Anwar Ibrahim’s release from prison by the Malaysian Federal Court’s decision brought relief and satisfaction to his family, to his wife’s Parti Keadilan and to supporters. For an UMNO politician quoted in the Kuala Lumpur Star of 5th September 2004, “it was like something hanging over our head. Now, we can look up freely”.

The Asian Wall Street Journal in its 10-12 September 2004 edition had a headline entitled, “Investors May Consider Return on Anwar Release” but spoke of two conditions: signs of progress toward a restructuring of large, local listed concerns with government links; and new growth strategies for Malaysia’s manufacturing-led economy. The article spoke of shares jumping on news of Anwar’s release and a commented, “Malaysia back to the ranks of the civilized world”.

The Star of the 5th September 2004 revealed that Anwar’s release was expected via the grapevine and that there was a speculation of a deal made for his release. Prime Minister Datuk Abdullah Ahmad Badawi flatly denied any such deal in the same edition of the Star. Speaking to some Malaysians, they were confident that there was no deal. Was this the start of an independent judiciary? Anwar Ibrahim was quoted in the same edition of the Star as crediting the Prime Minister for taking the initial steps towards judicial independence.

What is more important is the future of the Malaysian political scene with Anwar’s release or rather his place in Malaysian politics? Anwar immediately flew to Munich for his spine to be treated. Before his departure, there has been a reconcilatory tone on his part to cooperate with the government for the “betterment of Malaysians” while “pursuing his agenda of reformasi for a civil society” (The Star, 5th September 2004). The response came in the same paper from the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak with the statement that the Barisan Nasional, the coalition of parties led by UMNO, the United Malay National Organisation of the Prime Minister, in power, was willing to cooperate with Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim or any opposition party for the sake of the country.

Speaking to Malaysians including academics, one gets different viewpoints, which implies the future is open. One view is that he will provide a rallying point for the opposition cutting across ethnic divides, “ideologies” and parties and mounting a credible opposition and challenge to the parties in power. This will be best for a fractionated opposition. However, one must not also ignore that bringing the Islamic party, PAS, and the Chinese-based, DAP, in some kind of cooperation is not going to be easy. His wife’s party, Parti Keadilan, which did very badly in the last election this year is being boosted with new members, said one source. Some changes at the top will have to be made to accommodate him in his wife’s party.

The other scenario would have involved him returning to UMNO. But what would there have been for him in returning to UMNO? The Prime Minister stressed he had not made any deal to bring him back to the party and that having him back in the party is a decision for the party. (The Star, 13 September 2004). What argument would there have been for the party to take him back unless he was seen as a threat to draw away Malay support from UMNO. Having him under the UMNO wing would then cut support for him and and lead to the dissolution of Parti Keadilan. However, could he also posed a challenge to some in the leadership of the party? If so, it would be better that he stays out of the party. But why would Anwar want to rejoin UMNO? Wouldn’t he be isolated and marginalised in the party just as Tunku Razaleigh who returned back into the party after his departure to form Semangat 46. An UMNO leader spoke of sacked UMNO leaders on the sidelines or slipped into political oblivion (The Star, 13 September 2004). This will not be what Anwar wanted. The only way for him to return to the party would have been if a deal had been struck in which he could still have the freedom to play his part including rallying support, which could have been a challenge to the top leadership of UMNO.

(Anwar had previously resigned from the Party after former Prime Minister Mahatir ousted him as Deputy Prime Minister and Anwar has recently ruled out rejoining UNMO. The Party itself has also opposed his return and a leader more recently referred indirectly to him as a “traitor” to the Party.)

The satisfaction of Anwar’s release has been tempered by the Federal Court’s dismissal of his application to set aside its decision of two years earlier upholding his conviction and sentence on four counts of corrupt practice (The Star, September 16, 2004). This happened while he was away in Munich. He failed to clear his name on corruption charges. A Star report stated that as a result he would not be able to hold office in political parties and societies or stand for election until April 14, 2008.

Free from prison but keep quiet. Has nothing changed with Anwar’s release? A good way to keep him away from being a challenge in the next election at the latest 2008. His counsel dismissed any suggestion that the Federal Court’s decision was politically motivated. Anwar could be his wife’s party quiet counsellor or counsellor of the opposition on the quiet?

Anwar could patiently take the coming years to re-establish a clean reputation tainted by these corruption charges, through principled positions, ethical and non-opportunistic politics, humility, being approachable and to be with the people. He faces a Prime Minister untarnished by any wrong-doing and whose behaviour has registered some approval. His imprisonment as a result of unjust treatment may be the mainstay to keep him on an even keel.

To conclude to speak in these terms of the future scenario of Malaysian politics with Anwar Ibrahim’s release points to the importance of personalities in Malaysian politics much more so than in European politics where politics has a long history of institutionalisation, where what a political party stands for or its policies are equally considered in any election. Proportional representation allows an elector to have the choice to vote for a party or for personalities.

By Paul Lim, an Associate Professor at Universiti Sains Malaysia.