Johor’s Unelected State Representatives: Rhymes and Reasons

Barisan Nasional (BN), which leads the state government in Johor, is seeking to increase the number of elected members in the state legislature. The move has been criticised by other political parties and civil society groups. BN has argued that the move would increase the level of technical expertise and diversity of representation. But the move could well be a disguise for BN to prepare for a three-way battle when the polls come a-calling.

On 7 May, the BN state administration tabled and passed a bill to amend the Constitution to allow for an additional five assembly members. Johor’s top legislative body is its state assembly and the rules on its size and composition are set out in the state’s Constitution.  The constitution provided for 56 members elected by popular vote at least once every five years.

Unlike their peers, these members do not represent any geographic constituency. Instead of being elected, they will be nominated by at least seven assembly members. Their appointment subsequently needs to be approved by a simple majority in the assembly and accepted by the Sultan. As with other members of the state assembly, they are allowed to debate and vote on motions. However, they cannot be appointed as Menteri Besar (Chief Minister) or appointed to a cabinet position.   

The current Menteri Besar of Johor, Onn Hafiz Ghazi, has put forward two reasons for the amendment under Part II, Article 15 of the Constitution. First, the appointed representatives would increase the technical expertise of the assembly by bringing in experts in areas such as urban planning and data analytics. Second, this measure would allow groups such as women, youths, and civil society to be represented.

At the federal level, BN is part of the Madani administration along with Pakatan Harapan (PH). In Johor, BN holds power on its own. Johor’s Constitution can be amended with a two-thirds majority and BN was able to use its 40 members for this purpose. None of the other coalitions or parties in Johor’s assembly supported the measure.

With this change, Johor will become part of a sub-group of states in Malaysia that allow for non-elected members of the state assembly. However, the roles of these members and the reasoning behind them differs.

Sabah was the first state to introduce this measure in 1963. The provision (Part I, Article 14(1c)) for up to six members of the state assembly to be appointed by the Governor was in its Constitution upon its incorporation into Malaysia. The measure sought to allow people with technical expertise to be coopted into the assembly, and to increase the stability of the administration’s governing majority. These appointed politicians can hold cabinet positions.

Terengganu passed its own amendment in 2003 with the aim of ensuring adequate representation. The amendment (Part I, Article 27(2)) states that the state assembly may vote to appoint up to four non-elected members who are female or non-Muslim. These members are allowed to debate motions but cannot vote. This provision was used for the first time in 2018, when a female member of the assembly was appointed.

Pahang introduced its own amendment in 2020 to appoint an additional five members (Part II, Article 18) with the rationale that the greater number of assembly members would improve service delivery. As with Johor, there is no provision for these members to sit in the cabinet or be named Menteri Besar. And, as with Johor, opposition parties such as PKR and Amanah opposed the measure.

In Johor, opposition parties and civil society groups have criticised the amendment. First, the manner in which the measure was passed was decried, as the bill was introduced to the assembly and swiftly passed on the same day. Parties from PH and the parliamentary opposition Perikatan Nasional (PN) criticised the limited time for debate.

In a three-way fight with PN, it is likely that any majority attained will be relatively modest. BN’s fast-tracking of the amendment is an indication that elections are coming and that it is preparing for a three-way battle.

Second, civil society groups have argued that the measure will only serve to magnify the ruling coalition’s majority, as there is no provision for the appointed members of the assembly to be from different political parties. Instead, going by the current practice in Sabah and Pahang, the seats have been allocated to members of the ruling coalition.

Third, the specifics of Johor’s amendment do not really address the issue of representation. The appointed members cannot be voted out; they will only step down when the state assembly is dissolved or upon the request of the Sultan. Furthermore, in contrast to Terengganu’s amendment, there is no provision for the appointed members to come from specific population groups.

Johor’s state election is nearing and is due by June 2027 at the latest. While the state has enjoyed a tradition of strong majorities, there is no guarantee that this will continue. It is looking increasingly likely that BN and PH will contest separately in Johor. In a three-way fight with PN, it is likely that any majority attained will be relatively modest. BN’s fast-tracking of the amendment is an indication that elections are coming and that it is preparing for a three-way battle.

However, there are some cautionary tales from the other states. Sabah established an uncomfortable precedent in 1985. That year, the Governor decided to bypass the winning coalition and allocate the state’s six non-elected seats to the runner-up coalition, which then attained a majority. Following this, the Sabah Constitution was amended to include the stipulation that the Menteri Besar needs to be the leader of the party with a majority in the state assembly.

At present, the provisions for Johor’s non-elected representatives appear to preclude this scenario, as their nominations need to be approved by a majority in the assembly first, rather than solely at the discretion of the Sultan. However, it is important to remember that in 2022, there was an unexpected change at the head of the state when the incumbent MB Hasni Mohammad was bypassed in favour of the relatively unknown Onn Hafiz Ghazi. There was widespread speculation that this change was made at the behest of the palace. The royal assent needed for the new appointed members also increases the palace’s influence in the assembly. Given the rapidity with which this recent amendment was introduced, and the possibility of unintended consequences, it is entirely possible that more constitutional amendments may be tabled down the road.

2026/148