Zahid NFA torpedoes 'good vibes' from Anwar's new year reforms
When Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim made his new year address on Jan 5, pledging major reforms for 2026, it was a signal to Pakatan Harapan supporters not to lose faith in his leadership and administration.
But any goodwill and positive sentiments achieved through that announcement would have been severely eroded by the Attorney-General's Chambers declaration last night that there would be no further action (NFA) against Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in his Yayasan Akalbudi case.
Already, questions have been raised about...
When Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim made his new year address on Jan 5, pledging major reforms for 2026, it was a signal to Pakatan Harapan supporters not to lose faith in his leadership and administration.
But any goodwill and positive sentiments achieved through that announcement would have been severely eroded by the Attorney-General’s Chambers declaration last night that there would be no further action (NFA) against Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in his Yayasan Akalbudi case.
Already, questions have been raised about the NFA, given that the High Court had ruled there was a prima facie case for the 47 charges against Zahid, involving criminal breach of trust, bribery, and money laundering, linked to tens of millions of ringgit from Yayasan Akalbudi.
Then there was the coincidental timing of the announcement, which came just days after Zahid put his foot down and assured Umno would remain with Anwar’s government until the end of its term - amid a vocal push led by Umno Youth chief Dr Akmal Saleh for the party to leave and join the opposition.
Whether it was a coincidence or not, the optics are bad for the government.
Anwar, however, will not be the only one to suffer. DAP - for whom the prime minister’s announcement on Monday was supposed to be proof that the party is delivering on its promise to get reforms enacted - will also be courting tough questions from its supporters.

Reform commitment meant to cushion blow?
International Islamic University Malaysia political science associate professor Syaza Shukri posited that the government may have expected that the announced reforms would cushion the blow from the NFA decision.
“Maybe the government is thinking that with the reforms announcement, it could absorb criticism over the NFA, but to be honest, the ‘good vibes’ from the reforms were never fully felt in the first place,” she told Malaysiakini.
The reform announcement on Monday was not universally accepted, with people questioning, among others, the planned implementation.
Hence, she said the latest development only adds to cynicism that the Madani administration is not fully committed, especially in fighting corruption.
“The perception is that reforms target the people, but elites still get away,” she added.
All talk, no action
Pacific Research Center principal adviser Oh Ei Sun expressed a similar view, saying that the NFA reinforced the perception among Harapan supporters that promises of reforms and anti-corruption are just empty slogans when the coalition was in opposition, which became increasingly hollow when it was in power.

“The timing does look especially bad in the wake of the reform announcement and Najib Abdul Razak’s further conviction,” he said, referring to the former premier being handed a 15-year jail sentence and a RM11.38 billion fine over the 1MDB corruption scandal.
Oh was Najib’s former political secretary.
Commenting on DAP, Oh said the party will have some explaining to do to its supporters.
“DAP would first and foremost need to explain to its supporters why many others associated with this government are left off the hook while Lim Guan Eng’s case is still ongoing,” he said.
Lim, the DAP adviser, is on trial over four corruption charges involving the planned construction of Penang’s undersea tunnel and paired roads project connecting the island to the mainland.

Syaza said there might not be much that DAP can say to explain the NFA.
“I’m not sure how else DAP and the government can explain or justify this.
“I guess they will use the typical answer of no involvement with the decision, but that is a difficult argument to make, and instead it only adds to the perception of selective accountability,” she added.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2023/08/c05b7d148d029535f1ada3ae9c6c6582.jpg)

/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/11/734e68e7f6adc2ac3ab8e9f5aad6b556.png)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2024/08/733e179c289e14db639c799c9d2d2c13.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2024/12/4eaf6bdd9e3d52c083801683ec309709.jpg)