Anwar Ibrahim’s Balancing Act as a Muslim Leader for All

During the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, news broke of a disagreement over the relocation of the Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman Temple near Jalan Masjid India in the Malaysian capital. As with most other things in Malaysia, it became a religiously polarising issue. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s administration is stuck between the demands and wishes of Muslims and non-Muslims as he seeks to be a leader for all.

The land on which the temple sits was bought by the Jakel Group, a textile firm, in 2014 for the purpose of building a mosque as part of the late founder’s endowment (wakaf) to the local Muslim community. For more than a decade, there had been discussions between Jakel and the temple management to find an acceptable resolution. Members of the Muslim community argued that the land was bought legally, and the temple committee was offered a funded relocation. The Hindu community pointed out that the temple is a heritage site and that the temple management had applied to convert the land title into land for a non-Muslim house of worship in 2012, but failed.

The authorities quickly stepped in, especially the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Federal Territories), Dr Zaliha Mustafa. Following days of tension and discussion, it was announced that the temple management had agreed to relocate to privately owned land 50m from its current location. Despite the amicable resolution among stakeholders, netizens, especially Malay/Muslims, angrily commented that it was not fair that the temple was given “free” land instead of finding means to legally purchase a new location. Rather than applauding the resolution, it continued as a religiously divisive issue.

For Anwar Ibrahim, the resolution was considered a “victory“. He officiated the groundbreaking ceremony for the planned Madani Mosque on 27 March on the Jakel-owned land despite initial criticism of jumping the gun. Jakel wanted to proceed with the ceremony to coincide with Ramadan but gave an assurance that the still-standing temple will not be demolished until the new temple is built and operational. On the day of the groundbreaking ceremony, Anwar also met with temple committee members. But it is doubtful whether this is enough to convince Malaysians that Anwar is the right leader for all.

Anwar’s challenge lies in proving that upholding multicultural tenets as a leader is an authentic expression of Islamic values. Until his vision is fully embraced, being a post-Islamist will be Anwar’s Achilles’ heel.

The episode underscores how Anwar has been an enigma since his first day as prime minister. As president of a multiracial party, he claims to be a leader for Malaysians of all skin colour and creed. For example, during a session with students at the International Islamic University Malaysia on 11 April, he said, “Malaysia is a 60 per cent Muslim-majority country. Islam is the religion of the Federation, but we have more than 40 per cent non-Muslims. We have to deal with them. You want me to be a hero by just abusing the non-Muslims? Yes, I’ll be a hero among the Muslims. As many of my friends in the opposition do. But is that the right thing to do? First, is it an Islamic thing to do?”

Anwar claims he is not an Islamist in the sense that Islamism refers to a political ideology that advocates for the implementation of Islamic principles and law within government and society. Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) is the epitome of Islamism. On the other hand, Anwar’s “post-Islamism” advocates mutual respect grounded in the belief that it is in line with the values of justice and peace as mentioned in the Quran. 

But in the more than two years he has been prime minister, Anwar has faced accusations from both Islamists and liberals. In addition to the temple issue, Malaysians were also shocked by a group of radio DJs mocking the Hindu kavadi ritual in early March 2025. Despite the government’s quick action of a fine of RM250,000 (US$58,000) to the radio operator, the Malay community quickly noted that it seemed disproportionately high compared to the RM10,000 fine on comedian Harith Iskander for allegedly mocking Islam. This feeds into the narrative that Anwar is a liberal who prioritises non-Muslim causes. On the other hand, when Anwar suggested expanding the role of the Department of Islamic Development Malaysia beyond preaching and organising events, critics called him out for being an Islamist. Anwar’s attempt to lead with Islamic values and principles is used by his detractors to claim, strangely enough, that he is either too “liberal” or too “Islamist”.

Anwar must demonstrate that his vision of post-Islamism, which embraces diversity and justice, is the true path forward for Malaysia. This is manifested in his Madani vision, which includes values such as compassion, respect, and trust to be practised by all Malaysians. Even though he may face challenges in winning support from Islamists and liberals, his commitment to enduring harmony represents a more promising endgame for Malaysia. Anwar’s challenge lies in proving that upholding multicultural tenets as a leader is an authentic expression of Islamic values. Until his vision is fully embraced, being a post-Islamist will be his Achilles’ heel. While he panders to both Islamists and liberals, it is still impossible for him to simultaneously satisfy both sides, given the level of polarisation and distrust in Malaysian society.

2025/162