The Malaysian Bar’s International Malaysia Law Conference (“IMLC”) 2026 took place from 27 to 30 Oct 2026 at MITEC, Kuala Lumpur.
By Meor Mohammad Ariff, Advocate and Solicitor, Mazlina Tham & Partners
The question of restoring local council elections in Kuala Lumpur raises important considerations concerning democratic accountability, federalism and effective urban governance. The session, moderated by Dr Saravanabavan Mathialagan, brought together three panellists who examined the issue from the perspectives of electoral reform, parliamentary and institutional considerations, and urban governance.
Danesh Prakash Chacko, Chairperson of Persatuan Bertindak Pilihan Raya Bebas Dan Saksama, advocated the restoration of local council elections, emphasising that representative democracy is founded upon the relationship between voters and their elected representatives. He argued that elections provide essential mechanisms for direct and indirect accountability, which remain inadequate under the present system of local Government. In his view, the absence of elected local representatives contributes to a lack of effective checks and balances.
Beyond advocating elections, Danesh Prakash Chacko emphasised the importance of electoral design. He proposed considering a Mixed-Member Proportional Representation System — rather than simply replicating Malaysia's existing electoral arrangements — which could provide a more balanced representation of Kuala Lumpur's diverse communities. He further suggested that electoral wards should reflect both geographical constituencies and their demographic composition. Additionally, he advocated allowing political parties to contest under their respective banners and permitting individuals aged 18 and above to stand as candidates.
In contrast, The Honourable Datuk Haji Ahmad Amzad b Mohamed @ Hashim, Member of Parliament and former Deputy Minister of Malaysia, expressed reservations about introducing local council elections at this stage. He questioned whether elections would necessarily translate into improved governance, arguing that priority should instead be given to strengthening existing administrative institutions.
Central to his argument was Kuala Lumpur's unique position as the nation's capital, a Federal Territory and a major commercial centre. Unlike other local authorities, Kuala Lumpur serves not only its residents but also broader national interests. Its substantial budget and distinctive administrative structure require careful consideration before introducing an additional layer of elected government.
The Honourable Datuk Haji Ahmad Amzad b Mohamed @ Hashim further highlighted potential conflicts between national and local priorities, particularly in matters involving urban development and public expenditure. He cautioned that an elected local council could complicate existing administrative arrangements unless the respective powers, responsibilities and liabilities of the relevant institutions were clearly defined.
He also questioned how electoral eligibility should be determined, given that many individuals who work, conduct business(es), or own property(ies) in Kuala Lumpur reside outside its boundaries. Referring to studies undertaken by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and the International Islamic University Malaysia, he stated that institutional and administrative improvements should take precedence over electoral reform.
As an alternative, he proposed strengthening oversight mechanisms, establishing an independent advisory council, introducing clear Key Performance Indicators (“KPIs”), and implementing effective disciplinary procedures to ensure greater accountability within Kuala Lumpur City Hall (Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur, “DBKL”).
Dr Shahridan Faiez, Technical Director of Think City Kuala Lumpur, offered a broader perspective on urban governance. While supporting the reintroduction of local council elections in principle, his response to the central question was: "Yes, but it is not enough."
He argued that the underlying challenge confronting Kuala Lumpur concerns its declining liveability and whether existing governance structures remain capable of addressing the needs of a rapidly expanding metropolitan population. In his view, focusing solely on elections risks overlooking the more fundamental question of whether Kuala Lumpur's Governmental architecture remains fit for purpose.
He cautioned that elections alone would not eliminate the "3Cs" of governance: Corruption, Clientelism and Capture, the latter referring to situations where public institutions become disproportionately influenced by private or political interests. Without adequate institutional safeguards, elected authorities could remain vulnerable to the same governance weaknesses.
Drawing comparisons with the Greater London Authority, Dr Shahridan emphasised that rapidly growing metropolitan centres require governance structures capable of responding to their increasingly complex needs. He advocated a new governance framework incorporating clearer decision-making structures, meaningful public participation, effective accountability mechanisms and greater institutional responsiveness. For him, democratic representation should extend beyond periodic elections to include continuous public engagement in matters affecting urban communities.
The discussion also highlighted the constitutional complexities surrounding Kuala Lumpur's status as a Federal Territory. Unlike local authorities within the states, Kuala Lumpur operates within a distinct federal administrative framework. Accordingly, any proposal to restore local council elections must consider the division of governmental responsibilities, the relationship between federal and local authorities, and the balance between local democratic representation and national interests.
Notwithstanding their differing positions, the three panellists shared an underlying concern regarding the need to improve accountability and governance in Kuala Lumpur. Their disagreement lay principally in the appropriate mechanisms and sequence of reform. Danesh Prakash Chacko emphasised electoral accountability; The Honourable Datuk Haji Ahmad Amzad b Mohamed @ Hashim prioritised institutional and administrative accountability; while Dr Shahridan advocated for comprehensive structural reform incorporating democratic participation and institutional safeguards.
Ultimately, the session demonstrated that the debate extends beyond the question of whether Kuala Lumpur should elect its local representatives. The more fundamental question is how its governance framework can be strengthened to ensure democratic legitimacy, effective administration and meaningful public accountability. Whether through electoral reform, institutional improvements or a combination of both, the objective remains to establish a governance system capable of addressing Kuala Lumpur's evolving needs while safeguarding the interests of its residents and the nation as a whole.
*This article reports on Breakout Session 9, Stream A: Law and Society.