Article By:��Assoc. Prof. Dr. Abdul Rahman Bin Ramdzan,��Public Health Medicine Specialist,��Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences

��

��

Recent concerns have surfaced regarding a children’s cartoon aired on local television that included scenes depicting same-sex romance. This incident has raised public questions about how such content was broadcast during a children’s programming slot and whether current oversight mechanisms within media organisations are sufficiently robust. Although discussions surrounding the issue can easily shift toward moral or political debate, the core matter relates to child development, mental wellbeing, and the responsibility of broadcasters in shaping young minds.

Children are among the most impressionable groups in society. Their cognitive and emotional development is heavily influenced by the media they consume. Television programming, in particular, plays a central role in shaping perceptions, social norms, and early understanding of relationships. While the exposure to diverse narratives is increasingly common in today’s globalised media environment, young children still require content that is clearly aligned with their developmental readiness. When programmes introduce themes that are too mature or complex, such as romantic relationships or emotionally heavy storylines, children may experience confusion or curiosity beyond what they can process healthily.

The primary issue at hand concerns age-appropriate content, not discrimination or stigma. Every nation defines standards for children’s programming based on cultural, societal, and religious values. Broadcasters, regardless of whether they are public or private entities, carry a critical duty to ensure that children’s content aligns with these standards and meets parental expectations. When content falls outside the range considered appropriate for young viewers, questions about the effectiveness of content vetting procedures naturally arise.

The airing of such material suggests potential gaps in existing screening systems. These may include inadequate review of imported programmes, reliance on outdated classification guidelines, or insufficient personnel to manage the increasing volume and diversity of media content. Many modern animations originate from global markets where storytelling norms differ significantly from local expectations, making it essential for broadcasters to thoroughly evaluate suitability rather than relying on visual style alone.

This situation also underscores a broader national challenge: the absence of a coordinated media health literacy framework to support parents and guardians. With the rapid expansion of digital entertainment platforms, families often find it difficult to monitor every piece of content their children encounter. As such, strong, consistent oversight from media organisations becomes a vital safeguard to ensure that vulnerable viewers are protected.

Moving forward, several improvements are necessary.

First, broadcasters should strengthen and modernise their vetting processes by implementing multi-tiered reviews and consulting child development experts where needed.

Second, content classification standards must be updated to reflect the complexities of contemporary media, especially for imported shows with culturally distinct norms.

Third, transparent communication when inappropriate content is aired helps maintain public trust. Offering explanations and outlining corrective steps demonstrates accountability and reinforces the broadcaster’s commitment to child safety.

The recent incident serves as a clear reminder that protecting children requires proactive, preventive oversight. Strengthening content screening systems, modernising guidelines, and recognising the unique developmental needs of young viewers are essential steps toward ensuring a safe and supportive media environment for Malaysia’s children.

��

As state polls loom, here’s a clear-eyed look at what’s legally enforceable, and what isn’t.

��

Article By: Marja Azlima Omar, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Science Social and Humanities

mazlima@ums.edu.my����

��

As Sabah gears up for its next state election, the “20 Points” will resurface, as they always do, on campaign stages and in manifestos. Expect familiar promises: more autonomy, greater revenue share, protection of native rights, Borneonisation of the civil service, control over immigration, language and religion safeguards. But how much of the 20 Points is a legal guarantee you can enforce, and how much is political aspiration that still depends on negotiation? The answer to the question separates law from lore, so voters can press candidates on what is realistically deliverable after the ballots are counted.

First things first: What are the 20 Points?

The “20 Points” were a 1962 memorandum drafted by North Borneo (Sabah) leaders ahead of the formation of Malaysia. It set out conditions they wanted reflected in the terms of federation ranging from religion, language, immigration, fiscal arrangements, native rights, and local control of public services.

Essentially, the 20 Points is not itself a law or treaty. It informed the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) Report (1962) and, through that channel, influenced the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), the Malaysia Act 1963, and provisions in the Federal and State Constitutions. In court, judges do not enforce the 20 Points per se; they enforce constitutional text, statutes, and valid legal instruments that embody (or depart from) those points.

So, what is legally enforceable today?

Let us think the enforceability on the 20 Points in the form of a traffic-light spectrum whereby Green are those points that have strong legal footing, Amber on the other hand is those points that need some protection, but contestable. Lastly Red are those points that are political promise, far away from being legal right. The elaboration is as follows:

In the Green Lane are items with firm legal hooks that voters can rely on. Sabah’s immigration controls are entrenched in federal law that gives East Malaysia authority over entry by non-residents; disputes can go to court, but judges will focus on whether officials applied the rules lawfully, not on political preferences. Native law and customs, particularly over land are likewise grounded in written law whereby protection entrenches in the Constitution, land ordinances and native-court structures, so remedies turn on the precise statute and facts before the court. Lastly, Religious and language safeguards operate as constitutional guardrails in the sense that they set boundaries that make arbitrary or discriminatory decisions reviewable and reversible.

The Amber Lane mixes law with politics and administration. Borneonisation is recognised as an objective, yet not as a constitutional quota which means progress depends on public-service rules, Public Service Commission (PSC) practice and transparent targets, with judicial review available only for classic public-law wrongs (illegality, irrationality, procedural unfairness). Fiscal arrangements and special grants exist in the Constitution, but the quantum, timing and formulas commonly require executive negotiation and periodic orders; courts can interpret and police the process, while the actual numbers are hammered out at the table. Education and health devolution is constitutionally possible via concurrent powers and agreements, but delivering it needs intergovernmental compacts, staffing plans, budget lines and systems migration; litigation can clarify who may do what, not conjure the capacity to do it.

The Red Lane flags crowd-pleasing ideas that remain political unless converted into binding instruments. Fixed revenue shares (i.e. a guaranteed percentage of federal taxes collected in Sabah) are not hardwired today; making them real would require constitutional or statutory amendments plus budgetary restructuring and enforceable grant orders. Likewise, automatic veto-style powers for Sabah over federal policy do not fit the current federal design and would need constitutional change with supermajority support and this indeed no small feat. The practical test for any Red-zone promise is simple namely can it be traced to a specific article, bill, regulation or gazetted order with a timetable and enforcement mechanism? If not, it’s rhetoric in search of a legal vehicle

What changed with recent MA63-related moves?

Parliament has in recent years reaffirmed Sabah and Sarawak’s founding-status language in the Constitution and tightened definitions around “Malaysia Day.” Symbolically, this matters. Legally, it strengthens interpretive context for courts and governments to read autonomy provisions purposively. But symbolism does not automatically yield cash, competencies, or headcount. Those still need agreements, regulations, budgets, and sustained administrative follow-through.

Why politicians still cite the 20 Points

It is because the 20 Points is a moral compass and negotiating mandate. It reminds Putrajaya and Sabah’s own leadership what North Borneo believed it was signing up for in 1963. In law, it operates as context and purpose behind constitutional provisions; in politics, it energises demands for devolution, fairer funding, and recognition of native rights.

Voter’s checklist: Five questions to ask every candidate

So, if the politicians/candidates were to bring up 20 Points again (and again) in their manifesto, how should the voters approach the matter? Here are some suggestions/questions to ponder:

• Show me the legal hook. - For each 20 Points promise, which exact constitutional article or statute will you use or amend? If it is not in black-letter law, what instrument will you draft?
• Timeline and instrument. - Is the plan a federal–state agreement, regulation, or constitutional amendment? When will the draft be tabled, and who signs?
• Money on the table. - For fiscal promises, how much (RM), from which vote/head, and what mechanism enforces it (statutory formula, multi-year grant order, or MoF circular)?
• Administrative capacity. - If education/health powers shift, which agencies, staff, and IT systems move on Day 1? How will services avoid disruption?
• Accountability metrics. - What KPIs will prove Borneonisation is advancing (e.g., percentage Sabahans in Jusa/C-suite posts by year)? What public dashboard will track progress?

How the courts fit into this?

Courts remain vital, but they are not a silver bullet. However, through judicial review they can halt unlawful decisions that breach constitutional safeguards, clarify the scope of existing powers and duties so authorities act within their legal remit, and enforce procedural fairness and basic legality to ensure decisions are made lawfully and transparently.

Three realistic, near-term wins after the election

Three realistic near-term wins after the election are within reach if leaders convert rhetoric into instruments. First, a binding Federal–Sabah Financial Order can translate pledges into a statutory or gazetted grant mechanism with clear review dates and escalation clauses. Second, a Borneonisation Roadmap 2026–2030 via a public service circular. It should set yearly targets, build recruitment pipelines, tie scholarships to service bonds, enable lateral entry, and require an annual report to the State Assembly. Third, a Native Land Justice Package ought to update key land ordinances and court procedures, properly resource native courts, and publish a digitised cadastre to speed up recognition and reduce disputes.

The takeaway

The 20 Points still matter, unfortunately not as a magical key, but as the map legend for what Sabah sought in 1963. In this state election, meaningful change depends on whether candidates can translate that legend into enforceable instruments such as precise clauses, gazettes, budgets, timelines, and dashboards the public can verify. If a promise cannot be traced to a specific legal hook and an implementation instrument, treat it as rhetoric. If it can, hold the winners to it, point by point, if possible.

��

��

Article By:��Assoc. Prof. Dr. Abdul Rahman Bin Ramdzan,��Public Health Medicine Specialist,��Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences

��

��

Recent reports of alcoholic beverages being served during events held on school premises have sparked public concern. While some argue that such functions were organised after school hours and did not involve students, the symbolism of serving alcohol within an educational compound cannot be ignored. Schools represent centres of learning, discipline, and moral development. It is not venues for activities that contradict these values.

Educational institutions must remain neutral spaces, free from the promotion or normalisation of behaviours that could compromise the physical, mental, and moral well-being of young people. The Ministry of Education’s Circular (Surat Pekeliling Ikhtisas) No. 3 of 2018 clearly prohibits accepting sponsorships or conducting programmes involving gambling, tobacco, drugs, or alcoholic beverages. These guidelines are designed to ensure that schools remain safe, healthy environments conducive to holistic development.

From a public health perspective, alcohol is one of the most harmful yet socially accepted substances worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that over 3 million deaths annually are linked to alcohol use, contributing to liver disease, cancer, mental health disorders, and social harm including domestic violence and traffic accidents. When schools allow or tolerate alcohol-related events on their premises, it indirectly signals that such substances are acceptable within the social mainstream — undermining decades of public health education.

From an ethical and moral standpoint, prohibiting alcohol aligns with the Islamic principle of maqasid syariah, which emphasises the protection of intellect (hifz al-‘aql) and progeny (hifz al-nasl). Alcohol impairs judgement, weakens self-control, and erodes the moral fabric of individuals and communities. Upholding the sanctity of schools from such influences is therefore both a moral and societal obligation, regardless of cultural or administrative nuances.

Legally, Malaysia’s Food Act 1983 and Food Regulations 1985 already impose strict controls on alcohol sales, including an age limit of 21 years and the requirement to display clear warning signage. These laws reflect the government’s recognition that alcohol poses significant health and social risks, and that stronger preventive measures are needed to protect minors.

Respecting the ban on alcohol within schools is not about restricting cultural expression or religious imposition, it is about building a healthy, disciplined, and respectful society. As Malaysia continues to nurture its multicultural harmony, the shared goal must be to cultivate future generations grounded in moderation, empathy, and moral integrity.

Protecting our schools from the influence of alcohol is, ultimately, protecting the minds and futures of our children. It is an act of collective responsibility, one that speaks to our shared aspiration for a healthier, wiser, and more dignified nation.

��

��

��

Article By:

Marja Azlima Omar

Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Science Social and Humanities,

Universiti Malaysia Sabaah

mazlima@ums.edu.my����

��

��

The Dialogue:

��

The Israel Navy: “You are instructed to change your course. Any further attempts to sail towards Gaza endangers your safety and places you within an active war zone. If you continue your route and attempt to breach the naval blockade, we will stop your vessel and act to confiscate it through legal proceeding in court”.

��

Reply:

“Attention Attention Israel Offensice Forces

This is Tiago Avila from the Steering Committee of the Global Sumud Flotilla. We advise you that we are a humanitarian non violent solidarity mission to break the illegal siege imposed by the Israel 18 years ago against the Palestinian people in Gaza and to create a humanitarian corridor.

��

We carry only food aid, we carry water filters, we carry crutches, we carry a baby formula for the people that you’ve been starving to death. I repeat you ‘ve been committing genocide for 8 decades and ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian people and that is absolute against international law.

��

Once again, we are in international waters which is not your jurisdiction, we are heading to Palestinian territorial waters which is not your jurisdiction despite the fact that you think you can occupy that land but it all of this is completely illegal. The highest judicial authority in the world, the ICJ in their provisional rulings on the case opened by South Africa against you for the crime of genocide clearly stated that you are prohibited to hinder any humanitarian mission to get to Gaza once again in the planet of 8 billion people despise you starving children to death bombing hospitals, schools and shelters here we are here with the conscience of the world moving peacefully in a non violent humanitarian mission to take this aid you are not allowed by international law to stop us therefore we do not comply with your request because your request is still an attempt to perpetuate the genocide of the Palestinian people. We are here in solidarity with them so we do not comply with occupation with an apartheid system and with a recist and supremacy ideology called Zionism over”.

��

Reply:

The Israel Navy:”We repeat, this is an Israeli navy, you are approaching a blockade zone”.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1DCbV5ajpU/

��

��

The authority and enforceability of international law have long been debated. John Austin, the leading legal positivist of the 19th century, argued that “international law is not law properly so called” (Austin, 1832/1995). He grounded this on his command theory of law, which defined law as commands of a sovereign backed by sanctions. In Austin’s view, because international law lacks a global sovereign and centralized enforcement, it is no more than “positive morality.” This brief write-up revisits Austin’s theory and considers its relevance in the context of the dialogue between the Israeli navy and the humanitarian flotilla heading toward Gaza

Austin’s command theory identified three elements necessary for law namely a sovereign issuing commands, habitual obedience by the governed, and sanctions for disobedience.

��

On this basis, Austin argued that international law does not qualify as true law because it lacks these essential features. First, there is no single world government or sovereign authority over states, since each state is sovereign (Austin, 1832/1995). Second, international law suffers from weak enforcement, as it does not possess uniform coercive sanctions comparable to those found in domestic criminal law; instead, it relies largely on reciprocity, reputational consequences, or political pressure to ensure compliance. Finally, given that much of international law develops through customs, treaties, and international consensus rather than the commands of a sovereign, Austin dismissed it as “positive morality” rather than binding law. Thus, Austin would argue that the flotilla’s invocation of international law against the Israeli blockade has no binding legal force but reflects moral and political claims.

��

The dialogue illustrates the contested status of international law. On the part of the Israel’s Position on Power and Sovereignty, they asserted its right to enforce a blockade, warning that any breach would lead to confiscation and legal proceedings. And, such position reflects a sovereign exercising power and issuing enforceable threats, an argument that is closer to Austin’s definition of law.

��

On the other side, the GSF asserted that the blockade is illegal under international law and cited the International Court of Justice’s provisional measures in the South Africa v. Israel case on genocide (ICJ, 2024). They claimed to be protected by humanitarian law and the right to deliver aid. Yet, they had no coercive means to enforce this legal position, relying instead on moral authority and global opinion. This clash reflects Austin’s point: international law lacks centralized enforcement. The flotilla appeals to international law, but Israel, as a sovereign state with military power, disregards it.

��

While the Gaza case seems to validate Austin’s scepticisms, his view is overly narrow. international law does have enforcement mechanisms, albeit in a decentralized form. Institutions such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the United Nations Security Council play crucial roles in adjudicating disputes and imposing sanctions when necessary. The flotilla’s reference to the ICJ ruling illustrates how states and actors treat international judgments as authoritative and binding. Moreover, state practice itself reinforces the legality of international law, as states consistently invoke it to justify or challenge actions, demonstrated in the dialogue where both Israel and the flotilla relied on legal arguments to legitimize their respective positions.

��

The Dialogue also suggests that international law has legal force, not merely moral weight. Furthermore, the validity of law does not necessarily depend on the existence of a single sovereign authority. Since the inception of the United Nations, international law operates through a “horizontal” system of rules that states accept as binding, and compliance with treaties and customary norms remains generally high even without centralized sanctions. In addition, the evolving international order has reinforced the authority of international law, with modern developments such as human rights treaties, humanitarian law, and global tribunals institutionalizing international norms far beyond the limited framework envisioned in Austin’s 19th-century context.

��

What is apparent is this: the Gaza blockade case highlights the dual nature of international law. On one hand, Austin’s critique is visible whereby Israel is seen as a sovereign state with military control, can disregard international rulings without immediate coercive consequences. However, on the other, the flotilla’s reliance on international law shows its enduring significance as a normative framework shaping legitimacy, global opinion, and even potential long-term accountability for violations.

��

Thus, while international law lacks the coercive central authority Austin demanded, it nonetheless constrains and influences state behaviour in ways that resemble “law” in both form and function.

��

John Austin’s assertion that “international law is not law” reflected a rigid positivist view equating law with sovereign command. The Gaza blockade dialogue illustrates both the strengths and weaknesses of his claim. Israel’s ability to enforce its blockade despite international criticism reflects Austin’s scepticism about the enforceability of international law. Yet, the flotilla’s invocation of the ICJ and humanitarian law reinforces that states and actors treat international law as binding and authoritative. Ultimately, international law is law, but of a distinctive kind i.e. without a centralized sovereign yet still capable of shaping conduct, legitimizing claims, and holding violators accountable over time.

Article By:

Azizan��H Morshidi

Senior Lecturer,��Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities &��Researcher of GEOPES Team

azizanm@ums.edu.my��

��

The Bernama feature “As AI Rushes In, Malaysia Races to Save Jobs, Human Connection” offers a compelling overview of how rapid automation is reshaping work and society at the national level. Its warning that up to 92 percent of clerical and administrative positions are vulnerable to generative AI captures the scale of potential disruption, while its case study of a major bank’s misstep with a voice-bot underscores the perils of displacing human judgment. Applied to Sabah’s imminent 17th State Election, these lessons resonate deeply: the same technologies that threaten routine jobs also possess the power to either fortify or fracture democratic engagement, depending on how stakeholders choose to deploy them.

��

Sabah’s economy and public administration are still heavily reliant on manual processes and in-person interactions. Many district offices use paper-based record-keeping, and intermittent broadband coverage in rural areas has slowed digital uptake. While this infrastructural lag might temporarily shield local workers from wholesale automation of clerical tasks, it also cements a growing digital divide. In urban centres like Kota Kinabalu and Sandakan, private-sector employers are already experimenting with AI chatbots for customer service, yet these systems often falter when confronted even with popular Sabahan dialects such as Kadazandusun or Bajau. The bank example from the Bernama article is instructive: without investing in nuanced language models and human oversight, automated interfaces frustrate users and erode trust, an outcome equally damaging during an election when citizens seek clear communication from both government agencies and political candidates.

��

Beyond the risk of job displacement, AI-driven manipulation presents an acute threat to the integrity of PRN17. Deepfake videos have surfaced on messaging apps, falsely depicting infrastructure projects in Sabah as non-functional, thereby inflaming public frustration over supply disruptions. Social-media algorithms, by curating content based on previous interactions, can inadvertently confine young voters to politically homogeneous echo chambers. This echo-chamber effect magnifies sensationalist

claims—whether about infrastructure failures or exaggerated manifestos, while muting fact-based discourse. In an election where youth turnout could tip the balance, such distortions risk alienating first-time voters or, worse, swaying them on the basis of fabricated evidence.

��

Yet the Bernama analysis did more than highlight perils; it outlined a blueprint for human-centred automation that Sabahan stakeholders may embrace. AI should be leveraged to amplify human strengths, contextual judgment, empathy, cultural knowledge, rather than replace them. For instance, predictive-analytics tools can help state engineers forecast drought risks and optimize water allocation, but human technicians are indispensable for interpreting sensor data in light of local terrain and community needs. Similarly, natural-language processing can translate election guidelines into Sabahan dialects, widening civic participation, but human moderators must verify translations to prevent misunderstanding.

��

The urgency of upskilling cannot be overstated. Young Sabahan voters are digitally savvy, often consuming political news and campaign materials online. However, their media-literacy skills, particularly the ability to distinguish deepfakes from authentic footage, remain underdeveloped. If Sabah’s youth are to become true stewards of democracy instead of passive data consumers, the state education system must integrate digital-citizenship modules that cover AI ethics, fact-checking techniques, and the science behind algorithmic recommendations. Community colleges and religious study centres in Tawau, Beaufort, and the Interior should host practical workshops where participants examine manipulated media, learn to use open-source verification tools, and discuss the civic implications of unchecked misinformation.

��

Small and medium enterprises in Sabah are another focal point. Many shopkeepers and agribusiness operators still rely on cash transactions and manual ledgers. Bernama’s survey of nationwide corporate hesitancy, rooted in cost concerns, technical inexperience, and fear of complex deployment, mirrors reality here. To prevent Sabah’s SMEs from falling irreversibly behind, the state government, in partnership with industry associations, must roll out mobile AI-literacy labs. These units would travel to remote communities, offering hands-on training in basic AI tools for inventory management, customer-relationship tracking, and crop forecasting. By bundling these sessions with micro-financing advice, Sabah can stimulate grassroots innovation while building resilience against both economic and informational shocks.

��

Regulators and digital-platform operators bear a shared responsibility to protect election integrity. The federal election commission’s recent collaboration with social-media companies to take down false election-date posters sets a positive precedent. In Sabah, this effort must be expanded: local research centres and university laboratories should install AI-powered monitoring systems that flag suspicious content in real time. These systems can identify coordinated inauthentic behaviour such as multiple accounts posting the same deepfake, while human analysts evaluate context and escalate confirmed threats. Simultaneously, regulators need to develop clear guidelines on political advertising algorithms, mandating transparency in how campaign messages are targeted to specific demographic groups.

��

Political parties and candidates themselves have an opportunity to set a higher standard for digital campaigning in PRN17. A public‐pledge initiative could require each candidate to commit to zero tolerance for AI-generated misinformation and to disclose any use of automated tools in their outreach. Those candidates who harness AI for legitimate innovation such as localized chatbots that answer voter queries on polling logistics or automated platforms that gather constituent feedback on infrastructure priorities, should be recognized and celebrated. Embedding responsible-AI clauses in party manifestos will not only build public trust but also signal to voters that tomorrow’s leadership values both technological progress and ethical restraint.

��

Civil society organizations, from youth councils to interfaith coalitions, have a vital role in bridging divides through technology. Sabah’s communal rice-planting ceremonies and traditional handicraft workshops exemplify the state’s cultural richness, networks of reciprocity and trust that must be preserved in the digital realm. Public hackathons can channel this communal spirit by inviting Sabahan teams to co-create AI applications that promote tourism, streamline fishery supply chains, or map rural heritage sites. These events do more than generate code: they foster inter-ethnic collaboration and surface solutions grounded in lived experience, ensuring that AI supports inclusive prosperity rather than exacerbating inequality.

��

For Sabah’s youth, the stakes could not be higher. As PRN17 approaches on the heels of Malaysia Day 2025, a moment to celebrate national unity and collective advancement, young voters stand at the crossroads of technology and democracy. They can either succumb to manipulated narratives that breed cynicism or rise as digital champions who demand transparent governance and equitable development. Cultivating this second path requires sustained mentorship from university innovators, local entrepreneurs, and civil-society mentors who can model ethical use of AI in campaign strategy and public service delivery.

��

By weaving together these elements, human-centred automation, targeted upskilling, robust regulation, ethical campaigning, and community-driven innovation, Sabah can embody the Bernama article’s core thesis: that technology’s true promise lies not in supplanting human connection but in magnifying it. The state’s unique linguistic diversity, patchwork of rural and urban communities, and vibrant youth culture give it a comparative advantage: a living laboratory for demonstrating how AI, guided by cultural nuance and democratic principles, can accelerate shared prosperity.

��

As voters head to the polls for PRN17, they are not merely casting ballots on infrastructure plans or party platforms; they are choosing how Sabah will navigate the 21st-century challenges of automation, misinformation, and digital inclusion. The Bernama analysis, when adapted to this context, offers both a sobering caution and an inspiring roadmap. It is now up to Sabah’s citizens, leaders, educators, and entrepreneurs to decide whether AI will become a wedge that divides or a bridge that unites, whether our island state will emerge fragmented by technocratic fear or strengthened by a collective commitment to human dignity and mutual progress. In the balance lies not only the outcome of an election but the future shape of democracy and opportunity in East Malaysia.

Article By:

Azizan bin Morshidi

Senior Lecturer,��Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities &��Researcher of GEOPES Team

azizanm@ums.edu.my

��

The approaching 17th State Election (PRN17) in Sabah represents not only a traditional political contest but also a critical test for the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) within the local democratic landscape. The year 2024 has been marked by a significant number of electoral processes worldwide, engaging nearly half of the global population and heightening the demand for accurate and reliable information. In this context, AI emerges as a dual-purpose tool—capable of enhancing electoral efficiency while simultaneously introducing risks of misinformation and manipulation.

��

The Potential of AI in Strengthening Democracy

��

AI offers significant opportunities to improve transparency and participation in elections. The Election Commission of Malaysia (EC) has the potential to utilise AI for disseminating personalised electoral information, including voting reminders in multiple languages and logistical details. This technology could also assist in monitoring voter turnout and managing electoral data more efficiently.

Such initiatives align with the nation's digital aspirations under the Malaysia Madani framework and the MyDIGITAL Blueprint, which aim to transform public services through digitalisation. The Government launched the National Artificial Intelligence Framework in 2023 to guide the ethical use of AI in both public and private sectors. In Sabah, the state government has demonstrated commitment to digital transformation through the Sabah Maju Jaya development plan, though the specific implementation of AI in public interest management remains at an early stage.

��

Risks and Challenges of AI in Democracy

��

However, the use of AI in elections is not without risks. The spread of false information and synthetic content such as deepfakes has become a global concern, including in Malaysia. According to the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2024, misinformation and disinformation are among the most severe short-term risks facing societies worldwide.

At the local level, the Chief Minister of Sabah, Datuk Seri Panglima Hajiji Noor, has expressed concerns about the misuse of social media and technology to spread political defamation. This issue is particularly relevant given Sabah’s unique linguistic and socio-cultural diversity, which may influence how information is disseminated and perceived. Sabah's strategic launch of the Gamuda AI Academy at the Sabah State Library could emerge as a commendable initiative for approaching the 17th State Election (PRN17), directly addressing the rising threats of AI-generated misinformation and deepfakes that may have already impacted the electoral landscape. Deputy Chief Minister Datuk Ir Shahelmey Yahya as criticizing the irresponsible use of AI technology to create defamatory videos against the government, warning that such actions risk tarnishing Sabah’s reputation. Thus, this initiative represents a proactive defence of democratic integrity by turning youth into frontline defenders of accurate information.

As throngs of new Undi18 voters increasingly rely on social media for political content, issue such as algorithmic literacy and digital verification shall be, empowering future voters to safeguard election transparency. By integrating AI education with Sabah's Sabah Maju Jaya agenda, this collaboration between government, private sectors, and AI giants ensures local talent drives ethical AI adoption in public services, land management, and electoral processes—proving that in the age of synthetic media, Sabah is building not just technical skills, but democratic resilience from within.

On the same note, for Sabah to harness the transformative potential of AI without falling prey to its perils, the state must first overcome a foundational digital challenge. The ambitious goals of digital literacy programs, ethical AI governance, and collaborative monitoring of misinformation will remain futile if basic public infrastructure remains critically inadequate. Without highly improved electricity supply, paved road networks, consistent water access, and, most urgently, stable and reliable 5G internet connectivity, Sabah risks entrenching a damaging new form of inequality namely, algorithmic exclusion. AI development depends on seamless data flow, continuous power, and widespread connectivity; without these, the state will not only lag in technological adoption but also remain acutely vulnerable to AI-driven disinformation and manipulation. If Sabah is to truly serve as a model for AI-integrated democracy rather than a cautionary tale, it must first bridge the infrastructural chasm that threatens to leave its people behind, once again, in the nation’s march toward progress.

��

Striking a Balance: The Path Forward

��

The start of second half of 2025 has witnessed social upheavals abroad partly caused by disinformation. These incidents serve as a sobering cautionary tale for the world, demonstrating that without robust digital infrastructure and pre-emptive safeguards, the same algorithms that promise progress can also be weaponized to exploit societal fractures and trigger real-world instability. Addressing these challenges requires proactive measures. Enhancing digital literacy is essential, necessitating collaboration between the EC, government agencies such as the Ministry of Communications, the Department of Information, Royal Military Police and local universities to raise public awareness on identifying false information.

Strengthening the existing regulatory framework under the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and the Official Secrets Act is also crucial to addressing digital threats, in line with the National AI Framework’s emphasis on ethics and governance.

Close collaboration with social media platforms such as Meta, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) is needed to monitor and address detrimental content, following precedents set by the general elections abroad.

Furthermore, developing localised research on the impact of AI on democracy in Malaysia, particularly in Sabah, is vital to understanding and addressing context-specific socio-cultural factors.

PRN17 in Sabah provides an important testing ground for the integration of AI into Malaysian democracy. While AI holds promise for improving efficiency and access to information, it also carries risks of manipulation and inequity that must be proactively addressed. A cautious and collaborative approach among all stakeholders is essential to ensure that this technology strengthens rather than undermines the democratic process in Sabah and Malaysia as a whole.

��

��

By:��Marja Azlima Omar,��Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, �鶹��Ƶ

��

On September 16, Malaysia marks its National Day of Unity, the day that we celebrate as “Malaysia Day” This date, etched in our collective memory since 1963, symbolises not only the moment of federation but also the promise of a shared destiny between Malaya, Sabah, and Sarawak. Each year, Malaysians are reminded of the ideals of integration often coined as unity in diversity, respect for difference, and strength in togetherness. For many, Malaysia Day is a time of parades, cultural performances, and proud reflections on the nation’s achievements.

Yet, this year, in Sabah, the occasion is shadowed by grief. Just days before the 68th commemoration of Malaysia Day, floods and landslides devastated several communities across the state. Families lost their homes, livelihoods were swept away, and most tragically, lives were lost. At the time of writing, 13 were confirmed dead due to landslides at four villages in Papar, Penampang and Kolombong. Indeed, what was supposed to be a day of celebration has become a moment of mourning and reflection. One cannot help but ponder pertinent lingering question i. e. after nearly seven decades of nationhood, is this truly the kind of freedom and unity we celebrate?

Floods and landslides are not new to Sabah and a few other states such as Kelantan, Terengganu and Pahang. Each monsoon season, communities brace themselves for the worst, often with immediate limited resources or support. The intensity of recent events, however, underscores a troubling reality: these disasters are not entirely natural. They are exacerbated by human actions and systemic failures. Poor urban planning, deforestation, inadequate drainage systems, and weak disaster preparedness all converge to turn heavy rain into humanitarian crises.

As Malaysians, we must confront the uncomfortable truth that such tragedies are, to a large extent, preventable. They are not simply “acts of God” to be accepted passively. They reveal shortcomings in governance, infrastructure, and long-term planning. The symbolism of Malaysia Day becomes stark when placed against this backdrop. What value does freedom hold if citizens cannot be safe in their own homes? What is the meaning of independence if some states continue to bear disproportionate suffering, year after year? All of these are nothing but uncomfortable questions but warrants deep reflection for better outlook.

Freedom is often celebrated in political terms as being independence from colonial rule, sovereignty over territory, and the right to self-determination. However, for ordinary citizens, freedom has a more immediate meaning. It is the freedom to live without fear of displacement or death from preventable disasters. It is the freedom to enjoy safe housing, reliable infrastructure, and equal access to opportunities. It is the freedom to trust that the government, both state and federal, will safeguard the well-being of its people.

Malaysia Day should therefore not only be about remembrance but also about accountability. To celebrate nationhood while ignoring preventable suffering would be an empty gesture. The true test of a nation’s independence is not found in ceremonial speeches or parades. It is revealed in moments of crisis. When states are struck by floods and landslides, the rest of Malaysia must respond. Those responses are not out of charity, but out of duty. Swift announcement of RM10 million through the National Disaster Management Agency (NADMA) by the Prime Minister marked the salient sheer commitment and nation’s empathy.

If Malaysia Day is to remain meaningful, it must be reclaimed as more than a ceremonial holiday. It must serve as a call to action to strengthen disaster preparedness, to invest in resilient infrastructure, and to ensure that no community is left behind. Policymakers must take the lessons from Sabah’s recent tragedy seriously, addressing the systemic causes of vulnerability. Civil society must demand accountability and transparency in disaster management. Ordinary Malaysians must extend solidarity, not only through words but through tangible support for affected communities. Blame is not to put under the label of climate change as climate change took place all due to human’s faults managing natural resources.

In Sabah’s floods and landslides, Malaysia’s conscience is once again being tested. How we respond to prevent future calamities will determine whether Malaysia Day remains a true celebration of an independent nation or merely an annual reminder of promises unfulfilled.

��

Article by:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Zarina Amin Prof. Dr. Vijay Kumar

Biotechnology Research Institute,

�鶹��Ƶ

zamin@ums.edu.my

��

Sabah, located on the island of Borneo, is one of the most biodiverse regions in Southeast Asia, home to extraordinary ecosystems and unique genetic resources with immense scientific and biotechnological potential. Renowned as a global biodiversity hotspot, its rainforests, coral reefs and highland ecosystems shelter countless rare and endemic species.

Yet, Sabah's future may depend on more than just conserving its lush forests and rich marine environments; it lies in how the state studies, sustains and innovates from these natural assets.

Today, Sabah stands at a pivotal crossroads: to embrace biotechnology as a key pillar of sustainable development, or risk leaving its remarkable natural wealth underexplored and underutilized.

In a bold move toward economic diversification and sustainable development, the Sabah state government, through the Sabah Biodiversity Centre (SaBC), a department under the Chief Minister's Department launched the Sabah Biotechnology Action Blueprint 2024-2034 in June 2024.

This decade-long strategic plan positions Sabah as a future leader in the regional bioeconomy. The blueprint aims to harness biotechnology to address the state's unique environmental and socio-economic challenges.

With its exceptional biodiversity and abundant natural resources, Sabah is ideally placed to advance agricultural, marine and environmental biotechnology.

By fostering innovation in these key sectors, the blueprint seeks to develop high-value industries that improve local livelihoods, create skilled jobs and enhance Sabah's global competitiveness.

The blueprint aligns with global trends of leveraging science and innovation for sustainable growth, opening new avenues for job creation, investment and technological progress. It identifies five focus areas: industrial, healthcare, forestry, biotourism and agriculture; supported by five strategic thrusts to promote scientific advancement, economic diversification, community engagement and environmental sustainability.

Experts have cautioned that without targeted research investment, Sabah's biological wealth risks remaining untapped and vulnerable. In response, the blueprint prioritizes converting research into sustainable revenue streams, focusing on promising sectors such as functional foods, precision agriculture, sustainable aquaculture and natural product development. Aligned with the National Biotechnology Policy 2.0 (DBN 2.0) launched in September 2022, the blueprint leverages Sabah's vast biodiversity, indigenous knowledge and growing research capabilities.

As environmental concerns grow and the global focus shifts toward sustainability, the role of higher education institutions has never been more vital. At the core of this scientific push is �鶹��Ƶ (UMS), widely regarded as a central force in driving biotechnology research, biodiversity conservation and inclusive innovation.

Through a range of strategic grants, collaborative projects and strong institutional leadership, UMS is translating scientific discovery into real-world impact; anchoring Sabah's transition to a resilient, knowledge-driven bioeconomy.

UMS's biotechnology leadership is rooted in its Centres of Excellence (COE): the Biotechnology Research Institute (BRI), Borneo Marine Research Institute (BMRI), and the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation (ITBC). These centres are pioneering efforts across terrestrial, microbial and marine biotechnology.

Their shared mission is to unlock the value of Sabah's extraordinary bio-resources for both industry development and environmental stewardship. UMS's work in microbial and plant biotechnology contributes to the development of high value bioproducts, while research on the genetic diversity and bioactivity of plant and marine species underpins conservation, agriculture and climate resilience efforts.

A testament to UMS's strength is its success in securing major research funding.

Between 2023 and 2024, UMS was awarded a total of RM18 million in external grants, including RM6.25 million under the Ministry of Higher Education's Translational Sustainability Programme. This grant supports targeted research in energy, agriculture, and environmental biotechnology, with a strong emphasis on local relevance and real-world application.

UMS’s involvement in the Petronas–Academia Collaboration Dialogue (PACD) further advances Sabah’s clean energy goals. In early 2024, UMS received RM5.75 million to support bioenergy research, particularly in microbial hydrogen production and biomass conversion. This initiative highlights the potential of Sabah's microbial resources in driving low-carbon, sustainable industrial development.

To support these efforts, UMS continues to upgrade its infrastructure. The Biotechnology Research Institute now houses a state-of-the-art High-End equipment facility, featuring Transmission and Scanning Electron Microscopes, a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) hyphenated system and a two-storey Class 3 Biosafety Laboratory for animal and human work as well as a dedicated Class 3 Transgenic Biosafety Laboratory for genetic modification research.

These tools and facilities are crucial for advanced innovations in molecular biology, natural product discovery and the characterization of bioactive compounds sourced from Sabah's rich ecosystems.

UMS's research programmes align closely with state and national development strategies such as the Sabah Maju Jaya roadmap and DBN 2.0. Through the SBAB, UMS is helping transform Sabah's biodiversity into a sustainable economic pillar while promoting ethical, community- focused research.

Collaboration is fundamental to UMS's approach. The university works closely with various government agencies, international institutions and local communities.��

Leading BRI researchers such as Prof. Dr. Michael Wong, Prof. Dr. Vijay Kumar, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mailin Misson and Dr. Nur Athirah Yusuf have advanced biotechnology for community wellbeing and regional growth. BRI's landmark contributions include decoding the MD2 pineapple genome, as well as genetic studies of endangered species such as the Sunda stink-badger, horseshoe crabs, staghorn corals, slipper orchids, proboscis monkeys and the indigenous peoples of Sabah.

In a landmark collaborative effort between SaBC and BRI in 2020, more than 1,000 bacterial strains were successfully isolated from marine and terrestrial conservation sites across Sabah.

Among these, over 70 species demonstrated significant industrial and medical potential, including the ability to produce valuable enzymes such as amylases and proteases, as well as antimicrobial compounds.

This initiative has strengthened UMS’s position not only as a leader in tropical genomics and conservation biotechnology, but also as a key contributor to industrial and healthcare biotechnology, which are core pillars of the state’s biotechnology blueprint.

Equally important is UMS's role in public education and awareness. Through the efforts of Yayasan Penyelidikan Antartika Sultan Mizan (YPASM) and Akademi Sains Malaysia (ASM) Fellows, UMS has delivered impactful outreach programmes to schoolchildren and rural communities.

These initiatives bring biotechnology education into classrooms and community halls, covering molecular biology, microbial diversity and environmental DNA.

“Sabah's biodiversity is a gateway to biotechnology,” said Dr. Nur Athirah Yusuf. “From tropical forests to polar regions, our research helps link local knowledge with global solutions and proves that science truly knows no boundaries.”

These workshops, demonstrations and science-based storytelling sessions are inspiring a new generation of Sabahans to see biotechnology as both accessible and meaningful, while fostering early interest in STEM and conservation careers.

Sustainability remains at the core of UMS's mission. The SBAB explicitly rejects extractive, externally driven models that have failed other biodiverse regions.

“Sabah has the potential to become a global model for biodiversity-driven innovation,” said Prof. Dr. Clemente Wong, a molecular microbiologist and research pioneer. “But success depends on sustained investment, not just in infrastructure, but in the people who make it happen.”

In conclusion, �鶹��Ƶ exemplifies how a university can serve as both a steward of biodiversity and a driver of bioeconomic transformation. Through its multidisciplinary research, strategic partnerships and grassroots engagement, UMS is building a future where science, society and sustainability converge.

Its work ensures that Sabah's natural heritage becomes a foundation for lasting innovation, opportunity and prosperity for generations to come.

Artikel oleh:��

Prof. Dr. Vijay Kumar & Prof. Madya Dr. Zarina Amin

Institut Penyelidikan Bioteknologi

�鶹��Ƶ

zamin@ums.edu.my

��

��

Borneo merupakan kawasan luas yang kaya dengan biodiversiti yang menakjubkan : hutan hujan yang subur, sungai sungai dan pelbagai hidupan liar yang telah sekian lama wujud bersama komuniti manusia. Namun, selaras dengan pembangunan pesat di Sabah, interaksi di antara manusia, ternakan dan hidupan liar semakin meningkat. Sekali gus ini meningkatkan risiko penyakit zoonotik, iaitu penyakit yang berpunca daripada patogen yang berpindah dari haiwan ke manusia.

��

Kejadian pandemik COVID-19 sekitar 2020 - 2022 telah meningkatkan aktiviti pemantauan biologi (biosurveillance) secara global pada skala yang lebih besar. Walaubagaimanapun, amalan langkah berjaga-jaga sebagai pengajaran daripada krisis tersebut telah mula dilupakan oleh ramai pihak. Di wilayah seperti Sabah, di mana interaksi manusia dan hidupan liar berlaku dengan sangat kerap, pemantauan biologi perlu dikekalkan sebagai keutamaan oleh jabatan-jabatan Kerajaan yang terlibat. Ini adalah kerana penularan penyakit berjangkit bukan sahaja mampu mengganggu kesihatan awam, tetapi seperti yang terlihat dari pandemik COVID-19, ia juga boleh memberikan impak negatif dan menjejaskan sektor pelancongan, pertanian serta usaha pemuliharaan biodiversiti.

��

��

Ancaman Penyakit Zoonotik yang Semakin Meningkat di Borneo

��

Di antara penyakit zoonotik yang paling banyak didokumentasikan di Borneo merupakan penyakit malaria Plasmodium knowlesi dari perumah asal monyet macaque yang disebar melalui nyamuk. Dengan peningkatan aktiviti komuniti luar bandar Sabah yang semakin banyak berkembang ke kawasan hutan dan sekitarnya, risiko pendedahan kepada monyet macaque sekali gus kepada penyakit ini turut meningkat. Lebih membimbangkan, sejak kebelakangan ini penyakit malaria zoonotik ini merekodkan jumlah kes tertinggi di negeri Sabah.

��

Selain malaria yang dibawa oleh monyet, burung kelawar di Sabah turut dikenal pasti sebagai pembawa pelbagai jenis koronavirus baru mirip SARS dan COVID-19. Penemuan ini menonjolkan risiko yang mungkin dihadapi pelancong dan penduduk tempatan yang mengunjungi gua -gua yang dihuni oleh burung kelawar.

��

Industri ternakan ayam di Sabah juga pernah berhadapan dengan wabak influenza burung patogenik tinggi (H5N1) pada tahun 2018. Virus ini merebak dengan cepat sehingga ribuan ayam terpaksa dihapuskan. Walaupun tiada kes jangkitan manusia dilaporkan, kehadiran antibodi terhadap virus tersebut di dalam kalangan individu tertentu mencadangkan kemungkinan wujudnya penularan zoonotik terdahulu.

��

Di Sarawak pula, penyakit anjing gila (rabies) setakat ini masih kekal sebagai penyumbang kepada hampir semua kes berkaitan di Malaysia. Memandangkan Sabah berkongsi sempadan dengan Sarawak, maka segala usaha vaksinasi serta aktiviti pemantauan penyakit berjangkit yang berterusan amat penting untuk mencegah penularan ‘rabies’ di negeri ini.

��

��

Cabaran Baharu Kesihatan Haiwan

��

Penyakit yang menjejaskan ternakan dan hidupan liar turut menjadi perhatian. Penyakit ‘Newcastle Disease ’ dan Bronkitis Berjangkit telah menjejaskan industri ayam pedaging di Sabah, menjadikan vaksin sedia ada kurang berkesan. Walaupun ayam yang dijangkiti tidak secara langsung mengancam manusia, kemerosotan ternakan memberi kesan kepada keselamatan makanan dan pendapatan penternak.

��

Hidupan laut juga tidak terkecuali. Di Pulau Mabul dan perairan sekitarnya, semakin banyak penyu laut dilaporkan menghidap fibropapillomatosis — sejenis penyakit yang disebabkan oleh virus herpes, yang menyebabkan ketumbuhan melemahkan dan memerlukan campur tangan manusia untuk kelangsungan hidup. Survelan kesihatan juga penting di kawasan perairan Sabah yang masih belum tercemar bagi melindungi spesies terancam ini.

��

Selain itu, Demam Babi Afrika (ASF) telah memusnahkan populasi babi liar dan ternakan di Sabah. Walaupun ASF tidak menjangkiti manusia, penyebarannya yang pantas dalam kalangan Sus barbatus (babi berjanggut) memberi impak besar dari segi ekologi dan ekonomi. Kehilangan haiwan ini boleh mengganggu ekosistem serta menjejaskan amalan memburu tradisional masyarakat peribumi.

��

��

Jangkitan Kuman dari Tanah Air dan Pembawa Tikus

��

Penyakit seperti melioidosis yang dibawa oleh bakteria patogenik Burkholderia pseudomallei, yang merebak di Sabah berupaya menjangkiti manusia serta hidupan liar termasuk orang utan dan monyet macaque. Ancaman lain yang berterusan ialah leptospirosis: sejenis jangkitan

��

bakteria yang merebak melalui air tercemar dan sering dibawa oleh tikus. Bakteria Bartonella yang berkaitan dengan tikus juga didapati sangat meluas di kawasan bandar di Borneo. Ancaman tersembunyi ini menekankan keperluan pemantauan alam sekitar secara berterusan.

��

��

Tingkah Laku Manusia dan Penularan Penyakit

��

Antara cabaran terbesar dalam pencegahan penularan wabak penyakit merupakan aktiviti manusia sendiri. Kegiatan pemburuan haiwan secara haram dan perdagangan hidupan liar masih berleluasa walaupun terdapat beberapa usaha penguatkuasaan yang dijalankan selain dari usaha-usaha pemuliharaan haiwan dari badan badan terlibat. Hidupan liar seperti tenggiling masih diperdagangkan secara senyap di pasar-pasar tempatan. Walaupun belum ada virus zoonotik yang dikenal pasti di dalam tenggiling di Sabah setakat ini, risiko penularan jangkitan penyakit tetap tinggi. Penguatkuasaan yang lebih tegas amat diperlukan untuk membendung aktiviti ini.

��

Melihat ke hadapan, projek-projek pembangunan luar bandar berskala besar sebagai contoh pembinaan ibu negara baharu Indonesia, Nusantara di Kalimantan Timur, dijangka mampu menggugat habitat hidupan liar secara besar-besaran. Di simpang itu peningkatan pembalakan, peluasan pertanian dan pembinaan empangan hidro dijangka mampu memburukkan konflik manusia-hidupan liar serta meningkatkan risiko penularan penyakit.

��

��

Langkah Ke Hadapan: Memperkukuh Biosurvelan One Health

��

Aktiviti pemantauan ‘biosurveillance’ di Sabah pada waktu ini melibatkan pelbagai agensi kerajaan, institusi akademik serta organisasi pemuliharaan; walaubagaimanapun kekangan2 seperti dana yang terhad, peralatan usang dan kurang penyelarasan mampu menjejaskan kelancaran aktiviti pemantauan ini. Pendekatan One Health — yang menggabungkan kesihatan manusia, haiwan dan alam sekitar — perlu diperkukuh untuk mengatasi cabaran ini.

��

Sehubungan dengan itu, lima strategi utama telah dicadangkan:

��

1. Pemantauan Genomik dan Analitikal Kecerdasan Buatan (Artificial Intelligence):��Menggunakan penjujukan generasi baharu, pemantauan DNA persekitaran (eDNA) dan kecerdasan buatan untuk mengesan patogen baru.

2. Libat Urus dan Pendidikan Komuniti:��Memberi pendidikan kepada komuniti luar bandar dan masyarakat peribumi mengenai risiko zoonotik dan strategi pencegahan.

3. Penguatkuasaan Lebih�� Tegas�� terhadap�� Pemburuan�� Haram:��Mengukuhkan kerjasama antara agensi kerajaan dan NGO untuk membanteras perdagangan hidupan liar.
4. Dasar Guna Tanah Lestari:��Menggalakkan pembangunan berasaskan pemuliharaan bagi mengurangkan konflik manusia-hidupan liar.

5. Penyepaduan Dasar dan Peningkatan Pembiayaan:��Memastikan sumber tambahan untuk biosurvelan dan mengintegrasikan pendekatan One Health dalam dasar kebangsaan.

��

Penutup

��

Biodiversiti Sabah merupakan khazanah dunia, namun pada masa yang sama menjadi titik panas kepada kemunculan penyakit berjangkit baharu. Ketika aktiviti manusia terus mengubah landskap dan ekosistem, usaha biosurvelan proaktif dan pengukuhan pendekatan ‘One Health’ amat diperlukan.

��

Kami menyeru penubuhan satu pasukan petugas antara disiplin yang merangkumi pakar kesihatan awam, pemuliharaan, virologi, teknologi AI dan pembuat dasar. Dengan menggabungkan kepakaran dan memanfaatkan teknologi terkini, Sabah boleh melindungi rakyatnya dan khazanah biodiversitinya untuk generasi akan datang.

By Associate Professor Dr. Jakaria Dasan,��Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy,���鶹��Ƶ

��

In every organization, tough decisions must be made at some point. These decisions are usually bold, strategic, and meant for the long term. However, if they seem sudden or confusing, they become unpopular. As the saying goes, “a weapon can turn on its owner.”

Both corporations and governments experience this. It's known as a daring approach in the corporate world. However, it can result in losses if the market is misinterpreted. In politics, it can be risky; a kamikaze’s move in which one wrong move can lead to downfall.

In Human Resources (HR), such incidents have the power to alter team spirit, trust, and morale in human resources. These unpopular decisions are often known as restructuring. It brings changes that may cause worry or doubt among employees and the public. However, the choice should be given a fair shot if the modifications attract talented and charismatic individuals.

Understanding Unpopular Decisions in HR. This article looks at how tough decisions affect people in an organization, especially from an HR view. It explores how HR leaders can manage negative reactions and safeguard the culture of the organisation.

Restructuring: Strategy vs. Perception. Restructuring is frequently required for major decisions, such as employing new personnel, reorganising teams, or replacing leaders. To remain competitive, HR might view this as the best course of action. However, workers may believe: "Wrong person, wrong time." Staff feel shocked and trust may drop. If communication is poor, rumors spread. What HR sees as smart may feel like punishment to staff. What matters is how changes are made and how they are felt.

Leadership Lessons: Silent Impact. Consider this scenario: a beloved manager is replaced by a talented but unheard-of leader. It makes strategic sense because the company is looking for new talent. However, there is a significant emotional impact on the team. Faith in the former leader is replaced with mistrust and scepticism. The actual issue? Ineffective communication, or the worst a poor communication. The team was not prepared by management. Thus, the abrupt adjustment was painful and perplexing. The team might stay unstable for a while even if the transition is successful.

The True Price of Unpopular Choices. From an HR perspective, the harm manifests itself in more ways than just numbers. Firstly, low employee engagement: Confusion, mistrust, and even hatred result from a lack of explanation. Secondly, leadership credibility declines: Leaders appear self-centred in the absence of candid discussions. Thirdly, workplace culture suffers: Team ties are weakened by restructuring in the absence of common values. These issues might not be included in reports, but they will be discussed in meetings, office gossip, and watercooler conversation.

HR's Role in the Crisis. One aspect of HR's work is making unpopular decisions. However, the impact can be lessened by taking wise actions: 1. Don't be a surprise by telling the story early. Talk about the "why" before the "what." 2. Involve unofficial leaders: There are influencers on every team. Get their help as soon as possible. 3. Be ready for emotional responses: Denial, rage, or rejection can accompany even positive changes. Plan how to help staff cope.

When Care and Courage Collide. In human resources, we have to balance strategy with people's emotions. Not all decisions that are unpopular are bad. However, they can cause scars if done incorrectly. When made by the wrong person, in the wrong way, or at the wrong moment, even the best choice can backfire.
HR is responsible for managing emotions in addition to systems. When bold moves are needed, HR must translate logic into human stories. Because people remember how something happened, not just what happened.

��

About the Author:

Dr. Jakaria Dasan is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Business, Economics, and Accountancy, �鶹��Ƶ (UMS). He specializes in Human Resource Management and has experience in both industry and university HR roles.