PAS deputy president Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man’s objection to limiting the prime minister’s tenure is not a thoughtful warning about leadership quality. It is a clear signal that PAS remains hostile to reform and trapped in outdated thinking. To argue that Malaysia would “lose capable leaders” by setting a term limit is to misunderstand, or deliberately misrepresent, how modern democracies protect themselves from abuse of power.

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s proposal to cap the premiership at two terms is a basic reform aimed at strengthening institutions, not weakening leadership. It recognises a simple truth: no individual, however capable, should hold power indefinitely. Term limits encourage renewal, prevent complacency, and reduce the risk of power being concentrated in the hands of a few. These are principles accepted across mature democracies and long demanded by Malaysians who have seen where unchecked power leads.

PAS’s response exposes a deeper problem. The party is not only socially rigid and ideologically extreme, it has now proven itself to be openly anti-reform. Its leaders cling to the myth that long tenure equals good governance, ignoring decades of evidence to the contrary. Malaysia’s worst governance failures did not happen because leaders served too briefly, but because they stayed too long, unchallenged and unaccountable.

This same reflexive rejection of reform can be seen in PAS’s opposition to the Urban Renewal Act. Even a policy designed to redevelop ageing flats, improve safety, and provide better housing for ordinary Malaysians has been met with suspicion and fearmongering. Instead of engaging constructively with safeguards, compensation mechanisms, and residents’ rights, PAS chose to oppose the initiative outright, raising exaggerated claims and stoking anxiety.

The reality is simple. Many urban areas are deteriorating, unsafe, and no longer fit for decent living. Urban renewal is about rebuilding communities, not dispossessing them. It is about replacing crumbling structures with safer homes, better infrastructure, and a more dignified quality of life. PAS’s rejection of the Urban Renewal Act shows that even when reforms are meant to benefit Malaysians directly, especially the urban poor, the party would rather say no than improve what exists.

Anwar’s reform agenda goes beyond slogans. It includes limiting executive power, strengthening oversight, improving housing policy, and rebuilding public trust after years of institutional damage. These reforms are about rules, not personalities. They are designed to protect the country regardless of who sits in Putrajaya. PAS opposes them not because they are flawed, but because reform threatens the old political habits it is comfortable with.

To dismiss term limits as a danger to leadership is lazy thinking. To reject urban renewal while offering no credible alternative is irresponsible politics. Capable leaders do not fear limits, and serious parties do not fear reform. They work within rules, improve policies, and accept change in the public interest.

This is why PAS continues to lose credibility beyond its base. At a time when Malaysia needs clear thinking, institutional courage, and practical solutions, PAS offers suspicion of reform and protection of the status quo. That is not conservatism. It is regression. And it places PAS firmly on the wrong side of Malaysia’s future.