KUALA LUMPUR: In a rare failure not seen since 2019, the government could not obtain a two-thirds majority to pass a Bill, limiting the Prime Minister’s tenure to two term or 10 years.
The Constitutional (Amendment) Bill 2026 garnered 146 votes in favour at the Dewan Rakyat, just two short of the 148 required to amend the Constitution.
Speaker Tan Sri Johari Abdullah announced the outcome after the voting process. Only 190 MPs were present at the time of the voting.
“Those who were not present today for the voting are 32 MPs, and 44 abstained from voting.
“Those who voted for the amendment are 146 MPs. The amendment has received less than the required two-thirds majority,” he told the Lower House yesterday.
The Bill was tabled for its first reading on Feb 23 by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said.
Earlier yesterday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim tabled it for second reading, describing the proposed amendment as a key institutional reform to ensure leadership renewal and to prevent the concentration of power in the executive.
Anwar also said the proposed amendments would not affect the prerogative powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
A total of 41 MPs from both sides of the political divide took part in the debate, which centred on constitutional procedure, the King’s prerogatives and the need for checks and balances.
Kota Bharu MP Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan, who sought clarification from Azalina on whether proper procedures were followed during her winding-up speech, stressed that the Opposition did not directly oppose the proposed amendment.
“We are not against the amendment. However, any amendment, especially to the Federal Constitution, must be made in accordance with the law and in accordance with the Constitution,” he said.
Otherwise, he added, the law could be challenged in court as unconstitutional.
He highlighted Article 43(2)(a), which provides that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall appoint as Prime Minister a member of the Dewan Rakyat who, in His Majesty’s judgment, is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the House.
Takiyuddin argued that this provision embodies the personal prerogative and distinction of the monarchy.
Citing Article 38(4) of the Constitution, he elaborated that no law directly affecting the privileges, position, honour or sovereignty of the Malay Rulers may be passed without the consent of the Conference of Rulers.
He also questioned why the government had not referred the matter to the Conference, adding that doing so would have removed any doubt about the amendment’s validity.
As an example, he said a future Prime Minister who had served 10 years but still commanded majority support could challenge the amendment in court on the grounds that it was passed without the Rulers’ consent.
“We can agree to one term or two terms. But whatever amendment is made must strictly follow the constitutional procedure,” he said.
In her winding-up speech, Azalina rejected the assertion that the amendment encroached upon royal powers.
She said the government was proposing to amend Article 43(2)(a), not Article 38(4), and that Article 43 was not among the constitutional provisions requiring the Conference’s consent for amendment.
“We are not touching on the privileges or position of the Rulers,” she said, adding that the Constitution already contains eligibility conditions and disqualifications for the office of Prime Minister.
“If they (the Opposition) do not like the amendments, then make sure that they gain more than a two-thirds majority in the 16th General Election and change the amendments.
“They can put a prime minister forever until the end of days,” she said.
The last time a constitutional amendment failed to clear the Dewan Rayat was in 2019, when a Bill to restore the status of Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners with the Federation of Malaya under the MA63 provisions was rejected.
It garnered 138 votes, 10 short of the requirement. The Bill was later passed in 2021.
