleh kewarganegaraan secara tidak wajar dan akhirnya dimasukkan ke dalam daftar pemilih.

Atas sebab inilah profesionalisme mesti merangkumi satu audit menyeluruh dan sah di sisi undang-undang antara agensi yang melibatkan Jabatan Imigresen, Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara, polis, agensi keselamatan dan Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya.

Rekod agensi-agensi tersebut hendaklah disemak silang secara selamat, tertakluk kepada undang-undang dan keadilan prosedur, untuk mengenal pasti:

• identiti yang bercanggah atau berganda;

• dokumen kelahiran dan pengenalan diri yang palsu atau tidak teratur;

• perubahan status kewarganegaraan yang tidak dapat dijelaskan;

• individu yang memasuki Sabah secara tidak sah atau tinggal melebihi tempoh permit;

• rekod identiti yang dikaitkan dengan dapatan atau keterangan yang diteliti oleh Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja mengenai Pendatang Asing di Sabah; dan

• individu yang mungkin telah didaftarkan secara tidak wajar dalam daftar pemilih.

Mana-mana individu yang benar-benar merupakan warganegara Malaysia mesti dilayan dengan adil dan dilindungi menurut undang-undang. Namun, kewarganegaraan yang diperoleh melalui penipuan, rasuah atau dokumentasi palsu tidak boleh dilindungi hanya kerana kesalahan tersebut tidak dikesan selama bertahun-tahun.

Kerajaan juga mesti menjelaskan perkembangan sejarah yang membawa kepada keadaan demografi luar biasa di Sabah. Tidak memadai sekadar mengumumkan operasi penguatkuasaan dari semasa ke semasa sambil mengelakkan persoalan lebih besar tentang bagaimana jumlah penduduk ini boleh mencapai skala sedemikian.

Rakyat Sabah berhak mengetahui:

Siapakah yang gagal melindungi sempadan Sabah?

Siapakah yang gagal bertindak terhadap sindiket dokumentasi terancang?

Siapakah yang membenarkan atau memudahkan pengeluaran dokumen pengenalan yang tidak teratur?

Adakah pegawai awam terlibat?

Adakah kepentingan politik terlibat?

Apakah tindakan pembetulan yang telah diambil susulan Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja?

Dan mengapakah kebimbangan serius berkaitan kewarganegaraan dan integriti daftar pemilih Sabah masih belum diselesaikan?

Profesionalisme bermaksud lebih daripada sekadar kepantasan, pakaian seragam, teknologi dan pengumuman perhubungan awam.

Ia bermaksud integriti, akauntabiliti, ketelusan serta keberanian untuk menyiasat dan membetulkan kegagalan institusi—walaupun kegagalan itu membabitkan individu berkuasa atau pihak berkuasa awam.

Pertumbuhan ekonomi memang penting, tetapi tiada matlamat ekonomi yang boleh membenarkan perlindungan imigresen Sabah dilemahkan atau perkembangan demografi yang mungkin menjejaskan suara politik masyarakat pribuminya diabaikan.

Jaminan keselamatan yang diberikan kepada Sabah mesti dihormati secara nyata, bukan sekadar dikenang dalam ucapan.

Perlindungan khas imigresen Sabah tidak boleh dianggap sebagai hiasan sejarah sedangkan lebih sejuta bukan warganegara menetap di negeri ini dan persoalan lama berkaitan imigresen haram, dokumentasi yang meragukan serta integriti pilihan raya masih belum terjawab.

Kerajaan mesti menjelaskan dengan terus terang kepada rakyat Sabah:

Bagaimanakah perkara ini berlaku?

Siapakah yang bertanggungjawab?

Apakah yang telah dilakukan untuk membetulkannya?

Dan di manakah jaminan keselamatan yang dijanjikan kepada Sabah pada tahun 1963?

Hak perlembagaan rakyat Sabah—khususnya masyarakat pribuminya—untuk menentukan masa depan politik tanah air mereka sendiri melalui sistem kewarganegaraan yang sah dan daftar pemilih yang bersih serta berwibawa tidak boleh dikompromikan.

Daniel John Jambun ialah Presiden NGO, 

Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)#~Borneo Herald™

Tokoh Aktivis Dr Julia Ongkili Antara Penerima Anugerah Gemilang Maju Jaya 2026

Borneo Herald 

10.45PM MYT, 13-7-2026

Dr Julia E Ongkili bersama keluarganya pada majlis Anugerah Gemilang Maju Jaya di SICC, Kota Kinabalu kelmarin (11-7-2026).

Oleh Jayden Lisandu, Tuaran

TAMPARULI : Aktivis masyarakat yang tidak asing lagi di sini, Dr Julia Emelda Ongkili, dipilih antara penerima Anugerah Gemilang Maju Jaya 2026 dalam satu majlis gilang-gemilang di ibu negeri kelmarin.

Dr Julia, anak bekas Menteri Undang-Undang Malaysia, Datuk Dr James Ongkili, menerima pengiktirafan Anugerah Cemerlang Pembangunan Modal Insan Gemilang Maju Jaya.

Sebelum ini beliau pernah menerima beberapa anugerah kebangsaan kerana sumbangan kepimpinan beliau dalam masyarakat khususnya golongan wanita. 

Ketika ditemui Borneo Herald, Dr Julia, yang berpengalaman luas dalam sektor korporat,  hospitaliti dan keusahawanan, berkata beliau amat berterimakasih atas kepercayaan dan penghargaan itu.

"Anugerah Cemerlang Pembangunan Modal Insan Gemilang Maju Jaya merupakan satu penghormatan yang amat bermakna buat diri saya," kata ibu kepada dua orang anak itu.

Majlis di SICC Kota Kinabalu itu menyaksikan ramai ikon masyarakat termasuk anak seni dan ahli sukan turut menerima anugerah.

Antaranya artis Stacy Anam, pencipta lagu Datuk Joe Fernandez, artis Datuk Khadijah Ibrahim dan atlit penerjun negara Datuk Pandalela Rinong.

Sementara itu Pengasas merangkap Pengerusi

Penganjur AGMJ, Datuk Rehan Rahim, berkata penganjurananugerah itu melambangkan

kerjasama erat antara pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO), kerajaan, agensi dan masyarakat dalam menyemai budaya menghargai dan mengiktiraf

kecemerlangan.

Datuk Rehan Rahim, orang yang bertanggungjawab menganjurkan majlis gilang-gemilang di SICC berkenaan..

Isteri Ketua Menteri Sabah, Datuk Juliah Salag, yang juga Yang Dipertua Muafakat Titipan Amal Isteri Wakil Rakyat Sabah (Mutiara GRS) adalah tetamu khas dan telah merasmikan majlis bersejarah berkenaan.#~Borneo Herald™

Johor PRN 2026: A Turning Point — The Numbers, The Message, And The Signs Of Anwar’s Ebbing Support

 By Jose Telado, Kota Kinabalu

THE dust has settled on the 16th Johor State Election (PRN), held on 11 July 2026, and the results paint a striking picture: a decisive victory for Barisan Nasional (BN), a sharp retreat for Pakatan Harapan (PH), and what many observers are reading as a clear warning sign for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and his administration.

 

The Full Overview

 

Of the 56 state seats contested, Barisan Nasional secured 48, achieving a commanding two-thirds majority — an improvement from its 40 seats in the 2022 Johor polls. The coalition’s component parties performed strongly: UMNO won 36 seats, MCA 8, and MIC 4.

 

In contrast, Pakatan Harapan managed only 8 seats, down from 12 previously. DAP retained 6 seats, mostly in traditional urban strongholds, while PKR and Amanah secured just one each. Perikatan Nasional (PN), MUDA, and all smaller parties failed to win a single seat, effectively eliminated from the state assembly.

 

Voter turnout stood at 68.73%, slightly lower than the 2022 figure — suggesting some degree of apathy, but more importantly, a shift in preference among those who did cast their ballots.

 

Anwar’s Popularity: From High Hopes To Fading Appeal

 

When Anwar Ibrahim took office as Prime Minister in late 2022, he enjoyed a surge of goodwill, both domestically and internationally. His “Unity Government” was hailed as a historic breakthrough, promising stability, reform, and inclusive governance. For a time, his approval ratings remained high, with many voters willing to give his administration the benefit of the doubt.

 

But the results in Johor tell a different story today. This election was widely seen as a key test of Anwar’s personal and political standing — and the outcome has raised serious questions. PH lost ground not only in rural and semi-rural areas but also in several mixed and urban constituencies that were once its base. Seats like Johor Jaya, Perling, and Tangkak, previously held by PH candidates, fell to BN candidates, a sign that even its traditional supporters are drifting away.

 

Critics argue that the drop in support stems from unmet expectations. Issues such as the rising cost of living, slower-than-promised economic reforms, perceived delays in tackling corruption, and concerns over policy consistency have chipped away at public confidence. In Johor — Malaysia’s second most economically important state — voters prioritised continuity, infrastructure delivery, and local governance over national-level rhetoric. The fact that BN chose to run independently, despite being part of the same federal unity government, and still won convincingly, indicates that voters distinguished between the state leadership’s performance and the Prime Minister’s national agenda.

 

Signs Of A Fall: What The Result Means

 

While it is too early to call this a complete collapse, the Johor PRN 2026 results are widely viewed as a significant warning signal for Anwar’s leadership:

 

1. Eroding Cross-Community Support: The loss of votes across Malay, Chinese, and Indian constituencies suggests that his broad appeal is narrowing.

​

2. Local Over National: Voters are now judging parties more on what they deliver at state and district levels rather than aligning strictly with federal leadership.

​

3. Coalition Dynamics Under Pressure: BN’s landslide win, while still part of the unity government, creates a situation where it now holds stronger bargaining power, potentially limiting Anwar’s room to push through controversial reforms.

​

4. Momentum Shift: What began as a “reform wave” under Anwar has visibly lost momentum, replaced by growing calls for practical results rather than promises.

 

Conclusion

Johor has spoken clearly: stability and tangible progress have won over promises and idealism. For Anwar Ibrahim, this election is a moment of reckoning. It serves as evidence that his popularity, once soaring, is now on a downward trajectory. If his administration does not address public concerns quickly and visibly, what appears today as a warning sign could well become the beginning of a deeper decline in political standing — not just in Johor, but across the nation.

Jose Telado is an activist, an ardent political observer from Sabah.#~Borneo Herald™