UPOV 1991 AND THE CPTPP: DO NOT SACRIFICE LOCAL SEED SOVEREIGNTY FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS Local Seeds • Farmers’ Rights • Natural Wealth • People’s Wealth

MALAYSIAN PEOPLE’S PARTY (PRM)

OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL MEDIA STATEMENT

UPOV 1991 AND THE CPTPP: DO NOT SACRIFICE LOCAL SEED SOVEREIGNTY FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Local Seeds • Farmers’ Rights • Natural Wealth • People’s Wealth

By: Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
President, Malaysian People’s Party (PRM)

The Malaysian People’s Party (PRM) asserts that food sovereignty begins with seed sovereignty. Seeds are not merely agricultural inputs. They are part of our natural wealth, the product of generations of farmers’ knowledge, and the foundation of our national capacity to produce our own food.

Therefore, any amendments to the Protection of New Plant Varieties Act 2004 (Act 634) and any steps taken by Malaysia concerning the 1991 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV 1991) must be carefully assessed in the national interest, with due regard to farmers’ rights, food security and the fair distribution of wealth.

1. THE CPTPP AND UPOV 1991: THE GOVERNMENT MUST CLARIFY MALAYSIA’S STATUS

The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) entered into force for Malaysia on 29 November 2022. Malaysia’s intellectual property commitments relating to plant varieties include a four-year transition period concerning UPOV 1991.

The date of 29 November 2026 is therefore important in assessing the implementation of these commitments. However, the expiry of the transition period does not, by itself, establish that Malaysia has become a member of UPOV 1991 or completed all necessary domestic legislative processes.

UPOV documents issued in 2025 record that Malaysia submitted draft amendments to Act 634 for examination against the requirements of UPOV 1991. A positive decision on the conformity of the draft does not automatically make Malaysia a UPOV member. The relevant UPOV documentation states that Malaysia may deposit its instrument of accession once the draft amendments have been adopted without changes and the law has entered into force.

PRM calls on the Government to publicly clarify the current status of the amendments to Act 634, Malaysia’s accession process to UPOV 1991, and the measures being taken to protect the interests of local farmers.

2. BREEDERS’ RIGHTS MUST BE BALANCED WITH FARMERS’ RIGHTS

PRM recognises the importance of research, innovation and appropriate protection for breeders who develop new plant varieties. However, intellectual property protection must not undermine smallholders’ ability to cultivate their land and produce food at reasonable cost.

UPOV 1991 grants specific rights to breeders in respect of plant varieties that satisfy the applicable legal criteria. The Convention does not impose an absolute prohibition on every practice of saving and replanting seeds. Nevertheless, exceptions for farm-saved seed are subject to the conditions and limitations of the applicable law. They do not create an unlimited right to save, exchange or sell every protected seed variety.

On 4 March 2026, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Food Security Datuk Chan Foong Hin stated in the Dewan Negara that the Government was adopting a cautious and balanced approach. He also affirmed the Government’s commitment to preserving smallholders’ practices of saving and reusing seeds for their own use through exceptions under Act 634.

PRM takes note of these assurances. However, policy assurances must be translated into clear, understandable and enforceable legal provisions.

The Government must clarify the following:

- What are farmers’ actual rights to save and replant seeds for their own use?
- What limits apply to seed exchanges among farmers and traditional community practices?
- How can smallholders determine whether a variety is protected and what restrictions apply?
- What complaint mechanisms and remedies are available if farmers’ rights are affected?

3. LOCAL SEEDS ARE PART OF OUR NATURAL WEALTH AND PEOPLE’S KNOWLEDGE

Under PRM’s National Wealth Architecture of Malaysia framework, national wealth should not be measured solely through exports, market values or economic growth figures. We must also assess how natural resources, human knowledge and productive activity create ownership and improve people’s well-being.

Local seeds embody genetic diversity, agricultural knowledge and generations of farmers’ experience. If these resources and knowledge are not adequately protected, Malaysia risks weakening an important foundation of its agricultural capacity and food security.

PRM views this economic relationship as a mutually reinforcing cycle:

Natural Wealth + Human Wealth → Seeds and Production → Economic Value → People’s Income and Ownership → Reinvestment in People and Nature.

Quality seeds enable farmers to produce food. Production generates economic value. That value should contribute to farmers’ income, a stable food supply and wealth that can be passed on to future generations.

This cycle must be protected so that natural wealth does not merely become a source of profit for selected parties, but also builds the wealth of the people.

4. SEED COMPETITION, PRICES AND FOOD SOVEREIGNTY

The Government has stated that there are 15 authorised paddy seed producers under the Paddy Seed Certification Scheme (Skim Pengesahan Benih Padi, SPBP). PRM takes note of this figure, but the number of producers alone is insufficient to establish whether the market is genuinely competitive.

A comprehensive assessment must examine seed prices, varietal choices, farmers’ access to seeds, production costs, purchasing and selling conditions, and the ability of new suppliers to enter the market.

Farmers should not face restrictions that leave them with insufficient choices or undermine the viability of their agricultural enterprises. At the same time, allegations of monopoly or market restrictions must be investigated on the basis of verifiable evidence and data.

PRM demands transparency in assessing the impact of amendments to Act 634 on market competition, agricultural costs, farmers’ incomes and national food supplies.

5. THE PEOPLE’S VOICES MUST BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY

On 9 July 2026, Astro AWANI reported that the Malaysian Food Sovereignty Forum (Forum Kedaulatan Makanan Malaysia, FKMM) had submitted a petition containing 20,800 signatures opposing amendments to Act 634 associated with Malaysia’s proposed accession to UPOV 1991.

Among the concerns raised were the risks of biopiracy, the protection of traditional farmers’ rights, and possible legal gaps or overlaps involving access to biological resources and benefit-sharing under the Access to Biological Resources and Benefit Sharing Act 2017 (Act 795).

These concerns warrant legal scrutiny, meaningful consultation and evidence-based assessment. They should not be treated as proven consequences, but neither should they be dismissed without proper examination.

PRM emphasises that public consultation must not be a mere formality. Farmers, paddy growers, researchers, local communities, consumers and civil society organisations must have a meaningful opportunity to understand and comment on changes that could affect the future of Malaysia’s food system.

6. PRM’S SEVEN DEMANDS

To safeguard seed sovereignty and the interests of the people, PRM calls on the Government to:

1. Clarify Malaysia’s current status regarding the implementation of CPTPP commitments relating to UPOV 1991 and the amendments to Act 634.
2. Publish the draft amendments and a clause-by-clause explanation so that the public can understand the proposed rights and obligations.
3. Provide clear legal protection for smallholder farmers, including the actual scope of seed saving and reuse, together with the applicable legal limitations.
4. Conduct meaningful public consultations with paddy growers, farmers, researchers, local communities, consumers and civil society.
5. Protect genetic diversity and traditional knowledge, while ensuring coherence between relevant laws governing biological resources and benefit-sharing.
6. Strengthen Malaysia’s domestic seed capabilities through public research, local plant breeding, universities, MARDI and support for farmer-led innovation.
7. Publish a National Seed Sovereignty Impact Assessment examining the effects on seed prices, production costs, market competition, farmers’ incomes, varietal diversity and food security.

This assessment must inform the Government’s decisions, rather than becoming a document prepared only after the policy has been implemented.

CONCLUSION: PEOPLE’S LAND, PEOPLE’S SEEDS, PEOPLE’S RICE

PRM does not reject innovation or appropriate protection for plant breeders. What we demand is a fair balance between innovation, the public interest and farmers’ ability to remain the producers of the nation’s food.

Food sovereignty cannot be separated from Malaysia’s capacity to manage genetic resources, develop local seeds and ensure that farmers receive a fair share of the value generated by their work.

PRM’s principle is clear: natural wealth must build people’s wealth, not make the people increasingly dependent on resources that they can no longer reasonably access or cultivate.

Food sovereignty begins with seed sovereignty.

People’s Land • People’s Seeds • People’s Rice • People’s Nation

Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
President
Malaysian People’s Party (PRM)

---

REFERENCES

1. Ministry of Finance Malaysia (MOF)
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) — information on the signing and entry-into-force dates of the CPTPP for Malaysia, including 29 November 2022.
https://www.mof.gov.my/portal/en/procurement/cptpp

2. Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry (MITI)
CPTPP Cost-Benefit Analysis Final Report — discussion of UPOV 1991-related commitments, the transition period and implications for plant variety protection.
https://fta.miti.gov.my/miti-fta/resources/CPTPPA/25072022_CPTPP_Cost_Benefit_Analysis_Final_Report_-_for_publication.pdf

3. International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Examination of the Conformity of the Draft Amendments to the Protection of New Plant Varieties Act 2004 [Act 634] of Malaysia with the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention, document C/59/17, 2 October 2025.
https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/upov/en/c_59/c_59_17.pdf

4. International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Report on the Decisions Taken by the Council at its Fifty-Ninth Ordinary Session, document C/59/19, October 2025 — decision on the conformity of the draft amendments to Act 634 and the conditions that must be met before an instrument of accession may be deposited.
https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/upov/en/c_59/c_59_19.pdf

5. Parliament of Malaysia — Dewan Negara Hansard
Official record of the Dewan Negara sitting on 4 March 2026 — questions concerning UPOV 1991, farmers’ rights, paddy seeds and the position of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security.
https://hansard.parlimen.gov.my/hansard/dewan-negara/2026-03-04?search=undefined

6. Astro AWANI
“FKMM serah petisyen 20,800 tandatangan bantah pindaan Akta 634 sertai UPOV 1991” [FKMM submits petition with 20,800 signatures opposing amendments to Act 634 and accession to UPOV 1991], 9 July 2026.
https://www.astroawani.com/berita-malaysia/fkmm-serah-petisyen-20800-tandatangan-bantah-pindaan-akta-634-sertai-upov-1991

Publication note: The latest status of the amendments to Act 634, the commencement of the relevant legislation and Malaysia’s accession process to UPOV 1991 should be verified again before publication. The expiry of the CPTPP transition period on 29 November 2026 must not be treated as proof that Malaysia has joined UPOV 1991 or completed all domestic processes.

UPOV 1991 DAN CPTPP: JANGAN KORBANKAN KEDAULATAN BENIH TEMPATAN DEMI HAK HARTA INTELEK Benih Tempatan • Hak Pesawah • Kekayaan Alam • Kekayaan Rakyat

 PARTI RAKYAT MALAYSIA (PRM)

KENYATAAN MEDIA RASMI PRESIDEN

UPOV 1991 DAN CPTPP: JANGAN KORBANKAN KEDAULATAN BENIH TEMPATAN DEMI HAK HARTA INTELEK

Benih Tempatan • Hak Pesawah • Kekayaan Alam • Kekayaan Rakyat

Oleh: Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
Presiden Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)

Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) menegaskan bahawa kedaulatan makanan negara bermula daripada kedaulatan benih. Benih bukan sekadar input pertanian, tetapi sebahagian daripada kekayaan alam, pengetahuan turun-temurun petani dan asas kepada keupayaan rakyat menghasilkan makanan sendiri.

Oleh itu, sebarang pindaan kepada Akta Perlindungan Varieti Baru Tumbuhan 2004 (Akta 634) dan langkah Malaysia berkaitan Konvensyen UPOV 1991 perlu dinilai secara teliti berdasarkan kepentingan nasional, hak petani, keterjaminan makanan dan pengagihan kekayaan kepada rakyat.

1. CPTPP DAN UPOV 1991: STATUS PERLU DIJELASKAN

CPTPP berkuat kuasa di Malaysia pada 29 November 2022. Komitmen berkaitan perlindungan harta intelek tumbuhan memberikan Malaysia tempoh peralihan empat tahun untuk melaksanakan kewajipan berkaitan UPOV 1991.

Tarikh 29 November 2026 merupakan tarikh penting untuk menilai perkembangan komitmen tersebut. Namun, tamatnya tempoh peralihan tidak dengan sendirinya membuktikan bahawa Malaysia telah menjadi anggota UPOV 1991 atau bahawa semua proses perundangan domestik telah selesai.

Dokumen UPOV pada 2025 merekodkan bahawa Malaysia mengemukakan draf pindaan Akta 634 untuk penilaian keselarasan dengan UPOV 1991. Keputusan positif terhadap keselarasan draf itu bukan bermaksud Malaysia telah secara automatik menjadi anggota UPOV. Dokumen UPOV menyatakan bahawa instrumen penyertaan boleh diserahkan setelah draf diterima pakai tanpa perubahan dan undang-undang tersebut berkuat kuasa.

PRM menggesa kerajaan menjelaskan secara terbuka status terkini pindaan Akta 634, proses penyertaan UPOV 1991 dan langkah yang sedang diambil untuk melindungi kepentingan petani tempatan.

2. HAK PEMBIAK BAKA MESTI SEIMBANG DENGAN HAK PETANI

PRM mengiktiraf kepentingan penyelidikan, inovasi dan perlindungan terhadap pembiak baka yang menghasilkan varieti tumbuhan baharu. Namun, perlindungan harta intelek tidak boleh dilaksanakan sehingga menjejaskan keupayaan petani kecil untuk terus mengusahakan tanah dan menghasilkan makanan pada kos yang munasabah.

UPOV 1991 memberikan hak tertentu kepada pembiak baka bagi varieti yang memenuhi kriteria undang-undang. Konvensyen tersebut tidak secara mutlak melarang semua amalan menyimpan dan menanam semula benih. Walau bagaimanapun, ruang pengecualian bagi benih yang disimpan petani tertakluk pada syarat dan batas undang-undang yang berkaitan; ia bukan hak tanpa had untuk menyimpan, menukar atau menjual semua benih yang dilindungi.

Pada 4 Mac 2026, Timbalan Menteri Pertanian dan Keterjaminan Makanan, Datuk Chan Foong Hin, menyatakan di Dewan Negara bahawa kerajaan mengambil pendekatan berhati-hati dan seimbang serta komited melindungi amalan petani kecil menyimpan dan menggunakan semula benih bagi kegunaan sendiri melalui pengecualian di bawah Akta 634.

PRM mengambil maklum jaminan tersebut. Namun, jaminan dasar perlu diterjemahkan kepada peruntukan undang-undang yang jelas, mudah difahami dan boleh dikuatkuasakan.

Antara persoalan yang perlu dijawab ialah:

- Apakah hak sebenar petani untuk menyimpan dan menanam semula benih bagi kegunaan sendiri?
- Apakah batas bagi pertukaran benih sesama petani dan amalan tradisional komuniti?
- Bagaimanakah petani kecil dapat mengetahui sama ada sesuatu varieti dilindungi dan apakah sekatan yang terpakai?
- Apakah saluran aduan dan remedi sekiranya hak petani terjejas?

3. BENIH TEMPATAN IALAH KEKAYAAN ALAM DAN PENGETAHUAN RAKYAT

Dalam kerangka Senibina Kekayaan Negara Malaysia, kekayaan negara tidak seharusnya dinilai hanya melalui hasil eksport, nilai pasaran atau angka pertumbuhan. Kita juga perlu menilai sejauh mana sumber alam, pengetahuan manusia dan hasil pengeluaran membina pemilikan serta kesejahteraan rakyat.

Benih tempatan membawa nilai genetik, pengetahuan pertanian dan pengalaman generasi petani. Jika sumber dan pengetahuan ini tidak dilindungi secara wajar, negara berisiko kehilangan sebahagian daripada asas keupayaan pertanian dan keterjaminan makanannya.

PRM melihat hubungan ekonomi ini sebagai satu kitaran yang saling bergantung:

Kekayaan Alam + Kekayaan Insan → Benih dan Penghasilan → Nilai Ekonomi → Pendapatan dan Pemilikan Rakyat → Pelaburan Semula kepada Insan dan Alam.

Benih yang baik membolehkan petani menghasilkan makanan. Penghasilan mewujudkan nilai ekonomi. Nilai itu sepatutnya menyumbang kepada pendapatan petani, bekalan makanan yang stabil dan kekayaan yang boleh diwariskan kepada generasi akan datang.

Kitaran ini mesti dipelihara agar kekayaan alam tidak sekadar menjadi sumber keuntungan pihak tertentu, tetapi turut membina kekayaan rakyat.

4. PERSAINGAN BENIH, HARGA DAN KEDAULATAN MAKANAN

Kerajaan pernah menyatakan bahawa terdapat 15 pengeluar benih padi sah di bawah Skim Pengesahan Benih Padi (SPBP). PRM mengambil maklum angka tersebut, tetapi bilangan pengeluar semata-mata tidak mencukupi untuk menentukan sama ada pasaran benar-benar kompetitif.

Penilaian yang menyeluruh perlu melihat harga benih, pilihan varieti, akses petani kepada benih, kos pengeluaran, syarat jual beli dan keupayaan pembekal baharu memasuki pasaran.

Petani tidak sepatutnya berhadapan dengan keadaan yang mengehadkan pilihan mereka sehingga menjejaskan daya maju perusahaan pertanian. Pada masa yang sama, sebarang dakwaan tentang monopoli atau sekatan pasaran hendaklah disiasat berdasarkan bukti dan data yang boleh disemak.

PRM menuntut ketelusan dalam menilai kesan pindaan Akta 634 terhadap persaingan, kos pertanian, pendapatan petani dan bekalan makanan negara.

5. SUARA RAKYAT MESTI DIBERI PERTIMBANGAN

Pada 9 Julai 2026, Astro AWANI melaporkan bahawa Forum Kedaulatan Makanan Malaysia (FKMM) menyerahkan petisyen yang mengandungi 20,800 tandatangan bagi membantah pindaan Akta 634 yang dikaitkan dengan penyertaan Malaysia dalam UPOV 1991.

Antara kebimbangan yang dibangkitkan ialah risiko biopirasi, hak tradisional petani dan kemungkinan pertindihan atau kelompongan undang-undang berkaitan akses kepada sumber biologi dan perkongsian faedah di bawah Akta 795.

Kebimbangan ini perlu dinilai melalui penelitian undang-undang, konsultasi bermakna dan penilaian berasaskan bukti. Ia tidak wajar dianggap sebagai kesan yang telah terbukti, tetapi juga tidak boleh diketepikan tanpa penelitian sewajarnya.

PRM menegaskan bahawa konsultasi awam bukan sekadar formaliti. Petani, pesawah, penyelidik, komuniti tempatan, pengguna dan organisasi masyarakat sivil mesti mempunyai ruang yang bermakna untuk memahami serta memberikan pandangan terhadap perubahan yang bakal mempengaruhi masa depan makanan negara.

6. TUJUH TUNTUTAN PRM

Bagi memastikan kedaulatan benih dan kepentingan rakyat terpelihara, PRM menuntut kerajaan:

1. Menjelaskan status terkini pelaksanaan komitmen CPTPP berkaitan UPOV 1991 dan pindaan Akta 634.
2. Menerbitkan draf pindaan serta huraian klausa demi klausa supaya rakyat memahami hak dan kewajipan yang bakal terpakai.
3. Menjamin perlindungan yang jelas bagi petani kecil, termasuk skop sebenar penyimpanan dan penggunaan semula benih serta batas undang-undang yang berkaitan.
4. Melaksanakan konsultasi awam yang bermakna dengan pesawah, petani, penyelidik, komuniti tempatan, pengguna dan masyarakat sivil.
5. Melindungi kepelbagaian genetik dan pengetahuan tradisional, termasuk memastikan keselarasan undang-undang berkaitan sumber biologi dan perkongsian faedah.
6. Memperkukuh keupayaan benih negara melalui penyelidikan awam, pembiakbakaan tempatan, universiti, MARDI dan sokongan kepada inovasi petani.
7. Menerbitkan Penilaian Impak Kedaulatan Benih Negara yang menilai kesan terhadap harga benih, kos pengeluaran, persaingan pasaran, pendapatan petani, kepelbagaian varieti dan keterjaminan makanan.

Penilaian ini hendaklah menjadi asas kepada keputusan kerajaan, bukan sekadar dokumen selepas sesuatu dasar dilaksanakan.

PENUTUP: TANAH RAKYAT, BENIH RAKYAT, BERAS RAKYAT

PRM tidak menolak inovasi atau perlindungan yang wajar kepada pembiak baka. Apa yang dituntut ialah keseimbangan yang adil antara inovasi, kepentingan awam dan hak petani untuk terus menjadi pengeluar makanan negara.

Kedaulatan makanan tidak boleh dipisahkan daripada keupayaan negara mengurus sumber genetik, membangunkan benih tempatan dan memastikan petani memperoleh manfaat yang adil daripada hasil usaha mereka.

Prinsip PRM jelas: kekayaan alam mesti membina kekayaan rakyat, bukan menjadikan rakyat semakin bergantung kepada sumber yang tidak lagi mampu mereka akses atau usahakan secara munasabah.

Kedaulatan makanan bermula daripada kedaulatan benih.

Tanah Rakyat • Benih Rakyat • Beras Rakyat • Negara Rakyat

Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
Presiden
Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)

---

RUJUKAN

1. Kementerian Kewangan Malaysia (MOF)
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) — maklumat tarikh tandatangan dan tarikh kuat kuasa CPTPP bagi Malaysia, termasuk 29 November 2022.
https://www.mof.gov.my/portal/en/procurement/cptpp

2. Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry (MITI)
CPTPP Cost-Benefit Analysis Final Report — perbincangan tentang komitmen berkaitan UPOV 1991, tempoh peralihan dan implikasi perlindungan varieti tumbuhan.
https://fta.miti.gov.my/miti-fta/resources/CPTPPA/25072022_CPTPP_Cost_Benefit_Analysis_Final_Report_-_for_publication.pdf

3. International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Examination of the Conformity of the Draft Amendments to the Protection of New Plant Varieties Act 2004 [Act 634] of Malaysia with the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention, dokumen C/59/17, 2 Oktober 2025.
https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/upov/en/c_59/c_59_17.pdf

4. International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
Report on the Decisions Taken by the Council at its Fifty-Ninth Ordinary Session, dokumen C/59/19, Oktober 2025 — keputusan mengenai keselarasan draf pindaan Akta 634 dan syarat sebelum instrumen penyertaan boleh diserahkan.
https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/upov/en/c_59/c_59_19.pdf

5. Parlimen Malaysia — Hansard Dewan Negara
Penyata rasmi persidangan Dewan Negara, 4 Mac 2026 — soalan mengenai UPOV 1991, hak petani, benih padi dan pendirian Kementerian Pertanian dan Keterjaminan Makanan.
https://hansard.parlimen.gov.my/hansard/dewan-negara/2026-03-04?search=undefined

6. Astro AWANI
“FKMM serah petisyen 20,800 tandatangan bantah pindaan Akta 634 sertai UPOV 1991”, 9 Julai 2026.
https://www.astroawani.com/berita-malaysia/fkmm-serah-petisyen-20800-tandatangan-bantah-pindaan-akta-634-sertai-upov-1991

Catatan penerbitan: Status terkini pindaan Akta 634, kuat kuasa undang-undang dan proses penyertaan Malaysia dalam UPOV 1991 hendaklah disahkan sekali lagi sebelum kenyataan ini diterbitkan. Tempoh peralihan CPTPP yang berakhir pada 29 November 2026 tidak boleh dianggap sebagai bukti bahawa Malaysia telah menyertai UPOV 1991 atau bahawa semua proses domestik telah selesai.

DEMOKRASI EKONOMI DAN HAK PEKERJA: DARIPADA PELANTIKAN KEPADA PERWAKILAN, DARIPADA PERTUMBUHAN EKONOMI KEPADA KEKAYAAN RAKYAT GAJI MINIMUM, KOS SARA HIDUP DAN KEADILAN EKONOMI: SIAPA SEBENARNYA DILINDUNGI BELANJAWAN 2027?

 PARTI RAKYAT MALAYSIA (PRM)

KENYATAAN MEDIA RASMI PRESIDEN

12 Oktober 2026

DEMOKRASI EKONOMI DAN HAK PEKERJA: DARIPADA PELANTIKAN KEPADA PERWAKILAN, DARIPADA PERTUMBUHAN EKONOMI KEPADA KEKAYAAN RAKYAT

GAJI MINIMUM, KOS SARA HIDUP DAN KEADILAN EKONOMI: SIAPA SEBENARNYA DILINDUNGI BELANJAWAN 2027?

Oleh: Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
Presiden, Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)

Rakyat bukan sekadar penerima dasar. Rakyat mesti mempunyai suara, pendapatan yang bermaruah dan peluang membina kekayaan.

Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) memandang serius persoalan yang timbul daripada pembentangan Belanjawan 2027, khususnya berhubung gaji minimum RM2,000, tempoh pelaksanaannya, pengecualian perusahaan mikro, kecil dan sederhana (PMKS), serta sejauh mana suara pekerja dan pencarum diwakili dalam institusi ekonomi negara.

PRM bimbang bahawa sesuatu dasar yang diumumkan atas nama peningkatan pendapatan rakyat masih boleh meninggalkan persoalan besar sekiranya kadar gaji tidak dinilai secara menyeluruh berdasarkan kos kehidupan sebenar, manakala pekerja tidak mempunyai saluran perwakilan dan akauntabiliti yang mencukupi.

Kebimbangan ini bukan bermaksud setiap langkah Kerajaan tidak mempunyai manfaat. Kenaikan gaji minimum daripada RM1,700 kepada RM2,000 ialah peningkatan sebanyak RM300 atau kira-kira 17.6%. Namun, angka kenaikan itu sahaja belum membuktikan bahawa pekerja sudah mampu menjalani kehidupan yang wajar.

Dalam ucapan Belanjawan 2027, Perdana Menteri sendiri menyatakan bahawa bahagian pampasan pekerja kepada Keluaran Dalam Negara Kasar (KDNK) Malaysia masih rendah, iaitu 33.9%, dan jurang antara produktiviti dengan upah pekerja perlu dirapatkan. Kerajaan turut mengumumkan gaji minimum RM2,000 mulai Jun 2027, kerangka pendapatan RM2,500 bagi pekerja separa mahir dan graduan, serta peningkatan penanda aras gaji sara hidup GLIC dan GLC daripada RM3,100 kepada RM3,400 sebulan. <Link url="https://www.pmo.gov.my/ms/ucapanterkini/ucapan-belanjawan-madani-kelima-tahun-2027-belanjawan-madani-kelima-menggapai-di-langit-mengakar-di-bumi/" title="(Ucapan rasmi Belanjawan 2027, Pejabat Perdana Menteri)."/>

Persoalan yang perlu dijawab ialah: adakah keseluruhan kerangka ini cukup untuk melindungi kehidupan pekerja, dan adakah rakyat mempunyai kuasa yang sewajarnya dalam menentukan bagaimana kekayaan negara dihasilkan, diurus dan diagihkan?

Bagi PRM, isu ini tidak boleh dipisahkan daripada demokrasi ekonomi.

---

1. Gaji minimum RM2,000: Kenaikan yang perlu dinilai berdasarkan kehidupan sebenar

PRM mengambil maklum bahawa gaji minimum baharu sebanyak RM2,000 dijadualkan berkuat kuasa pada Jun 2027. Walaupun peningkatan ini wajar dinilai sebagai perubahan dasar, tempoh menunggu sehingga Jun 2027 menimbulkan persoalan tentang beban yang terus ditanggung pekerja dalam bulan-bulan sebelumnya.

Harga makanan, perumahan, pengangkutan, utiliti dan keperluan keluarga tidak menunggu sehingga kadar gaji baharu berkuat kuasa.

Oleh itu, Kerajaan perlu menjelaskan asas penetapan RM2,000, data kos sara hidup yang digunakan, serta sebab tempoh peralihan tersebut dipilih. Pekerja berpendapatan rendah tidak seharusnya menjadi pihak yang menanggung keseluruhan kos sementara menunggu pelaksanaan dasar.

PRM juga mengingatkan bahawa gaji minimum ialah lantai perlindungan pendapatan, bukan jaminan bahawa seseorang pekerja telah memperoleh gaji yang cukup untuk hidup dengan bermaruah.

Apakah yang ditunjukkan oleh Bank Negara dan KWSP?

Bank Negara Malaysia menerbitkan kajian The Living Wage: Beyond Making Ends Meet pada 2018, yang menganggarkan keperluan pendapatan bulanan untuk mencapai taraf kehidupan minimum yang boleh diterima. Anggaran bagi seorang dewasa bujang di Kuala Lumpur ketika itu ialah sekitar RM2,700, berdasarkan bakul perbelanjaan dan paras harga yang digunakan dalam kajian tersebut. <Link url="https://www.bnm.gov.my/insights/income/ar2017b3" title="(Bank Negara Malaysia, kajian gaji sara hidup)."/>

Sementara itu, Panduan Belanjawanku KWSP 2024/2025 menganggarkan keperluan perbelanjaan bulanan di Lembah Klang, antaranya:

- Individu bujang yang menggunakan pengangkutan awam: RM1,970;
- Individu bujang yang memiliki kereta: RM2,800;
- Pasangan tanpa anak: RM4,970;
- Pasangan dengan seorang anak: RM6,420; dan
- Pasangan dengan dua orang anak: RM7,440.

Angka tersebut ialah anggaran perbelanjaan mengikut kategori isi rumah dan andaian tertentu, bukannya kadar gaji minimum yang ditetapkan KWSP. <Link url="https://www.kwsp.gov.my/ms/w/epf-releases-belanjawanku-2024/2025-and-retirement-income-adequacy-framework" title="(KWSP, Panduan Belanjawanku 2024/2025)."/>

PRM tidak menyamakan penanda aras gaji sara hidup Bank Negara dengan panduan perbelanjaan KWSP atau menganggap kedua-duanya sebagai arahan supaya gaji minimum berkanun ditetapkan pada angka tertentu. Namun, kedua-duanya menyediakan asas penting untuk menilai sama ada pendapatan rakyat selari dengan keperluan kehidupan sebenar.

Jika gaji minimum ditetapkan tanpa penilaian berkala terhadap kos kehidupan, dasar itu berisiko ketinggalan daripada realiti yang dihadapi pekerja.

PRM menggesa Kerajaan menerbitkan asas pengiraan gaji minimum, menjalankan semakan berkala dan menjelaskan bagaimana produktiviti, inflasi, keperluan isi rumah serta kemampuan majikan diambil kira.

2. Pengecualian PMKS: Hasil jualan tidak semestinya menggambarkan kemampuan

Belanjawan 2027 menetapkan pengecualian bagi PMKS dengan hasil jualan tahunan di bawah RM50 juta untuk memberi ruang penyesuaian model perniagaan terhadap gaji minimum baharu. PRM memahami bahawa perniagaan mempunyai kemampuan kewangan yang berbeza dan majikan kecil tidak semestinya mempunyai sumber yang sama seperti syarikat besar.

Namun, hasil jualan bukan keuntungan bersih.

Perniagaan dengan jualan yang besar boleh menanggung kos bahan mentah, sewa, pembiayaan, logistik, utiliti dan tenaga kerja yang tinggi. Perniagaan dengan jualan lebih rendah pula mungkin mempunyai margin keuntungan yang lebih besar.

Oleh itu, ambang RM50 juta wajar dinilai secara teliti. Kerajaan perlu menjelaskan mengapa ambang itu dipilih dan sama ada ia benar-benar mengenal pasti perniagaan yang memerlukan tempoh penyesuaian.

PRM mencadangkan supaya penilaian turut mengambil kira keuntungan dan margin keuntungan, aliran tunai, bilangan pekerja, kos operasi serta kemampuan sebenar perniagaan. Sebarang kaedah perlu mempunyai perlindungan daripada manipulasi akaun dan tidak boleh mewujudkan ruang untuk mengelakkan tanggungjawab membayar gaji yang diwajibkan undang-undang.

PRM tidak mahu pekerja dipertentangkan dengan PMKS. Perniagaan kecil yang benar-benar memerlukan bantuan patut menerima sokongan bersasar melalui pendigitalan, peningkatan produktiviti, latihan dan kemudahan pembiayaan yang sesuai.

Pada masa yang sama, pengecualian tidak boleh menjadi alasan untuk mengekalkan pendapatan pekerja pada tahap yang tidak mencukupi tanpa penilaian terhadap kemampuan sebenar majikan.

Dasar yang adil perlu melindungi pekerja tanpa memusnahkan perniagaan yang berdaya maju, dan membantu perniagaan tanpa menjadikan pekerja pihak yang sentiasa menanggung kos penyesuaian.

3. Daripada pelantikan kepada perwakilan: Pengajaran daripada Thailand

Persoalan pendapatan pekerja perlu dibaca bersama persoalan siapa yang mewakili mereka dalam institusi yang mengurus perlindungan sosial dan simpanan masa depan.

Pada 11 Oktober 2026, Thailand mengadakan pilihan raya bagi memilih wakil majikan dan orang yang diinsuranskan untuk menjadi anggota Lembaga Keselamatan Sosial. Perkembangan ini menunjukkan satu mekanisme yang boleh dikaji Malaysia: pihak yang terlibat secara langsung dalam sistem keselamatan sosial turut mempunyai saluran untuk memilih wakil mereka. <Link url="https://www.thaigov.go.th/th/news/170044" title="(Kerajaan Thailand, laporan pilihan raya Lembaga Keselamatan Sosial)."/>

PRM tidak mencadangkan supaya Malaysia menyalin sistem Thailand secara automatik. Struktur undang-undang, sejarah institusi dan keperluan tadbir urus setiap negara berbeza.

Namun, pengalaman tersebut menimbulkan persoalan dasar yang sah: jika pekerja dan pencarum menyumbang kepada sistem perlindungan sosial, sejauh mana mereka boleh menentukan siapa yang mewakili kepentingan mereka?

Perwakilan bukan sekadar soal mengisi kerusi dalam lembaga. Ia melibatkan proses pemilihan, mandat, ketelusan, kebebasan bersuara dan tanggungjawab untuk melaporkan kembali kepada pihak yang diwakili.

Malaysia wajar mengkaji sama ada mekanisme pencalonan terbuka, perundingan dengan kesatuan sekerja, pemilihan wakil oleh kelompok yang diwakili atau kaedah lain yang sesuai boleh memperkukuh legitimasi dan akauntabiliti institusi.

4. PERKESO dan KWSP: Perwakilan mesti membawa suara pekerja

PRM mengiktiraf bahawa PERKESO dan KWSP sudah mempunyai struktur lembaga yang merangkumi wakil kerajaan, majikan dan pekerja atau pencarum mengikut peruntukan undang-undang masing-masing.

Oleh itu, isu yang dibangkitkan bukanlah bahawa perwakilan pekerja langsung tidak wujud. Persoalan sebenarnya ialah sama ada cara wakil dipilih atau dilantik, mandat mereka dan mekanisme akauntabiliti sedia ada cukup telus serta memberikan ruang yang bermakna kepada pekerja dan pencarum.

Bagi PERKESO, Kerajaan wajar meneliti cara pandangan orang berinsurans dapat disampaikan secara lebih langsung dan berkesan dalam proses membuat keputusan.

Bagi KWSP, simpanan persaraan pekerja memerlukan tadbir urus yang kukuh, profesional dan bertanggungjawab. Perwakilan pekerja perlu dilihat bersama perlindungan kepentingan pencarum, kewajipan fidusiari, keselamatan simpanan serta keperluan mengurus pelaburan secara berhemat.

PRM mencadangkan kajian terhadap:

1. Kriteria dan proses pencalonan wakil pekerja serta pencarum;
2. Ketelusan pelantikan dan justifikasi pemilihan;
3. Mekanisme perundingan dengan kesatuan sekerja dan kumpulan pencarum;
4. Pelaporan tentang tanggungjawab wakil, tertakluk pada undang-undang dan kerahsiaan yang sah; dan
5. Kemungkinan memperluas penyertaan langsung melalui mekanisme yang sesuai dengan undang-undang dan mandat institusi.

Tujuannya bukan untuk menggantikan kepakaran dengan kepentingan politik, tetapi untuk memastikan kepakaran berjalan seiring dengan akauntabiliti dan suara pihak yang dilindungi.

5. Hak kesatuan sekerja ialah sebahagian daripada demokrasi ekonomi

Kesatuan sekerja ialah saluran penting untuk pekerja berorganisasi, berunding secara kolektif dan mempertahankan hak mereka.

Isu yang melibatkan MTUC dan NUBE mengingatkan kita bahawa hak pekerja tidak hanya ditentukan oleh kadar gaji minimum. Ia turut bergantung pada kebebasan berpersatuan, proses perundingan yang adil dan akses kepada remedi undang-undang.

Dalam isu MTUC, Mahkamah Tinggi menggantung perintah pembubaran oleh Jabatan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan pada Ogos 2026 sementara proses semakan kehakiman diteruskan. Perkembangan itu perlu difahami berdasarkan kedudukan prosiding dan keputusan mahkamah yang berkenaan. Ia juga menekankan kepentingan proses yang adil bagi institusi yang mewakili pekerja.

Bagi pertikaian NUBE dan pihak majikan, setiap dakwaan perlu dinilai berdasarkan fakta serta proses undang-undang yang berkaitan. PRM menyeru semua pihak menghormati perundingan kolektif dan saluran penyelesaian pertikaian.

Kerajaan, majikan dan kesatuan sekerja perlu mempunyai ruang dialog yang berkesan. Pekerja tidak boleh dianggap sekadar kos operasi, manakala kesatuan sekerja tidak seharusnya diketepikan daripada perbincangan dasar yang secara langsung mempengaruhi pendapatan dan keselamatan pekerjaan mereka.

6. Daripada perlindungan pendapatan kepada Senibina Kekayaan Negara Malaysia

PRM berpandangan bahawa isu gaji dan perwakilan pekerja mesti dihubungkan dengan persoalan yang lebih besar: bagaimana rakyat boleh membina kekayaan, bukan sekadar menampung perbelanjaan setiap bulan?

Pekerja mungkin mempunyai pekerjaan tetapi masih tidak mampu mengumpul simpanan. Pencarum mungkin mempunyai akaun persaraan tetapi menghadapi ketidakpastian tentang kecukupan pendapatan pada hari tua. Pengusaha kecil pula mungkin menghasilkan nilai ekonomi tanpa memperoleh bahagian pulangan yang seimbang.

Bagi menangani persoalan ini, PRM mengemukakan kerangka cadangan Senibina Kekayaan Negara Malaysia sebagai asas perbincangan dasar.

Kerangka ini melihat kekayaan negara melalui hubungan antara:

- Kekayaan insan — kemahiran, ilmu, kesihatan, kreativiti dan keupayaan rakyat;
- Kekayaan alam — tanah, air, sumber asli dan ekosistem;
- Kekayaan yang dihasilkan — pertanian, industri, perkhidmatan, teknologi dan perusahaan;
- Kekayaan kewangan — simpanan, kredit, pelaburan dan institusi kewangan; dan
- Kekayaan rakyat — aset, pemilikan produktif, keselamatan kewangan dan peluang membina kekayaan merentas generasi.

Kelima-lima dimensi ini saling bergantung. Kekayaan alam memerlukan insan yang berkemahiran untuk menghasilkannya. Aktiviti produktif memerlukan pembiayaan yang sesuai. Kekayaan kewangan pula mesti menyokong kegiatan ekonomi yang bermanfaat, sementara hasilnya perlu membuka peluang pemilikan dan peningkatan kesejahteraan rakyat.

Matlamatnya ialah mengalihkan tumpuan daripada bantuan semata-mata kepada pembinaan keupayaan rakyat untuk menghasilkan, memiliki dan mengembangkan kekayaan.

Bantuan sosial tetap penting untuk melindungi mereka yang memerlukan. Namun, perlindungan sosial perlu berjalan seiring dengan peluang pekerjaan yang baik, pendapatan yang mencukupi, pemilikan aset dan penyertaan dalam kegiatan produktif.

Inilah maksud kekayaan rakyat: bukan sekadar wang yang dibelanjakan oleh Kerajaan untuk rakyat, tetapi juga keupayaan rakyat untuk membina kekayaan dan mengambil bahagian secara adil dalam nilai yang dihasilkan negara.

7. Transformasi digital: Siapa memiliki nilai yang dihasilkan?

Perkembangan teknologi digital dan kecerdasan buatan (AI) menambahkan satu lagi dimensi kepada demokrasi ekonomi.

Apabila teknologi meningkatkan produktiviti, persoalannya ialah siapa yang memiliki data, siapa yang mengawal infrastruktur, siapa yang memperoleh keuntungan dan bagaimana manfaatnya dikongsi dengan pekerja serta masyarakat.

Transformasi digital tidak seharusnya hanya meningkatkan kecekapan operasi atau menumpukan pemilikan pada segelintir pihak. Pekerja dan PMKS perlu mendapat akses kepada kemahiran, teknologi, pembiayaan dan peluang untuk mengambil bahagian dalam ekonomi baharu.

Kerajaan juga perlu menilai sama ada peningkatan produktiviti diterjemahkan kepada gaji yang lebih baik, pekerjaan berkualiti, pertumbuhan perusahaan tempatan dan pemilikan ekonomi yang lebih meluas.

Bagi PRM, teknologi sepatutnya memperkukuh keupayaan insan dan kedaulatan ekonomi negara, bukan mewujudkan jurang baharu antara pihak yang memiliki teknologi dengan pihak yang hanya menyediakan tenaga kerja.

8. Cadangan tindakan PRM

PRM menggesa Kerajaan mempertimbangkan langkah-langkah berikut:

Pertama: Semakan gaji minimum berasaskan data. Terbitkan asas penetapan RM2,000, nilai kesan tempoh peralihan dan wujudkan mekanisme semakan berkala berasaskan kos sara hidup, produktiviti serta kemampuan majikan.

Kedua: Penilaian semula pengecualian PMKS. Jelaskan asas ambang hasil jualan RM50 juta dan pertimbangkan keuntungan, margin, aliran tunai serta kemampuan sebenar perniagaan, dengan perlindungan terhadap penyalahgunaan.

Ketiga: Bantuan bersasar untuk perniagaan. Perkukuh sokongan produktiviti, latihan, pendigitalan dan pembiayaan supaya perniagaan yang berdaya maju mampu menyesuaikan operasi tanpa memindahkan keseluruhan beban kepada pekerja.

Keempat: Kajian perwakilan pekerja. Semak mekanisme pelantikan dan pencalonan wakil dalam PERKESO, KWSP serta institusi berkaitan. Kaji pilihan raya atau kaedah penyertaan yang sesuai tanpa mengabaikan undang-undang, kompetensi dan tanggungjawab fidusiari.

Kelima: Perlindungan kesatuan sekerja. Kukuhkan dialog tiga pihak, kebebasan berpersatuan, perundingan kolektif dan akses kepada proses penyelesaian pertikaian yang adil.

Keenam: Pembangunan kekayaan rakyat. Hubungkan dasar gaji, simpanan, kredit, pelaburan, kemahiran dan pemilikan aset dalam satu kerangka ekonomi yang saling melengkapi.

Ketujuh: Pelaporan hasil yang boleh diukur. Nilai kejayaan dasar berdasarkan perubahan kuasa beli pekerja, kualiti pekerjaan, daya maju PMKS, keselamatan persaraan dan peluang rakyat membina kekayaan, bukan hanya jumlah peruntukan atau pengumuman.

9. Wacana Ekonomi Rakyat: Data mengatasi slogan

Perbahasan ini berkait langsung dengan Wacana Ekonomi Rakyat (WER) 2026 anjuran PRM yang dijadualkan pada 24 Oktober 2026, dengan tema:

“Wang • Kredit • Hutang • Harga • Keadilan”

WER menyediakan ruang untuk meneliti bagaimana wang, hutang, harga, pendapatan dan struktur pemilikan mempengaruhi kehidupan rakyat.

PRM berhasrat membawa perbincangan ini ke arah hasil yang praktikal melalui matriks isu, ringkasan dasar dan papan pemuka ekonomi rakyat. Tujuannya bukan untuk menafikan perbezaan pandangan, tetapi untuk menguji cadangan berdasarkan data, mengenal pasti persamaan dan membina penyelesaian yang boleh dinilai.

Prinsip kami kekal: Data Mengatasi Slogan.

10. Persoalan terakhir: Siapa sebenarnya menikmati kekayaan negara?

Belanjawan yang besar tidak semestinya menjamin kehidupan yang lebih baik bagi setiap rakyat. Kenaikan gaji tidak semestinya menyelesaikan tekanan kos sara hidup. Pengecualian perniagaan pula tidak semestinya membantu pihak yang paling memerlukan jika kriterianya tidak menggambarkan kemampuan sebenar.

Begitu juga, perwakilan dalam sesebuah lembaga tidak memadai jika suara pihak yang diwakili tidak mempunyai saluran yang telus dan bertanggungjawab.

Oleh itu, PRM menyeru Kerajaan agar menilai dasar ekonomi bukan sahaja berdasarkan niat dan jumlah peruntukan, tetapi juga berdasarkan kesannya terhadap kehidupan sebenar rakyat.

Pekerja memerlukan gaji yang mencukupi. PMKS memerlukan ruang untuk berkembang. Pencarum memerlukan tadbir urus yang bertanggungjawab. Kesatuan sekerja memerlukan ruang untuk mewakili anggotanya. Rakyat pula memerlukan peluang untuk memiliki aset, membina perusahaan dan mengambil bahagian dalam kekayaan yang dihasilkan negara.

Inilah inti pati demokrasi ekonomi yang diperjuangkan PRM.

Daripada pelantikan kepada perwakilan. Daripada pertumbuhan ekonomi kepada kekayaan rakyat. Daripada gaji minimum kepada kehidupan bermaruah. Daripada penyertaan kepada pemilikan.

Persoalan nasional bukan sekadar berapa banyak kekayaan yang mampu dijana Malaysia, tetapi sejauh mana kekayaan itu memperkukuh kehidupan, maruah, keselamatan dan masa depan rakyat.

AHMAD JUFLIZ BIN FAIZA
Presiden
PARTI RAKYAT MALAYSIA (PRM)

---

Rujukan utama

1. Pejabat Perdana Menteri, Ucapan Belanjawan Madani 2027 — gaji minimum RM2,000, pelaksanaan Jun 2027, pengecualian PMKS, kerangka RM2,500 untuk pekerja separa mahir dan graduan, serta penanda aras gaji sara hidup GLIC/GLC RM3,400: <Link url="https://www.pmo.gov.my/ms/ucapanterkini/ucapan-belanjawan-madani-kelima-tahun-2027-belanjawan-madani-kelima-menggapai-di-langit-mengakar-di-bumi/" title="Baca ucapan rasmi"/>.
2. Bank Negara Malaysia, The Living Wage: Beyond Making Ends Meet: <Link url="https://www.bnm.gov.my/insights/income/ar2017b3" title="Baca kajian Bank Negara"/>.
3. KWSP, Belanjawanku 2024/2025 dan Rangka Kerja Kecukupan Pendapatan Persaraan: <Link url="https://www.kwsp.gov.my/ms/w/epf-releases-belanjawanku-2024/2025-and-retirement-income-adequacy-framework" title="Baca penerbitan KWSP"/>.
4. Kerajaan Thailand, laporan pilihan raya wakil majikan dan orang yang diinsuranskan bagi Lembaga Keselamatan Sosial, 11 Oktober 2026: <Link url="https://www.thaigov.go.th/th/news/170044" title="Baca laporan Kerajaan Thailand"/>.
5. PERKESO, maklumat anggota lembaga: <Link url="https://perkeso.gov.my/en/board-members/" title="Lihat struktur lembaga PERKESO"/>.
6. KWSP, Akta Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja 1991: <Link url="https://www.kwsp.gov.my/en/others/resource-centre/references/epf-act-1991" title="Rujuk Akta KWSP"/>.

Nota: Anggaran gaji sara hidup Bank Negara dan panduan perbelanjaan KWSP mempunyai tujuan serta andaian yang berbeza daripada kadar gaji minimum berkanun. Kenyataan ini menggunakan angka tersebut sebagai rujukan untuk menilai kecukupan pendapatan, bukan sebagai dakwaan bahawa Bank Negara atau KWSP telah menetapkan kadar gaji minimum yang sama.

ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY AND WORKERS’ RIGHTS: FROM APPOINTMENT TO REPRESENTATION, FROM ECONOMIC GROWTH TO PEOPLE’S WEALTH MINIMUM WAGE, COST OF LIVING AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE: WHO IS BUDGET 2027 REALLY PROTECTING?

 PARTI RAKYAT MALAYSIA (PRM)

OFFICIAL PRESIDENTIAL MEDIA STATEMENT

12 October 2026

ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY AND WORKERS’ RIGHTS: FROM APPOINTMENT TO REPRESENTATION, FROM ECONOMIC GROWTH TO PEOPLE’S WEALTH

MINIMUM WAGE, COST OF LIVING AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE: WHO IS BUDGET 2027 REALLY PROTECTING?

By Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
President, Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)

The people must be more than recipients of policy. They must have a voice, a dignified income and the opportunity to build wealth.

Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) is concerned about the implications of Budget 2027, particularly the proposed minimum wage of RM2,000, its implementation timeline, the exemption for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), and the extent to which workers and contributors are represented in the institutions that shape the nation’s economic future.

A policy announced in the name of improving workers’ incomes must be assessed not only by the increase in the headline figure, but also by whether that income reflects the actual cost of living and whether workers have meaningful channels of representation and accountability.

This does not mean that every government measure lacks merit. The increase in the minimum wage from RM1,700 to RM2,000 represents an additional RM300, or approximately 17.6%. However, the increase alone does not prove that workers can now afford a decent standard of living.

In the Budget 2027 speech, the Prime Minister highlighted that Malaysia’s labour compensation share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) remains low, at 33.9%, and that the gap between productivity and workers’ wages needs to be narrowed. The Government also announced a RM2,000 minimum wage from June 2027, an RM2,500 income framework for semi-skilled workers and graduates, and an increase in the living-wage benchmark for government-linked investment companies (GLICs) and government-linked companies (GLCs) from RM3,100 to RM3,400 per month. <Link url="https://www.pmo.gov.my/ms/ucapanterkini/ucapan-belanjawan-madani-kelima-tahun-2027-belanjawan-madani-kelima-menggapai-di-langit-mengakar-di-bumi/" title="(Official Budget 2027 speech, Prime Minister’s Office)."/>

The central questions are these: Is this framework sufficient to protect workers’ livelihoods, and do the people have an appropriate say in how national wealth is generated, governed and distributed?

For PRM, these questions are inseparable from economic democracy.

---

1. RM2,000 minimum wage: An increase must be measured against real living costs

PRM acknowledges the announced increase in the minimum wage to RM2,000 per month, scheduled to take effect in June 2027. While this increase merits consideration as a policy change, the waiting period raises concerns about the burden that workers will continue to bear in the intervening months.

Food, housing, transport, utilities and family necessities do not wait until the new wage takes effect.

The Government should therefore explain the basis for setting the rate at RM2,000, the cost-of-living data used, and the reasons for the transition period. Low-income workers should not be expected to bear the entire cost of waiting for the policy to take effect.

PRM also stresses that the minimum wage is a floor of income protection, not a guarantee that a worker earns enough to live with dignity.

What do Bank Negara Malaysia and EPF tell us?

Bank Negara Malaysia published The Living Wage: Beyond Making Ends Meet in 2018, examining the income required to achieve an acceptable minimum standard of living. Its estimate for a single adult in Kuala Lumpur at that time was approximately RM2,700 per month, based on the expenditure basket and price levels used in the study. <Link url="https://www.bnm.gov.my/insights/income/ar2017b3" title="(Bank Negara Malaysia, living-wage study)."/>

Meanwhile, the Employees Provident Fund’s (EPF/KWSP) Belanjawanku 2024/2025 guide estimates monthly expenditure needs in the Klang Valley for different household categories, including:

- Single adult using public transport: RM1,970;
- Single adult owning a car: RM2,800;
- Couple without children: RM4,970;
- Couple with one child: RM6,420; and
- Couple with two children: RM7,440.

These are estimated household expenditure requirements based on particular assumptions, not statutory minimum-wage rates prescribed by EPF. <Link url="https://www.kwsp.gov.my/ms/w/epf-releases-belanjawanku-2024/2025-and-retirement-income-adequacy-framework" title="(EPF, Belanjawanku 2024/2025)."/>

PRM does not equate Bank Negara’s living-wage benchmark with EPF’s household expenditure guide, nor does it claim that either institution has prescribed a particular statutory minimum wage. However, both provide useful evidence for assessing whether workers’ incomes reflect the realities of daily life.

If minimum wages are set without regular assessments of living costs, they risk falling behind the conditions workers actually face.

PRM calls on the Government to publish the basis for calculating the minimum wage, establish regular reviews and explain how productivity, inflation, household needs and employers’ capacity are taken into account.

2. MSME exemptions: Revenue is not the same as profit

Budget 2027 provides an exemption for MSMEs with annual sales below RM50 million to allow time for business-model adjustments to the new minimum wage. PRM recognises that businesses have different financial capacities and that a small employer may not have the same resources as a large corporation.

However, annual sales do not necessarily reflect net profit or the actual ability to pay higher wages.

A business with substantial sales may also face high costs for raw materials, rent, financing, logistics, utilities and labour. Its net profit margin may be narrow. Conversely, a business with lower sales may enjoy a relatively high profit margin.

The RM50 million threshold should therefore be examined carefully. The Government should explain why this threshold was chosen and whether it accurately identifies businesses that genuinely need additional time to adjust.

PRM proposes that the assessment also consider factors such as net profit and profit margins, cash flow, number of employees, operating costs and the actual financial capacity of each business. Any mechanism must include safeguards against accounting manipulation and must not create opportunities to evade legally required wages.

PRM does not want workers to be pitted against MSMEs. Small businesses that genuinely need assistance should receive targeted support through digitalisation, productivity improvements, skills training and appropriate financing.

At the same time, exemptions must not become a justification for keeping workers’ wages inadequate without assessing the employer’s actual ability to pay.

A fair policy must protect workers without undermining viable businesses, and support businesses without making workers bear the entire cost of adjustment.

3. From appointment to representation: Lessons from Thailand

Workers’ incomes must be considered alongside the question of who represents them in institutions responsible for social protection and their financial future.

On 11 October 2026, Thailand held elections for employer and insured-person representatives to its Social Security Board. This provides a regional example worth examining: people who participate directly in a social security system have a channel through which they can choose representatives to the governing board. <Link url="https://www.thaigov.go.th/th/news/170044" title="(Thai Government, Social Security Board election report)."/>

PRM is not proposing that Malaysia copy Thailand’s system automatically. Each country has a different legal framework, institutional history and governance requirements.

Nevertheless, the Thai experience raises a legitimate policy question: if workers and contributors help finance a social protection system, to what extent can they determine who represents their interests?

Representation is not merely about filling seats on a board. It concerns the selection process, the mandate of representatives, transparency, freedom to raise concerns and accountability to the people they represent.

Malaysia should examine whether open nominations, consultation with trade unions, elections by represented groups or other appropriate mechanisms could strengthen institutional legitimacy and accountability.

4. SOCSO and EPF: Representation must carry workers’ voices

PRM recognises that the Social Security Organisation (SOCSO/PERKESO) and the Employees Provident Fund (EPF/KWSP) already have board structures that include government, employer and worker or contributor representation under their respective legal frameworks.

The issue is therefore not that worker representation is entirely absent. The key question is whether the methods of appointment or selection, the mandate of representatives and existing accountability mechanisms are sufficiently transparent and provide workers and contributors with meaningful participation.

For SOCSO, the Government should examine how insured persons’ views can be conveyed more directly and effectively in decision-making.

For EPF, workers’ retirement savings require strong, professional and accountable governance. Worker representation must be considered alongside contributors’ long-term interests, fiduciary responsibilities, the security of savings and prudent investment management.

PRM proposes a review of:

1. The criteria and nomination process for worker and contributor representatives;
2. Transparency in appointments and the justification for selection;
3. Consultation mechanisms involving trade unions and contributor groups;
4. Reporting on representatives’ responsibilities, subject to applicable law and legitimate confidentiality requirements; and
5. The feasibility of expanding direct participation through mechanisms consistent with the law and each institution’s mandate.

The objective is not to replace expertise with political interests. It is to ensure that expertise operates alongside accountability and the voices of those whom these institutions serve.

5. Trade union rights are part of economic democracy

Trade unions are essential channels through which workers organise, bargain collectively and defend their rights.

Issues involving the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) and the National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE) remind us that workers’ rights are not determined by minimum-wage rates alone. They also depend on freedom of association, fair negotiation and access to legal remedies.

In the MTUC matter, the High Court suspended the Registrar of Societies’ dissolution order in August 2026 while judicial review proceedings continued. This development must be understood in the context of the relevant proceedings and court orders. It also highlights the importance of fair process for institutions representing workers.

In disputes involving NUBE and employers, individual claims must be assessed on their facts and through the relevant legal processes. PRM urges all parties to respect collective bargaining and established dispute-resolution mechanisms.

The Government, employers and trade unions need effective channels for dialogue. Workers must not be treated merely as operating costs, and trade unions should not be excluded from policy discussions that directly affect workers’ income and job security.

6. From income protection to a National Wealth Architecture for Malaysia

PRM believes that wage and worker-representation issues must be connected to a broader question: how can the people build wealth instead of merely covering their monthly expenses?

Workers may have jobs but remain unable to accumulate savings. Contributors may have retirement accounts but face uncertainty about whether their savings will be sufficient. Small businesses may create economic value without receiving a proportionate share of the returns.

To address these challenges, PRM proposes the National Wealth Architecture for Malaysia (Senibina Kekayaan Negara Malaysia) as a framework for policy discussion.

It views national wealth through the interaction of five dimensions:

- Human wealth — people’s skills, knowledge, health, creativity and capabilities;
- Natural wealth — land, water, natural resources and ecosystems;
- Produced wealth — agriculture, industry, services, technology and enterprise;
- Financial wealth — savings, credit, investment and financial institutions; and
- People’s wealth — assets, productive ownership, financial security and opportunities to build wealth across generations.

These dimensions depend on one another. Natural wealth requires skilled people to develop it productively. Productive activity requires suitable financing. Financial wealth should support beneficial economic activity, while the returns should create opportunities for broader ownership and improved public well-being.

The objective is to move beyond an approach centred solely on assistance towards an economy that enables people to produce, own and grow wealth.

Social assistance remains essential for those who need protection. But social protection must operate alongside decent employment, adequate income, asset ownership and participation in productive economic activity.

This is what people’s wealth means: not merely public money spent on the people, but the capacity of the people to build wealth and participate fairly in the value generated by the nation.

7. Digital transformation: Who owns the value created?

Digital technology and artificial intelligence (AI) add another dimension to economic democracy.

When technology increases productivity, we must ask who owns the data, who controls the infrastructure, who captures the profits and how the benefits are shared with workers and society.

Digital transformation should not merely improve operational efficiency or concentrate ownership in a small number of hands. Workers and MSMEs need access to relevant skills, technology, financing and opportunities to participate in the emerging economy.

The Government should also assess whether productivity gains translate into better wages, quality employment, stronger local enterprises and broader economic ownership.

For PRM, technology should strengthen human capabilities and national economic sovereignty, not create new divisions between those who own the technology and those who provide the labour.

8. PRM’s proposed policy actions

PRM calls on the Government to consider the following measures:

First: Evidence-based minimum-wage reviews. Publish the basis for the RM2,000 rate, assess the impact of the transition period and establish regular reviews based on living costs, productivity and employers’ capacity.

Second: Review MSME exemptions. Explain the rationale for the RM50 million annual-sales threshold and consider profit, margins, cash flow and actual business capacity, with safeguards against abuse.

Third: Targeted support for businesses. Strengthen productivity, training, digitalisation and financing support so viable businesses can adjust without transferring the entire burden to workers.

Fourth: Review worker representation. Examine appointment and nomination mechanisms in SOCSO, EPF and related institutions. Study elections or other appropriate participation mechanisms while preserving legal requirements, professional competence and fiduciary responsibilities.

Fifth: Protect trade union rights. Strengthen tripartite dialogue, freedom of association, collective bargaining and access to fair dispute-resolution processes.

Sixth: Build people’s wealth. Connect wages, savings, credit, investment, skills and asset ownership within an integrated economic framework.

Seventh: Measure outcomes transparently. Assess policy success through changes in workers’ purchasing power, job quality, MSME viability, retirement security and opportunities for people to build wealth—not merely through allocations or announcements.

9. People’s Economic Discourse: Evidence over slogans

These issues are directly relevant to PRM’s Wacana Ekonomi Rakyat (WER) 2026, scheduled for 24 October 2026, under the theme:

“Money • Credit • Debt • Prices • Justice”

WER provides a platform to examine how money, debt, prices, income and ownership structures affect the lives of Malaysians.

PRM intends to direct these discussions towards practical outcomes through an issues matrix, a policy brief and a people-centred economic dashboard. The objective is not to deny differences in opinion, but to test proposals against evidence, identify areas of agreement and develop solutions that can be evaluated.

Our guiding principle remains:

Evidence over slogans.

10. The fundamental question: Who actually benefits from national wealth?

A large budget does not automatically guarantee a better life for every citizen. A wage increase does not necessarily resolve the cost-of-living crisis. Business exemptions do not necessarily help those most in need if the criteria fail to reflect actual financial capacity.

Likewise, representation on a board is insufficient if the people represented lack transparent and accountable channels through which their voices can be heard.

PRM calls on the Government to evaluate economic policies not only by their stated intentions and financial allocations, but also by their actual effects on people’s lives.

Workers need adequate wages. MSMEs need room to grow. Contributors need responsible governance. Trade unions need the space to represent their members. The people need opportunities to own assets, build enterprises and participate in the wealth generated by the nation.

This is the essence of economic democracy that PRM seeks to advance.

From appointment to representation. From economic growth to people’s wealth. From minimum wages to a dignified life. From participation to ownership.

The national question is not merely how much wealth Malaysia can generate, but how far that wealth strengthens the lives, dignity, security and future of its people.

AHMAD JUFLIZ BIN FAIZA
President
PARTI RAKYAT MALAYSIA (PRM)

---

Key references

1. Prime Minister’s Office, Budget 2027 Speech — minimum wage of RM2,000, implementation from June 2027, MSME exemptions, the RM2,500 income framework for semi-skilled workers and graduates, and the RM3,400 GLIC/GLC living-wage benchmark: <Link url="https://www.pmo.gov.my/ms/ucapanterkini/ucapan-belanjawan-madani-kelima-tahun-2027-belanjawan-madani-kelima-menggapai-di-langit-mengakar-di-bumi/" title="Read the official speech"/>.
2. Bank Negara Malaysia, The Living Wage: Beyond Making Ends Meet: <Link url="https://www.bnm.gov.my/insights/income/ar2017b3" title="Read the Bank Negara study"/>.
3. EPF, Belanjawanku 2024/2025 and Retirement Income Adequacy Framework: <Link url="https://www.kwsp.gov.my/ms/w/epf-releases-belanjawanku-2024/2025-and-retirement-income-adequacy-framework" title="Read the EPF publication"/>.
4. Thai Government, report on the election of employer and insured-person representatives to the Social Security Board, 11 October 2026: <Link url="https://www.thaigov.go.th/th/news/170044" title="Read the Thai Government report"/>.
5. SOCSO, board members: <Link url="https://perkeso.gov.my/en/board-members/" title="View SOCSO board information"/>.
6. EPF, Employees Provident Fund Act 1991: <Link url="https://www.kwsp.gov.my/en/others/resource-centre/references/epf-act-1991" title="Refer to the EPF Act"/>.

Note: Bank Negara’s living-wage estimate and EPF’s expenditure guide have different purposes and assumptions from the statutory minimum wage. They are cited here as evidence for assessing income adequacy, not as a claim that either institution has prescribed the same statutory minimum-wage rate.

eJAMIN: GOVERNMENT MUST CLARIFY THE LEGAL BASIS AND SAFEGUARDS FOR BAIL FUNDS

 MEDIA STATEMENT
PARTI RAKYAT MALAYSIA (PRM)

eJAMIN: GOVERNMENT MUST CLARIFY THE LEGAL BASIS AND SAFEGUARDS FOR BAIL FUNDS

Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
President, Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)
6 October 2026

Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) takes note of The Edge Malaysia report on the findings of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) concerning the management of bail funds through the eJamin system.

According to the report, eJamin had operated for five years without a formal contract with the Federal Government. The PAC also raised concerns regarding the placement of bail funds in a commercial bank account held by Dapat Vista Sdn Bhd, rather than in the Federal Government’s consolidated trust account.

More significantly, out of a reported RM193.71 million in bail funds as at the end of 2024, RM130.8 million was reportedly invested, including in sukuk.

For PRM, these matters require clear clarification concerning the legal basis, approval process, oversight mechanisms and safeguards governing the bail funds and the interests of bail guarantors.

Bank Negara Malaysia’s role should also be clarified

PRM believes the Government should clarify whether Bank Negara Malaysia was consulted or involved, where applicable, in relation to the management of the funds and the financial structure of eJamin.

PRM makes no conclusion regarding Bank Negara Malaysia’s role or responsibilities in this matter. However, given the substantial amount of bail funds managed through a commercial account and subsequently invested, it is reasonable for the Government to clarify which agencies provided relevant advice or exercised oversight over the financial aspects of the arrangement.

The focus should go beyond corporate ownership

PRM notes the question raised by the Jelutong Member of Parliament concerning the parties behind the companies involved in eJamin.

Questions concerning corporate ownership and interests can be addressed through the relevant corporate records and documents. However, the more fundamental issue is the structure and process through which the bail funds were managed.

The public is entitled to understand how the arrangement was approved and administered, particularly where funds are required to be protected until they are properly returned to the parties entitled to them.

Digitalisation must be supported by sound governance

PRM supports the digitalisation of public and judicial services where it improves efficiency and facilitates access for the public.

However, any digital system managing bail funds must be supported by a clear legal basis, an appropriate trust structure, effective internal controls and proper audit mechanisms.

PRM therefore calls on the Government to provide a comprehensive clarification on the eJamin structure, the status of the bail funds collected and the corrective measures being undertaken.

If any breach of law is established, the matter should be determined by the appropriate authorities based on evidence and due process.

Most importantly, every ringgit of bail money entrusted through the judicial system must have clear safeguards and a proper mechanism for its return to the parties entitled to it.

Baik • Bijak • Berani • Amanah.

Ahmad Jufliz bin Faiza
President
Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM)

PRM against government SPYING on our internet usage and online activity? Respect Right to Privacy

Media Statement – 20/7/2018

RESPECT PRIVACY AND NO TO MONITORING OF INTERNET USAGE/ACTIVITY IN MALAYSIA

-Article 12 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights must be respected-

We, the undersigned organisations and groups, are most concern that the fact that all in Malaysians maybe under constant internet surveillance, which would be an invasion of the right to privacy, all on the basis of action by the government to curb child pornography. 

It was reported that the Malaysian police, being ‘….the Bukit Aman's Sexual, Women and Child Investigation Division (D11) principal assistant director Ong Chin Lan said the new Malaysia Internet Crime Against Children Investigation Unit (MICAC) will build a "data library" of pornography users and their surfing preferences…. “We will pick up those who visit these sites regularly. We use software that was specially developed to allow us to identify, locate and track visits to porn sites, especially those involving child porn. “The intelligence we get will be passed on to the Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), so we can obtain the internet users’ details," she said, adding that those being monitored could be called in for questioning or even arrested from their homes…. Internet users who view pornography from the "relative safety" of their mobile phones will not be spared from scrutiny under this system. (Malaysiakini, 9/7/2018)

RIGHT TO PRIVACY A HUMAN RIGHT

Whilst we are against child pornography, we are opposed to any on-going monitoring of internet activity/usage of all in Malaysia, which is an invasion of personal privacy.

Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that, ‘No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. ‘

Such monitoring also would mean that all other activity on the internet of persons could also very easily be monitored including personal communications, visits to websites, sharing of information and even private documents. This could also include privilege communications between a lawyer and a client.

EVEN IN INVESTIGATIONS, COURT ORDERS NEEDED TO SEARCH AND GET EVIDENCE

It must be pointed out that in criminal procedure, the arrest and/or investigation of a suspect  does not automatically allow even the search of premises, computers, etc without a required search warrant save for very exceptional situations. These warrants are usually issued by a Magistrate or a Judge, on application by the police and/or enforcement officers.

Likewise, for example under the Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Identification Act 2009, the police and enforcement authorities cannot even take intimate samples like blood, urine, semen and other tissue or fluid from a person’s body samples without the written consent of the person from whom the samples is/are to be  taken from. For even non-intimate samples, like saliva, hair and a sample taken from a nail, the person from which the sample is to be taken has the right to object hence requiring the obligation to obtain a court order.

As such, the idea of ‘secretive’ arbitrarily on-going monitoring of internet activity/usage of any or all persons, for whatever reasons, must be deplored and opposed.

RIGHT TO SEEK, RECEIVE AND IMPART INFORMATION AND IDEAS THROUGH ANY MEDIA

It is common knowledge that in Malaysia, the government have in the past denied people access to many online news sites and/or websites with opinions and news possibly critical to the past administration(and/or their interest) like even the Wall Street Journal, Malaysian Insider and Sarawak Report, thus depriving those in Malaysia access to alternative views and news that may be relevant to Malaysians.

As such, the blocking of access to websites is best not to be done simply vide arbitrary administrative decisions and/or actions, but must require a court order. Website owners and/or persons affected should preferably be also given the right to be heard before the granting of such court orders, or at worst the ability to challenge and set aside such orders.

It was also recently reported that the Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC)’s network security, new media monitoring, compliance and advocacy sector Chief Fadhlullah Suhaimi Abdul Malek as saying that the commission had blocked 3,781 pornographic websites from 2014 until the end of March. One wonders as to what other websites have been blocked.

Further, a listing of all such websites should be gazetted and made public, possibly also with brief reasons as to why such actions were taken. The right to challenge or judicially review the orders to block access to any websites should be available not just to owners, but also to users.

The right to privacy is sacrosanct and must always be respected, and as such the on-going ‘spying’ of internet usage cannot be tolerated.

Police investigations of suspects of a crime, may warrant the perusal of one’s computers and/or smartphone usage/records, but that too should be only after a relevant court order is applied for and obtained.

Therefore, we the undersigned organisations and group, calls for the immediate halt on all on-going ‘spying’ of internet usage and online activities by the police and/or the government  including Malaysia Internet Crime Against Children Investigation Unit (MICAC), allegedly to detect, locate and record data of traffic for online pornography.

Whatsoever "data library" of pornography users and their surfing preferences and/or any other such data that now exist, as developed by MICAC and/or any other government agencies,  must immediately be erased, and must never be used for whatever reason against any person/s.

The government must respect and protect a person’s right to privacy, this including one’s personal internet/online usage and communications. Any such invasion or interference of privacy must never be permitted or tolerated for whatsoever reason, more so such arbitrary ‘spying’ and keeping records of internet activity of all persons – not simply just a few investigated suspects.

Likewise, the right to information and other views online should also not be arbitrarily denied or suppressed by the government.  Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that, ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’ , clearly includes right to seek and receive information and ideas online from also websites/internet from all over the world.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of the 13 groups/organisations listed below

MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility (MPSR)

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor, Malaysia

Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)

Programme Against Custodial Torture & Impunity (PACTI), India 

Singapore Anti Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC)

Odhikar, Bangladesh

Parti Rakyat Malaysia(PRM)

Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha(MASUM), India 

CAW (Committee for Asian Women)

CENTRAL, Cambodia

Workers Hub For Change(WH4C)

HAK Association, Timor-Leste

PRM dalam PRU14 - Keputusan semua kerusi yang ditandingi PRM?

Dalam PRU14, PRM gagal memenangi mana-mana kerusi Parlimen dan/atau DUN yang PRM bertanding. Analisa perlu dilakukan mengenai apa yang berlaku...

* Satu faktor adalah hasrat utama rakyat kali ini untuk menolak kerajaan UMNO-BN, dan justeru itu memilih untuk menyokong Pakatan Harapan(gabungan parti pembangkang yang meletak calut di semua kerusi Parlimen dan DUN) justeru mempunyai keupayaan untuk menubuhkan kerajaan baru diperingkat Persekutuan dan Negeri. Maka, pilihan saperti PRU12 dan PRU13 adalah khususnya untuk menyingkirkan UMNO-BN dan menukar kerajaan, bukan sangat untuk memilih 'wakil rakyat' terbaik - tetapi adalah untuk menyokong mereka yang mempunyai kemampuan menyingkirkan kerajaan UMNO-BN. Nyata mereka yang menyokong PRM juga ramai telah memberikan undi mereka kepada pihak lain, kemungkinan pihak Pakatan Harapan. Yang menjadi mangsa finomena ini bukan sahaja PRM tetapi juga PSM, PAS, Bebas dan parti lain yang bertanding.

*  PRM juga harus menyedari bahawa sokongan orang lama penyokong 'Sosialist Front' serta juga masyarakat pertubuhan sivil dan NGO, yang biasa bersama PRM dahulu kini sudah tidak ada atau tidak menyokong PRM pada masa ini. 

* Hakikat juga menunjukkan bahawa bahawa calun yang juga pernah jadi MP dan DUN dulu, daripada parti pembangkang, telah tewas teruk mendapat begitu sedikit undi. Justeru, mereka yang seharusnya ada banyak sokongan akar umbi, mendapati bahawa pada PRU14 - rakyat fokus kepada menumpaskan UMNO-BN dan menukar kerajaan. Ini bukan sama sekali bererti mereka sokong parti Pakatan Harapan. 

* PAS, walaupun bertanding sendiri kali ini buat kali pertam,a bukan bersama parti politik lain, sapertimana berlaku untuk hampir semua PRU sebelum ini, telah berjaya mendapat banyak kemenangan atau kalah dengan memperolehi undi yang agak banyak dikebanyakkan tempat yang mereka bertanding. Mungkin, cara PAS beroperasi dan menjana sokongan akar umbi harus dijadikan pengajaran. Berbanding dengan PAS, yang begitu aktif di peringkat akar umbi setiap masa bukan hanya bila PRU hampir harus boleh memberikan pembelajaran kepada PRM.

* PRM, walaupun ada mengeluarkan kenyataan media sendiri atau bersama dengan NGO mengeluarkan kenyataan, mungkin perlu lebih aktif memantau dan bersuara...bukan sahaja diperingkat kepimpinan tetapi juga diperingkat akar umbi.

* Kepimpinan atau muka pimpinan PRM juga nampaknya penting...kerana itu mengambarkan imej parti di kalangan orang ramai serta juga media tempatan. Personaliti adalah penting di masa moden ini...Mungkin kepimpinan baru yang lebih progressif dan mesra media diperlukan - atau secara alternatif, ada 'spokesperson' sedemikian dalam barisan kepimpinan.

* Asas PRM meminta rakyat memilih PRM adalah untuk 'check and balance' - tetapi masalah utama adalah PRM tidak mempunyai rekod(yang boleh dilihat) melakukan ini dengan cukup untuk beberapa tahun kebelakangan ini...ini perlu ditingkatkan...

* Kehadiran PRM diakar umbi juga perlu dihebohkan...

* Keahlian PRM, serta juga bilangan cawangan yang aktif diseluruh negara perlu juga ditambahkan.

* PRM juga harus lebih arif dengan cara komunikasi pada masa kini - iaitu pengunaan media sosial - FB, Twitter, WhatsApp, YouTube, dll - kerana daripada PRU14, nyata ramai mengunakan ini untuk komunikasi dan mendapat maklumat.

* Keputusan bertanding, walaupun kalah, mencapai matlamat mengingatkan kesedaran rakyat Malaysia bahawa PRM masih wujud dan aktif. Ini penting khususnya apabila bilangan ramai pemimpin lama PRM - dan cerita pembubaran PRM yang bergabung dengan Pakatan Rakyat. Boleh dikatakan bahawa objektif ini tercapai ...kini masa untuk memperkasakan PRM, jika itu niat ahli, untuk masa depan..

Komen lain dilain masa... 
           

Selangor

1.N.11 Ijok (sdra T.Kumaran) dalam parlimen Kuala Selangor

IJOK

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.11 - IJOK
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	2114

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
KUMARAN A/L TAMIL DASSEN (PRM)	76
KR. PARTHIBAN (BN)	6800
IDRIS BIN AHMAD (PKR)	8914
JEFRI BIN MEJAN (PAS)	3942

2.N.13 Kuang (sdra Mohd Rafie Mohammad Arif) dalam Parlimen Selayang

KUANG

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.13 - KUANG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	2860

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
DATUK ABDUL SHUKUR BIN IDRUS (BN)	6985
USTAZ MOHD FAUZAN MADZLAN (PAS)	5672
SALLEH AMIRUDDIN (PKR)	9845
MOHD RAFIE BIN MOHAMMAD ARIF (PRM)	44

3.N.15 Taman Templer (sdra Koh Swe Yong) dalam Parlimen Selayang

TAMAN TEMPLER

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.15 - TAMAN TEMPLER
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	7903

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
ZAIDY BIN ABDUL TALIB (PAS)	10459
DATO' Ir HJ MD NASIR BIN IBRAHIM (BN)	7580
KOH SWE YONG (PRM)	82
MOHD SANY HAMZAN (PKR)	18362
DR. RAJANDRAN (PAP)	108

 

 

 

4.P.099 Ampang (sdra Tan Hua Meng)

AMPANG

NEGERI	SELANGOR
Parlimen	P.099 - AMPANG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	41956

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
TAN HUA MENG (PRM)	294
NURUL ISLAM BIN MOHAMED YUSOFF (PAS)	9598
LEONG KIM SOON (BN)	12351
ZURAIDA KAMARUDDIN (PKR)	54307

Hak Cipta Terpelihara @ 2018 © Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya Malaysia
TEL : 03-8892 7018 | FAX : 03-8892 7001
Date

5.N.19 Bukit Antarabangsa (sdra Ahmad Kamarudin)

BUKIT ANTARABANGSA

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.19 - BUKIT ANTARABANGSA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	25512

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
SHARIFAH HASLIZAH BINTI SYED ARIFFIN (PAS)	2311
DIVA AA (BEBAS - GAJAH)	90
DATO' SERI AZMIN ALI (PKR)	30892
SALWA HJ. YUNUS (BN)	5380
AHMAD BIN KAMARUDIN (PRM)	116

 

 

6.N.20 Lembah Jaya (sdra Norizwan Mohamed)

LEMBAH JAYA

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.20 - LEMBAH JAYA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	14790

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
KHASIM BIN ABDUL AZIZ (PAS)	7358
HANIZA TALHA (PKR)	22512
NORIZWAN (PRM)	177
MUHAMAD NIZAM (BN)	7722

7.P.100 Pandan (sdri Lee Ying Ha)

PANDAN

NEGERI	SELANGOR
Parlimen	P.100 - PANDAN
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	52543

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
USTAZ SUKRI OMAR (PAS)	8336
DR WAN AZIZAH (PKR)	64733
LEONG KOK WEE (BN)	12190
MOHD KHAIRUL AZAM BIN ABDUL AZIZ (BEBAS - RUMAH)	73
JENICE LEE YING HA (PRM)	442

Hak Cipta Terpelihara @ 2018 © Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya Malaysia
TEL : 03-8892 7018 | FAX : 03-8892 7001
Date

8.N.22 Teratai (sdri Lee Ying Ha)

TERATAI

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.22 - TERATAI
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	29425

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
BEN LIEW POK BOON (BN)	4784
JENICE LEE YING HA (PRM)	529
IRMAN WAHAB (PAS)	5028
LAI WAI CHONG (BRYAN) (PKR)	34453

 

 

9.P.102 Bangi (sdra Wan Jinn Woe)

BANGI

NEGERI	SELANGOR
Parlimen	P.102 - BANGI
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	68768

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
USTAZ SHAFIE NGAH (PAS)	33789
DR. ONG KIAN MING (PKR)	102557
DENNIS WAN (PRM)	215
LIEW YUEN KEONG (BN)	19766

10.N.25 Kajang (sdra Wan Jinn Woe)

KAJANG

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.25 - KAJANG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	30755

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
HEE LOY SIAN (PKR)	39055
DENNIS WAN (PRM)	103
TEH YEOW MENG (BN)	7097
ZAITON BINTI AHMAD (PAS)	8300

11.P.106 Damansara (sdra Wong Mun Kheong)

DAMANSARA

NEGERI	SELANGOR
Parlimen	P.106 - DAMANSARA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	106903

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
DATO' WONG MUN KHEONG (PRM)	617
TONY PUA (PKR)	121283
RYAN HO KWOK XHENG (BN)	14380

 

 

12.P.109 Kapar (sdra S.Manikavasagam)

KAPAR

NEGERI	SELANGOR
Parlimen	P.109 - KAPAR
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	16306

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
ABDULLAH SANI (PKR)	47731
MANIKAVASAGAM (PRM)	525
DR. HJ. ABD RANI BIN OSMAN (PAS)	31425
MOHANA MUNIANDY (BN)	26412

13.N.42 Meru (sdra S.Manikavasagam)

MERU

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.42 - MERU
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	9608

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
KHAIRUL ANUAR BIN SAIMUN (BN)	8057
MANIKAVASAGAM (PRM)	346
NOOR NAJHAN BIN MOHAMAD SALLEH (PAS)	7804
ALEX SHEE CHEE WENG (BEBAS - POKOK)	72
USTAZ FAKHRULRAZI MOKHTAR (PKR)	17665

 

 

14.N.43 Sementa (sdri N.Ghandi)

SEMENTA

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.43 - SEMENTA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	5370

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
SARONI BIN JUDI (BN)	12497
DR DAROYAH BINTI ALWI (PKR)	17867
GANDHI A/P NAGAMUTHU (PRM)	120
WAN HASRINA BINTI WAN HASSAN (PAS)	7696

 

 

15.N.44 Selat Kelang (sdra W.Jeichandran)

SELAT KLANG

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.44 - SELAT KLANG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	500

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
ABDUL RASHID BIN ASARI (PKR)	12266
MOHD KHAIRI BIN HUSSIN (BN)	9949
JEICHANDRAN A/L WADIVELU (PRM)	52
DR HALIMAH ALI (PAS)	11766
ZAINAL AZWAR BIN KAMARUDDIN (BEBAS - KUNCI)	49

 

 

16.N.48 Sentosa (sdra M.Telaiamblam) dalam Parlimen Kota Raja

SENTOSA

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.48 - SENTOSA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	33600

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
GUNARAJ (PKR)	38106
RAJAN MANIKESAVAN (PAS)	1722
DATO' R.S.MANIAM (BN)	4506
M . THILAI (PRM)	79
PS RAJOO (BEBAS - KUNCI)	95

 

 

17.N.49 Sungai Kandis (sdra Hanafiah Husin) dalam Parlimen Kota Raja

SUNGAI KANDIS

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.49 - SUNGAI KANDIS
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	12480

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
HANAFIAH BIN HUSIN (PRM)	76
KAMARUZZAMAN BIN JOHARI (BN)	11518
SHUHAIMI HAJI SHAFIEI (PKR)	23998
MOHD YUSOF (PAS)	7573

18.N.Banting (sdra Tan Choon Swee)

BANTING

NEGERI	SELANGOR
DUN	N.52 - BANTING
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	17299

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
NG SIOK HWA (BN)	4547
LAU WENG SAN (PKR)	21846
PHILIP TAN CHOON SWEE (PRM)	311

Pulau Pinang

1.N.04 Permatang Berangan (sdra Azman Shah Othman) dalam Parlimen  Tasek Gelugor)

PERMATANG BERANGAN

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.04 - PERMATANG BERANGAN
PARTI MENANG	BN
MAJORITI UNDI	646

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
NOR HAFIZAH BINTI OTHMAN (BN)	6870
AZMAN SHAH BIN OTHMAN (PRM)	24
PAKCIK SOBRI (PAS)	6224
DATO' SERI MOHD. SHARIFF BIN OMAR (PKR)	5021

2.N.06 Teluk Ayer Tawar (sdra Lee Thian Hong) dalam Parlimen Tasek Gelugor

TELOK AYER TAWAR

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.06 - TELOK AYER TAWAR
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	2203

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
USTAZ HANIF HARON (PAS)	3900
MUSTAFA KAMAL (PKR)	7072
LEE THIAN HONG (PRM)	88
ZAMRI BIN CHE ROS (BN)	4869

3.N.08 Bagan Jermal (sdra Teoh Chai Deng) dalam Parlimen Bagan

BAGAN JERMAL

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.08 - BAGAN JERMAL
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	15236

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
TEOH CHAI DENG (PRM)	74
SOON LIP CHEE (PKR)	18134
HARI DEVYNDRAN A/L MUNISWARAN (MU)	106
FABIAN GEORGE ALBART (PFP)	30
ANG CHOR KEONG (BN)	2898

4.N.09 Bagan Dalam (sdra Teoh Huck Ping) dalam Parlimen Bagan

BAGAN DALAM

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.09 - BAGAN DALAM
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	6783

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
TEOH UAT LYE (MU)	51
J. DHINAGARAN (BN)	3918
SATEES A/L MUNIANDY (PKR)	10701
TEOH HUCK PING (PRM)	45
JASPER OOI ZONG HAN (PFP)	36

5.N.13 Berapit (sdra Song Chee Meng) dalam Parlimen Bukit Mertajam

BERAPIT

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.13 - BERAPIT
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	16981

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
HENG LEE LEE (PKR)	18378
LEE POH KONG (PFP)	105
GOH SWEE GIM (BN)	1397
SONG CHEE MENG (PRM)	84

6.N.14 Machang Bubuk (sdra Tang Ah Ba) dalam Parlimen Bukit Mertajam

MACHANG BUBUK

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.14 - MACHANG BUBUK
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	16747

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
LEE KHAI LOON (PKR)	21819
TANG AH BA (PRM)	53
LIM JHUN HOU (MU)	28
TAN TEIK CHENG (BN)	4658
MD JAMIL ABD RAHMAN (PAS)	5072

7.N.15 Padang Lalang (sdra Lai Yean Nee) dalam Parlimen Bukit Mertajam

PADANG LALANG

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.15 - PADANG LALANG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	18364

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
CHONG ENG (PKR)	20764
LIEW EE JIN (PFP)	101
KUAN HIN YEEP (BN)	2400
LAI YEAN NEE (PRM)	154

8.N.16 Perai (sdra M.Samuganathan) dalam Parlimen Batu Kawan

PERAI

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.16 - PERAI
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	9049

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
OOI KHAR GIAP (PFP)	104
M. SURESH (BN)	2194
R.KUMARY (BEBAS - JAM)	23
ASOGHAN A/L GOVINDARAJU (PAP)	33
SAMUGANATHAN A/L MUNIANDY (PRM)	37
PROF. P.RAMASAMY (PKR)	11243

9.N.17 Bukit Tengah (sdra Tan Hiang Lye) dalam Parlimen Batu Kawan

BUKIT TENGAH

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.17 - BUKIT TENGAH
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	8558

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
GOOI HSIAO-LEUNG (PKR)	12535
EDWARD JOSEPH (PFP)	27
DR. THOR TEONG GEE (BN)	3977
TANG HIANG LYE (PRM)	53
NORAZMAN BIN ISHAK (PAS)	2355

10.N.18 Bukit Tambun (sdra Goh Bee Koon)

BUKIT TAMBUN

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.18 - BUKIT TAMBUN
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	14880

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
ONG SEONG LU (PFP)	54
GOH B. KOON (PRM)	117
HARTINI TAN (BN)	3184
GOH CHOON AIK (PKR)	18064
KUMARAVELU A/L ARUMUGAM (PAS)	735

11.N.20 Sungai Bakap (sdra Tan Chow Kang) dalam Parlimen Nibung Tebal)

SUNGAI BAKAP

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.20 - SUNGAI BAKAP
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	2348

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
TAN CHOW KANG (PRM)	55
USTAZ OSMAN BIN JAAFAR (PAS)	4316
DR AMAR PRITPAL BIN ABDULLAH (PKR)	10386
DATO MOHAMED SANI BAKAR (BN)	8038

12.N.22 Tanjung Bunga (sdra Chua Cheng Wee) dalam Parlimen Bukit Bendera

TANJONG BUNGA

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.22 - TANJONG BUNGA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	9343

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
MARVIN LEE ZHENG YONG (MU)	74
CHUA CHEONG WEE (PRM)	122
ZAIRIL KHIR JOHARI (PKR)	13245
TENG CHANG YEOW (BN)	3902

13.N.27 Pengkalan Kota (sdra Chew Seng Tung) dalam Parlimen Tanjong

PENGKALAN KOTA

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.27 - PENGKALAN KOTA
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	13390

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
LIM SWEE BOK (BN)	1647
CHEW SENG TUNG (PRM)	68
GOOI ZI SEN (PKR)	15037
RAGINDRAN A/L SIVASAMY (BEBAS - KUNCI)	87
KOAY TENG LYE (MU)	82

14.N.39 Pulau Betong (sdra Yeoh Cheng Huat) dalam Parlimen Balik Pulau

PULAU BETONG

NEGERI	PULAU PINANG
DUN	N.39 - PULAU BETONG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	1596

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
CIKGU MOHD TAUFIK (PAS)	1645
YEOH CHENG HUAT (PRM)	64
HAJI TUAH ISMAIL (PKR)	7675
DATUK Sr Dr MUHAMAD FARID BIN SAAD (BN)	6079

KEDAH 

1.N.13 Kota Darul Aman (sdra Tan Kang Yap) dalam Parlimen Alor Setar

KOTA DARUL AMAN

NEGERI	KEDAH
DUN	N.13 - KOTA DARUL AMAN
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	8468

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
HAJI ZULKIFLI BIN CHE HARON (PAS)	1732
TAN ENG HWA (BN)	3269
TEH SWEE LEONG (PKR)	11737
TAN KANG YAP (PRM)	32

2.P.015 Sungai Petani (sdra P.Sritharan) 

SUNGAI PETANI

NEGERI	KEDAH
Parlimen	P.015 - SUNGAI PETANI
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	21569

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
DATO' JOHARI ABDUL (PKR)	45532
USTAZ SHARIR LONG (PAS)	22760
DATO' SHAHANIM BINTI MOHAMAD YUSOFF (BN)	23963
P. SRITHARAN (PRM)	279

3.N.28 Bakar Arang (sdra Tan Kee Chye)

BAKAR ARANG

NEGERI	KEDAH
DUN	N.28 - BAKAR ARANG
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	10833

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
USTAZ OTHMAN CHE MEE (PAS)	7607
SIMON OOI (PKR)	18440
TAN KEE CHYE (PRM)	58
TAN HOCK HUAT (BEBAS - KUNCI)	29
KO HUNG WENG (BN)	5547

4.N.29 Sidam (sdra Mohd Hashim Salahudin)

SIDAM

NEGERI	KEDAH
DUN	N.29 - SIDAM
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	10860

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
DR ROBERT LING (PKR)	17344
CIK GU HASHIM (PRM)	80
TAN KOK SEONG (BN)	5951
NUR HIDAYAH FOO (PAS)	6484

5.N.35 Kulim (sdra Lee Ah Leong) dalam Parlimen Bandar Baru Kulim.

KULIM

NEGERI	KEDAH
DUN	N.35 - KULIM
PARTI MENANG	PKR
MAJORITI UNDI	3795

NAMA PADA KERTAS UNDI	BIL. UNDI
YEO KENG CHUAN (PKR)	13070
CHUA THIONG GEE (BN)	9275
MOHD KHAIRI SALLEH (PAS)	9080
LEE AH LEONG (PRM)	34