Instability tied to stalled development, unreliable services and broken promises, says academic
PETALING JAYA: Sabah heads to the polls this Saturday with voters less bothered about who wins and more worried about whether the next government is stable enough to actually govern.
Years of collapses, shifting alliances and overnight defections have turned instability into the defining issue of the election and analysts say Sabahans now see political turbulence not as elite drama but as daily disruption.
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia political analyst Assoc Prof Dr Novel Lyndon said ordinary voters have begun linking instability to stalled development, unreliable services and broken promises.
“Previously, political transitions might have been seen as behind-the-scenes negotiations.
“However, citizens now link these changes directly to disruptions in infrastructure projects, halted funding and delays in social benefits.
“This shift from viewing politics as theatre to seeing it as disruption has pushed instability to the top of voter concerns.”
He said issues such as water supply, road maintenance and living costs have become dominant campaign themes, adding that many Sabahans now associate these practical problems with the fallout from unstable administrations and collapsing coalitions.
He also said a clear behavioural shift is emerging, with a growing number of voters, especially those aged 20 to 49, prioritising stability over personality or party loyalty.
“A significant segment, particularly younger and urban voters, are making pragmatic assessments in which coalition longevity and administrative effectiveness take precedence.
“These voters are judging candidates based on their ability to secure federal backing, maintain project funding and prevent fragmentation after the election.”
He said in a volatile political landscape, “stability-first voting” is a rational response.
“The risks associated with endorsing an unstable candidate increase.
“Consequently, voters tend to prioritise indicators of stability such as signed coalition agreements, reliable technocratic candidates or incumbents with a proven track record of completing projects over charisma.”
Novel said communities that depend on government initiatives for essential services have “little tolerance for political instability”, adding that socio-economic pressure is also driving demand for stable governance.
“During times of material hardship, voters tend to favour policies and candidates that mitigate risks, particularly the risk of a government collapsing before projects are completed or assistance is disbursed.”
However, years of party-hopping have hollowed out trust.
“Frequent switching has significantly eroded interpersonal and institutional trust,” he said, describing public sentiment today as “conditional trust”– support given with the expectation that politicians may still break their mandate.
“Even with national anti-hopping laws, citizens believe politicians could exploit loopholes or rely on informal strategies.”
He added that Sabahans are likely to support governments that minimise unpredictability and deliver steady development.
“Voters favour coalitions that are inclusive, pragmatic and transparent, as well as leaders who value consultation, predictability and discipline.”
He also said from a political sociology standpoint, there is no definitive “best” party or leader, only coalitions that could offer credible stability, effective leadership and realistic development pathways.
Universiti Malaysia Sabah political analyst Assoc Prof Dr Romzi Ationg said instability would remain a central risk, arguing that the political culture of the state has long been shaped by fragmented parties, personality driven loyalties and regional interests.
“A multi-cornered contest makes a hung assembly plausible,” he said, adding that splintered vote shares are likely to produce narrow pluralities and last-minute coalition bargaining.
He said despite the anti-hopping law, the threat of realignment still looms, adding that personality-driven alliances, party mergers, leadership shifts and other “accepted realignment pathways” remain possible.
Romzi said patterns seen in 2018, 2020 and during the formation of Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) – such as the rapid reshuffles, federal influence and opportunistic collaboration under slim majorities – could easily reappear.
He added that the survival of the next Sabah government would hinge on disciplined coalition partners, cohesive leadership, steady federal relations and mechanisms to manage internal disputes before they escalate into open fragmentation.
