This article first appeared in Forum, The Edge Malaysia Weekly on January 12, 2026 - January 18, 2026

The next general election (GE) is due by the end of 2027. By then, if the pledge by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to limit the term of the prime minister comes true, that would mark a significant milestone in his reform agenda to improve governance in the administration of the country.

Last week, in his first address to civil servants for the year, Anwar said the government will table a bill to limit the term of the prime minister to two. The law, when it comes into effect, will also cover key positions in government agencies and the civil service.

Apart from limiting the term of the prime minister and key government officials, Anwar said a bill to separate the role of the attorney-general from that of the public prosecutor will also be tabled.

Other laws to be tabled in parliament this year are the Ombudsman Bill and the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill. The Ombudsman law will enable the setting up of an independent body to handle complaints against government departments and enforcement officers while the FOI is to facilitate easier access to government information.

In his first 30 months of helming the government, Anwar had focused on economic reform. Now, he seems to be tackling institutional and legal reforms and setting the stage for the next GE.

The first test for Anwar to demonstrate his seriousness in implementing the law to limit the tenure of persons holding key positions will come in May this year when the contract of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki comes up for review.

Azam has served in this key position since 2020, after having taken over from Latheefa Koya. He served under Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob.

His contract was renewed in May 2023 for a year although there were calls within Anwar’s Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), especially from Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli, to replace Azam. Since then, Azam’s contract has already been renewed twice.

Anwar had said at the PKR convention last year that he had no qualms about replacing Azam but that he could not find a suitable candidate to take on high-profile cases.

Limiting the prime minister’s tenure in office to two terms has far bigger implications than the other reforms.

Firstly, Anwar would be sending the message that he was not looking at being the prime minister for a long time. He is obviously seeking a second term as prime minister and has declared that if he gets the mandate to lead the government again, that would be his last term.

Previously, those in power would not have wanted to limit their term because of the fear of being labelled a lame-duck prime minister in the second term. But Anwar would probably have important reasons for announcing the impending bill.

It could be due to pressure from his coalition partners in Pakatan Harapan, particularly the DAP wanting to see concrete institutional reforms being implemented following the party’s shocking defeat in the recent Sabah polls.

Or it could be that Anwar is sending a message that the door is open to a younger leader to helm Putrajaya after the next GE.

Secondly, limiting the term of the prime minister would set the precedent for similar restrictions for officials appointed to lead critical institutions and enforcement agencies.

In the Malaysian political system, the prime minister’s post comes with a lot of power, more so when he is also the minister of finance. He has a say in all key appointments, from members of the cabinet to heads of prosecution and enforcement agencies.

For instance, breaking up the Attorney-General’s Chambers is one of the institutional reforms that is the subject of frequent debate. But in reality, the reform has no substance if the person heading the public prosecution is seen as someone who lacks integrity and does not act independently of the influence of the prime minister of the day.

The same goes for key appointments in other enforcement agencies, such as the police and the MACC. Although the MACC and police heads are appointed by the King, it is on the advice of the prime minister.

The end result is that these critical agencies are all seen as the apparatus of the prime minister of the day.

One must remember that the institutional reform of critical agencies will not be effective if the political system is impaired. The essential ingredient is the political will of politicians. Only if that is present can institutional reform be meaningful.

When the political system is broken, the institutions will invariably be affected. Even in the US, which is promoted as an exemplary democracy, the president influences the decision-making of the Federal Reserve and sometimes even the Justice Department.

Finally, limiting the term of the prime minister allows the person at the helm to make difficult decisions, especially when they are serving their final term. The prime minister does not have to be a populist leader at this point.

Since 2008, all of Malaysia’s prime ministers have tended to postpone hard decisions to remain popular. It is because since that time, no single coalition has been able to secure two-thirds majority in parliament to control Putrajaya.

The prime minister depends on allies from other parties to rule Putrajaya and provide a stable political environment.

Maintaining a stable political climate is all about compromises. And most of the time, compromises lead to the head of government bending over backwards to ensure the coalition does not crumble.

Some of the developments seen in the Anwar administration are viewed as compromise solutions adopted to ensure political stability.

Among them is the handling of alleged corruption in the Sabah mining scandal and bribery charges brought against Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi having been classified as “No Further Action”.

Another high-profile case is MACC’s forfeiture of RM169 million linked to aides of Ismail Sabri where no charges have been filed so far.

The concessions made to Sarawak over oil and gas rights are another example of compromises that have become necessary for the federal government to remain in power.

If it is clear that the prime minister cannot serve a third term, then he or she should be able to act without being pressured to seek compromise solutions just to remain in power.

The law on limiting the term of the prime minister is long overdue.

It was first tabled in parliament at the end of 2019 when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was the prime minister. Mahathir’s concern was that his successors may not be keen to introduce the two-term law as the tendency was for them to continue to remain in office.

Of all of Malaysia’s prime ministers, Mahathir would know best the pitfalls of having a prime minister in office for a long term. He was the country’s longest-serving prime minister, having ruled the country from 1981 to 2003 — a good 22 years.

During his rule, there were many good policies as he prepared Malaysia to become an industrialised and digital economy. However, he also delayed making hard decisions to restructure the economy.

The first reading of the bill to limit the term of the prime minister was done in December 2019, two months before Mahathir’s second stint at the helm of Putrajaya ended. His successor, Muhyiddin withdrew the bill in the September 2020 parliament session.

Of the states, only Penang has adopted a law to limit the term of the chief minister to two. None of the other states has followed suit.

As can be seen in Penang, the chief minister is not the most powerful person in DAP in that state. Hence the law by itself is a healthy way to keep an eye on the powers of the leaders.

M Shanmugam ([email protected]) is a contributing editor at The Edge

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's App Store and Android's Google Play.