A joint statement on PSA by Bersih, IDEAS, Projek SAMA and Rasuah Busters
28 February 2025
Malaysia deserves a strong PSA that is of grade-A quality in five aspects: (1) leadership; (2) administrative autonomy; (3) financial autonomy; (4) services provided to MPs; and (5) public accountability (See Table 1) to enable checks and balances on the Executive and better quality in lawmaking and policymaking.
We call upon the Madani Government, the official Opposition Perikatan Nasional (PN), and all MPs to bring about 11 necessary improvements (Table 2) to the PSA bill tabled for first reading on 24 February 2025 (Monday) when it is tabled for second reading on 4 March 2025 (Thursday) for it to be of 5A quality.
While arrangements may be subsequently made through Standing Orders of the Houses or administrative orders, we see the superiority of having express provisions or guarantees in the PSA 2025 bill for important matters such as representation of Opposition and Government Backbench in the Parliamentary Service Council (MPP), placing all personnel or at least most departments under the PSA, legislative appointment and tenure security for the Clerks of Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara, financial autonomy for the MPP as well as the establishment of Parliamentary Budget Office and Parliamentary Draftsman Office.
Based on desk research on parliamentary service legislations in several Commonwealth democracies, including Malaysia’s PSA 1963 which was repealed in 1992, we construct a five-criteria analytical framework with grades A-E to assess the PSA 2025 bill. (Table 1) We fully recognize the limitation and subjectiveness of this analytical framework as we can only study the parent acts and not by-laws or regulations, let alone power dynamics in the parliaments studied.
Given the limited time from the announcement of the bill’s tabling, this is what is humanly possible for four NGOs to do, when the task should have been undertaken by a Green Paper, White Paper or some detailed study by the Parliamentary Library and Research Service itself.
This attempt to facilitate an open-ended debate on the purposes, functions and design of the parliamentary service Malaysia needs is prompted by the Government’s apparent intention for the bill to be constrained by the parameters of the PSA 1963 and to exclude a substantial part of the parliamentary officers from its coverage.
We cannot comprehend why such a self-restricting approach is undertaken by the Madani Government as parliaments in Commonwealth democracies like New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada have undergone bold reforms to produce professional and competent parliamentary services since or even before the 1992 repeal of the PSA 1963.
If the Government would not adopt a 1963 strategy for economic development in 2025, why should it tie its hands to a 1963 design instead of benchmarking on international best practices when it comes to parliamentary reform?
Based on our yardstick, the PSA 2025 bill yields only a composite grade of 2C2D1E. This is doubtlessly a progress compared to the 5E quality of the status quo since 1992 and almost equally matches the quality of the repealed PSA 1963 (see Table 3). However, the composite grade means that if this bill is passed, the Parliament will still be largely under the influence of the executive, and not well-resourced and empowered to provide checks and balances and produce better laws and policies.
While gravely disappointed by the Madani Government’s low ambition in the PSA 2025, we congratulate it for at least restoring the parliamentary service, an idea that had been deliberated since 2005 under the Abdullah Government but was unable to be advanced by four successive governments before Madani.
The Madani Government’s political will to push through this reform is commendable given that 70% of parliamentary civil servants expressed opposition to it in an earlier survey, as acknowledged by Parliamentary Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Hamzah yesterday (27 February 2025), which possibly resulted from inadequate briefings and information about the details and alternatives for the PSA.
Objection to a new PSA has been driven by various motivations from authoritarianism, territoriality to career paths. Regrettably, the legitimate concerns of some civil servants were not given the encouragement to be expressed openly to enable public deliberation towards win-win solutions. This episode is yet another example of why the process of drafting Bills must be substantially improved by organising adequate consultations with all stakeholders involved, acknowledging their concerns and obtaining their buy-in from early on.
On 4 March, when the PSA 2025 bill is tabled for second reading, we call the Madani Government, the PN Opposition, and all 222 parliamentarians to take the necessary steps to ensure the PSA that is of a 5A quality and worthy of its name. Let’s use this opportunity to strengthen one of the vital democratic institutions in this country.
Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih)
Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS)
Project Stability and Accountability for Malaysia (Projek SAMA)
Rasuah Busters
