DECEMBER 27 — While Malaysians — much like observers across the world — remain shocked by the length and severity of the custodial sentence and fine imposed on former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, delivered on Boxing Day 2025, what ultimately stands out is not the punishment itself, but the discipline with which justice was administered.
In a Global South where political elites frequently evade accountability, the conviction of a former head of government through ordinary judicial processes remains a rarity.
Equally notable was Najib’s own appeal to his supporters to remain civic and civil. That appeal matters.
It signals an acknowledgment — however restrained — that political contestation must now proceed through courts, appeals, and constitutional mechanisms rather than pressure on institutions.
In that sense, Boxing Day 2025 marked not only a legal judgment, but a broader test of Malaysia’s political maturity.
Najib retains his constitutional right to appeal.
The Court of Appeal, staffed by three senior judges, and the Federal Court, constituted by five, remain open avenues.
Yet the High Court judgment delivered by Justice Colin Sequerah has already dealt a decisive blow to Najib’s political future.
With neither house arrest nor early release offering a realistic pathway back to executive authority, clemency — if any — lies solely within the constitutional prerogative of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim did not intervene in the SRC or 1MDB proceedings, other than reiterating that Malaysia’s legal institutions must be allowed to function independently and without fear or favour. Politically, however, Anwar emerges as the principal beneficiary of this moment.
For the first time in Malaysia’s history, a former prime minister — also the son of Tun Abdul Razak, the country’s second prime minister — has been imprisoned following due judicial process.
From 2010 to 2025, Malaysian politics was consumed by the shadow of SRC and 1MDB.
These cases shaped elections, fractured society, and eroded public trust. With Najib now convicted in both matters, a long and destabilising chapter has effectively closed, even as legal appeals continue.
His defence counsel, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah — among Malaysia’s most formidable advocates — faces the daunting task of overturning dozens of detailed judicial findings. That challenge reflects the depth of the court’s reasoning rather than arbitrariness or haste.
Yet it would be a mistake to see this moment as the triumph of one leader over another. The deeper story is the role of the Malaysian electorate itself.
Time and again, Malaysians have chosen the ballot box — not the street, not violence, not institutional sabotage — to express their vox populi.
On May 9, 2018, voters peacefully ended six decades of uninterrupted rule through a general election that stunned the world.
On November 19, 2022, amid fragmentation and fatigue, more than 82 per cent of Malaysians again returned to the polls, demanding accountability, coalition governance, and constitutional continuity rather than chaos.
These elections were not perfect, but they were decisive assertions that legitimacy in Malaysia flows from consent, not coercion.
This electoral discipline matters. It created the political conditions under which institutions could recover.
Courts do not regain credibility in isolation; they do so when citizens repeatedly signal that outcomes — however uncomfortable — must be settled through lawful change.
Without 2018 and 2022, Boxing Day 2025 would not have been possible.
Beyond personalities, therefore, lies a more consequential development: Malaysia’s re-entry into the league of like-minded, rules-based states.
Whether articulated through the norms of the United Nations, reflected in Asean’s diplomatic language, or embedded in anti-corruption commitments associated with the OECD, the rule of law has acquired tangible meaning in Malaysia.
Lineage, office, and political power no longer guarantee immunity.
That message resonates well beyond Putrajaya.
This repositioning yields five strategic benefits.
First, it restores institutional credibility at home.
Public confidence in the judiciary, prosecution, and enforcement agencies — long weakened by perceptions of selective justice — has been materially strengthened.
Second, it enhances Malaysia’s international legitimacy. Investors and partners value predictability and legal certainty.
A country willing to prosecute elite corruption signals that contracts, regulations, and courts are not negotiable commodities.
Third, it strengthens diplomatic leverage.
States that enforce their own laws speak with greater moral authority in regional and global negotiations, whether on governance, trade, or security cooperation.
Fourth, it aligns Malaysia with coalitions of like-minded countries committed to accountability and transparency — not as a Western imposition, but as a universal legal ethic increasingly shared across regions.
Fifth, and most importantly, it deepens political maturity. Leaders are reminded that power is temporary, but institutions endure.
Over time, this discourages excess, constrains authoritarian drift, and anchors competition within constitutional bounds.
The sentence delivered on Boxing Day 2025 will be remembered not merely as a personal reckoning for Najib Razak, but as a structural turning point for Malaysia.
It was made possible by judges who held firm, institutions that were allowed to function, and — above all — citizens who repeatedly chose elections to express their will.
Whatever one’s political sympathies, the message is now unmistakable.
Malaysia has stepped back into the community of nations where legitimacy flows not from power alone, but from law — validated by vox populi and sustained by institutions.
That is what it means for Malaysia to be back in the league of like-minded countries.
* Phar Kim Beng, PhD is the Professor of Asean Studies at International Islamic University of Malaysia and Director of Institute of International and Asean Studies (IINTAS).
** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
