THE Epstein files are back in the spotlight not for their salacious details, but for what they expose about a far more dangerous force: the corrosive grip of power, secrecy and leverage on an accountable government.
This is not merely an American problem as the dynamics revealed by the Epstein case are structural, not geographical. They emerge wherever power is concentrated, accountability is selective and secrecy is normalised including in Malaysia.
At the heart of the Epstein saga is not only criminal abuse, but the strategic accumulation of leverage. Epstein did not need to formally control institutions or governments. He needed access, proximity and compromising information on individuals who already held influence or were on their way to it.
Once someone in power is compromised, the wrongdoing itself becomes secondary. What matters is the unspoken understanding that exposure is always possible.
This is how blackmail works in practice; not through constant threats but through silence. Obedience becomes cheaper than accountability.
Malaysia has long grappled with this reality, even if it is rarely acknowledged openly. Over the years, the public has witnessed leaked recordings, sudden “video revelations”, confidential documents surfacing at politically convenient moments and scandals that emerge, fade or stall depending on shifting alliances.
Each incident is often treated as a stand-alone controversy. Taken together, however, they point to a deeper problem, that leverage has become an informal but powerful currency in politics.
When leaders are compromised — whether through personal misconduct, abuse of power, or corruption — governance risks becoming transactional. Decisions are no longer guided primarily by public interest, policy coherence, or electoral promises, but by self-preservation. Investigations slowed. Files gathered dust. Prosecutions delayed, reclassified or quietly dropped. Accountability becomes conditional.
The rakyat usually see only the surface effects. A case that drags on for years without resolution. A powerful figure cleared despite widespread public doubt. Alleged wrongdoing remains “under investigation”, while whistleblowers face swift and decisive action. These outcomes are often explained away in the language of stability, legal complexity, or political pragmatism. Rarely is the possibility discussed that unseen leverage — rather than law or principle — is shaping the outcome.
This is where secrecy becomes dangerous. Blackmail thrives in opaque systems and Malaysia’s political environment has long provided fertile ground. Limited asset disclosure, discretionary prosecutorial powers, opaque party financing, and a culture that discourages scrutiny of elites all weaken institutional resilience.
When enforcement is inconsistent, secrets turn into weapons. Those who possess them gain influence far beyond their formal authority.
The cost of this system is not borne by politicians alone. It is socialised. Compromised leaders may trade obedience for survival, but the rakyat pay through weakened institutions, distorted policy decisions, and eroding trust.
Economic arrangements that favour narrow interests, regulatory capture, the erosion of civil liberties, and deepening cynicism all flourish under such conditions.
Over time, disengagement grows. Voters feel their participation changes little. Public discourse becomes polarised, focusing on personalities and scandals rather than institutions and reform. Who is winning or losing the latest political contest begins to matter more than how power is exercised or in whose interests.
Another unsettling lesson from the Epstein files is that systems which shield elites from consequences tend to attract predators, fixers and intermediaries. They thrive not because laws do not exist, but because they are applied selectively.
When accountability depends on political alignment, blackmail becomes more effective than bribery. It buys silence, loyalty and compliance.
For Malaysia, the lesson is not about imported scandals or sensationalism. It is about vulnerability at the top and fragility at the bottom. A political class that behaves as if it is untouchable becomes easy to capture. A public kept distracted and divided becomes easier to manage.
Blackmail does not need to control everyone. It only needs to compromise enough people in the right places.
Moving forward requires resisting the temptation to treat each scandal as a one-off moral failure. These are structural warnings. Stronger transparency laws, consistent enforcement, genuine institutional independence, limits on discretionary power, and real protection for whistleblowers are not abstract ideals. They are defences against governance by leverage.
Until such safeguards are firmly in place, the rakyat will continue to bear the consequences of decisions shaped by secrets they never consented to, while being told that this is simply how politics works.