By INS Contributors

ALOR SETAR, Malaysia: PAS’s recently concluded Muktamar (annual congress) revealed what many in Malaysian politics already suspected: the party intends to be more than a kingmaker.

Delegates openly discussed putting forward a prime ministerial candidate, and a handful of senior names were floated. The list reads like a catalogue of PAS’s strengths and weaknesses namely religious legitimacy, organisational discipline, but also the very controversies that make governing a plural society difficult.

Among the names commonly discussed including Abdul Hadi Awang, Takiyuddin Hassan, Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar and Sanusi Mohd Nor only one stands out as a credible, relatively unblemished candidate: Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man. The contrast matters. Malaysia is not just a parliamentary arithmetic problem.

It is a multiethnic, multi-confessional society that needs steady administration and political prudence. PAS must be realistic about who might carry the party into the Perdana Putra without making the country’s fragile consensus any worse.

Abdul Hadi Awang is PAS’s spiritual luminary and its long-time president, but his record is politically costly. Recent remarks that drew formal review from religious authorities and a broad public backlash demonstrate the risk of allowing an elder statesman with a polarising rhetorical style to be the public face of a national government. Such controversies are not academic: they complicate relations with the monarchy, civil institutions and moderate Malay voters who prize stability over theological zeal. 

Takiyuddin Hassan is an organisational workhorse for PAS and a former minister who knows the machinery of government. That said, his tenure has not been free of problems; party discipline issues and occasional lapses in messaging have left him open to criticism about judgment and internal management. Recent reports of disciplinary headaches inside the party underscore the risks of elevating a leader whose administrative record is mixed and who has been at the centre of factional noise. 

Secretary-General Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar, the Terengganu Chief Minister, is claimed by some to be young, energetic and technically competent in state administration despite chronic flooding and underdevelopment. His resignation from a national party post and public claims about surveillance of his movements have prompted questions about his political stability and strategic judgment; choosing him as a national standard bearer risks inflaming inter-coalition tensions at a delicate moment. His actions in granting development orders in his state and association with individuals linked to fraud and corruption do not improve his odds.

Kedah Chief Minister Sanusi Mohd Nor has shown himself to be a political heavyweight capable of winning votes and generating media attention. Yet his style is combustible: off-the-cuff remarks that are sometimes defended as jokes have repeatedly landed him in controversy and given opponents fodder to suggest PAS tolerates intemperate rhetoric. That is a liability for any party hoping to govern a plural polity where missteps can cascade into diplomatic and domestic headaches. 

Which leaves Deputy President Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man. His record is not flawless — no politician’s is — but it is comparatively clean, predictable and administratively experienced. He has held ministerial office, managed a high-profile portfolio, and in recent years has avoided the repeated provocations and headline-grabbing statements that have dogged his colleagues. That restraint should not be mistaken for timidity. It is an asset: Malaysia needs senior leaders who can manage ministries, negotiate across coalitions, and keep the day-to-day work of government running rather than constantly stoking culture-war outrage.

There is also a pragmatic logic to Tuan Ibrahim as PAS’s standard bearer. He is a known quantity within the party and among outside partners, able to signal competence without immediately alienating the moderate Malay electorate or non-Malay communities.

If PAS wishes to convert its organisational strength into credible national leadership, it ought to nominate someone who can govern rather than merely rally the base.

But nomination is conditional. Tuan Ibrahim’s path would demand political discipline and realism. He should explicitly disavow incendiary language from the party’s past, commit to an inclusive tone, and focus on technocratic delivery in key ministries: social policy, infrastructure, environment and economic management. If he keeps his head low and lets results speak, he could broaden PAS’s appeal and demonstrate the party’s capacity to govern responsibly.

This is not an argument for diluting PAS’s principles. It is a strategic appeal: if PAS wants to be taken seriously as a party of government rather than a perpetual opposition voice, it must elevate leaders who can steward Malaysia through the complexities of coalition politics and ethnic pluralism. Tuan Ibrahim fits that bill better than the alternatives on display at the muktamar.

PAS’s ambitions now confront a simple test. Will the party choose charisma and theological authority that inflames debate, or will it choose administrative competence that builds trust?

For Malaysia’s sake, and for PAS’s own long-term credibility, the practical choice should be plain. Put Tuan Ibrahim forward, and give the country a chance to see whether PAS can govern without making the social fabric worse in the process.