Legal experts colluding with the political and economic elites in justifying corruption: the case of Malaysia's Madani government

The paper examines how the current reformist Malaysian government has centralized power by co-opting civil society organizations to bolster the moral legitimacy of an integral state. It argues that Anwar Ibrahim’s transition from opposition unifier to head of government has muted civil society actors and curtailed CSO autonomy and influence. A comparative look at socio-economic strategies under Anwar versus Najib Razak finds Anwar’s redistribution and empowerment of marginalized communities limited, disproportionately affecting rural constituencies and potentially reshaping political support. The administration is also criticized for not fulfilling its pledge to hold corrupt politicians accountable, with conflicts of interest underscored by prominent lawyers representing politicians across party lines. Drawing on a Gramscian lens, the paper proposes incorporating legal professionals into the concept of the integral state because of their capacity to interpret and shape laws in ways that benefit ruling elites, offering a more comprehensive framework to understand contemporary power consolidation in Malaysia.

Kevin Fernandez