DAP’s July 12 Vote: A shift in role, not in numbers

WHEN the Democratic Action Party (DAP) meets for its special congress on July 12, it will be considering an unusual move in Malaysian politics. Party secretary-general Anthony Loke said party delegates will decide whether DAP leaders should step down from all Cabinet and deputy minister positions — while still keeping the party’s 40 MPs supporting the government led by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

At first glance, this sounds confusing. How can a party leave the Cabinet but still support the government? The answer lies in the difference between being in the executive (running ministries) and supporting the government in Parliament.

A government falls only if it loses majority support in the Dewan Rakyat. If DAP’s 40 MPs continue to vote with the administration, the government would still have the numbers.

DAP is not a small player in the current unity government. It holds five full minister posts and several deputy minister posts. Among them are major ministries such as Transport, Housing and Local Government, and Entrepreneur Development and Cooperatives. Its deputy ministers also serve in important areas including finance and education.

If these ministers and deputies resign, the government would not automatically collapse. However, the prime minister would have to reshuffle the Cabinet and assign those portfolios to leaders from other coalition parties.

So the real impact would not be about numbers in Parliament. It would be about politics.

First, DAP would be trying to reduce direct responsibility for government decisions while still influencing laws and policies through Parliament. In simple terms, it would no longer be running ministries, but it would still vote to keep the government in power.

Supporters may see this as a reset — especially if some voters feel the party has compromised too much since joining the unity government.

Second, giving up Cabinet posts changes power dynamics within the coalition. Ministerial positions are not just jobs; they represent influence and bargaining strength. Walking away from them sends a message.

It could be read as a sign of dissatisfaction, a strategy to regain political space or an attempt to distance the party from unpopular policies without causing the government to fall.

Third, there is a public perception issue. Many voters may ask: if DAP still supports the government, why leave the Cabinet? And if it disagrees strongly enough to resign, why continue backing it?

Legally and constitutionally, there is a clear difference between executive roles and parliamentary support. Politically, however, that distinction can be hard to explain.

This situation also reflects how Malaysian coalition politics has evolved. In the past, leaving the Cabinet often meant bringing down a government.

Today, coalitions are more complex. A party can step out of executive roles but still maintain stability by continuing to support the prime minister in Parliament. It shows a more flexible, though still delicate, political system.

For Anwar, the situation would be manageable but challenging. A Cabinet reshuffle would be necessary, and he would need to quickly reassure the public and investors that the government remains stable.

For DAP, the decision carries longer-term risks and rewards. Stepping down could help the party sharpen its identity before the next general election. But it could also make it appear caught in between — not fully in government, yet not fully in opposition.

In the end, July 12 is about more than positions. It is about how DAP wants to be seen.

Is it trying to show disagreement without causing instability? Is it repositioning itself politically? Or is it reminding voters that holding seats in Parliament and holding Cabinet posts are two different kinds of power?

In coalition politics, perception matters as much as numbers. Sometimes, the biggest shift is not changing the government but changing how a party chooses to be part of it.