From Ashraf Abdullah
The Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), once a powerful pillar of Barisan Nasional (BN), has reached a critical point in its political decline.
Once proud, loud and central to the BN machinery, MIC today has been reduced to a faint shadow of its former self.
It is a party clinging to past glories, using threats to leave BN as negotiating leverage, yet unable to demonstrate real value.
At the party’s 79th annual general assembly held in Shah Alam over the weekend, MIC delegates voted to authorise the leadership to leave BN and explore joining Perikatan Nasional (PN). The bravado was loud, with speeches declaring MIC is no longer respected in BN, talk of new political homes, and veiled warnings that the coalition would somehow feel MIC’s absence.
However, bold talk cannot cover up the hard numbers. If anything, these theatrics highlight a deeper truth.
Why should BN or any coalition want a partner that brings no votes, no influence and no future?
A party that lost its relevance after Samy Vellu
MIC’s long decline can be traced back to the end of the S Samy Vellu era. Love him or hate him, Samy Vellu was a towering figure who commanded grassroots machinery, political respect and electoral presence.
When Samy Vellu stepped down, the party’s fortunes collapsed almost immediately. The 2008 political tsunami, fuelled in part by Indian anger and the Hindraf wave, wiped out much of MIC’s influence. The party never recovered.
By GE15 in 2022, MIC managed to win only one parliamentary seat.
This is what MIC brings to the table today.
Malaysia has no Indian majority constituencies. However, there are numerous seats in Selangor, Perak, Penang, Johor and parts of Negeri Sembilan where the Indian vote is sufficiently large to determine the winner in a tight race.
In some constituencies, Indian voters make up between 10% and 20% of the electorate, enough to swing outcomes when Malay and Chinese voters are divided between coalitions.
Yet even in these constituencies, where MIC should be most relevant, the party performs dismally.
The consistent pattern since 2008 is clear.
- Indian voters overwhelmingly reject MIC as their representative;
- Multi-ethnic and opposition parties secure the bulk of Indian support, and;
- Whatever Indian votes BN still receives come from local networks or candidate personalities, not MIC as a party.
Academic analyses of GE12 through GE15 repeatedly show that Indian support shifted dramatically away from MIC and BN and has never returned. In GE15, studies estimate that more than 80% of Indian voters supported Pakatan Harapan instead of BN.
If MIC cannot win in areas with substantial Indian voter concentrations, the very areas where its relevance is supposed to matter, then its claim of representing the Indian community collapses entirely.
Bargaining for Malay majority seats is an admission of weakness
When a communal based party no longer has influence among the very community it claims to represent, what does it do?
MIC does what it has done for more than a decade. It begs for Malay majority seats from Umno.
This has been the party’s mode of survival since 2008. Instead of contesting in Indian populated or urban seats where defeat is almost certain, MIC insists on traditional seats in Johor, Pahang and Melaka, all of which are Malay majority constituencies.
MIC leaders openly lobby Umno for these seats every election cycle, arguing that they deserve them as a BN component party. This behaviour resembles that of a dependent client that needs patronage rather than a partner with genuine electoral strength.
Even with Malay votes carrying them, MIC still struggles. The final outcome in GE15 tells the story plainly.
It contested 10 seats but won only one. For a party that claims to be the voice of a community, this is not a performance. It is an obituary.
The reality of a shrinking base
For decades, MIC leaders proudly claimed that the party had 600,000 “active” members. It was part of the MIC mythology, used to show mass grassroot strength.
However, insiders have long admitted that the number was inflated, duplicated or outdated.
Some current and former MIC officeholders admit privately, and occasionally publicly, that the real active membership is likely below 150,000 today.
This explains the following problems.
- MIC is struggling to mobilise branches.
- Division meetings attract small numbers.
- Many branches have gone inactive.
- The party had to launch a digital membership system.
A party that claims to represent Indians cannot even maintain its own membership rolls. This is a crisis of legitimacy, not merely numbers.
Why MIC is a liability to BN or anyone else
- It brings almost no parliamentary strength. One MP out of 222 is politically insignificant. BN could lose MIC tomorrow without any serious effect on parliamentary composition.
- It no longer commands Indian support. Coalitions include communal parties because they bring votes from that community. MIC no longer offers that.
- It complicates seat negotiations. MIC’s demands for seats, mostly Malay majority, create unnecessary friction within BN. Why allocate seats to a party that cannot deliver them?
- It adds no strategic value to Pakatan Harapan or Perikatan Nasional. If MIC leaves BN, the major question is simple. Why would PH or PN accept them?
What does MIC offer?
No significant voter base. No strategic constituencies. No strong grassroots machinery. Declining membership.
A negative image among Indians. This not an asset. It is political deadweight.
MIC’s repeated threats to leave BN are hollow
MIC president SA Vigneswaran and his deputy S Saravanan have repeatedly used threats of leaving BN as leverage. The resolution at the November 2025 AGM to prepare for an exit from BN reflects more desperation than strength.
A threat is only powerful if the other side fears your exit. BN does not.
Umno and MCA leaders have been polite in public, but privately many believe that BN would actually operate more smoothly without MIC, which complicates negotiations while contributing almost nothing electorally.
The truth is simple: MIC needs BN far more than BN needs MIC.
If MIC walks out of BN, it risks entering the political wilderness, a lonely place without Malay votes to carry its candidates and without Indian votes to validate its existence.
It has to prove to any new coalition that it joins, that it can contest in areas where there are high number of Indian voters and win. And as history has shown, this is next to impossible.
A personal message to Vigneswaran and Saravanan
Stop daydreaming. Stop pretending that MIC is still a force of Indian representation. Stop issuing threats that no one takes seriously.
If MIC believes it has strength, then contest independently. Field candidates in constituencies with significant Indian voter presence. Win those seats without relying on Umno’s machinery.
If you cannot do that, then the conclusion is clear. You have become a spent bullet.
If I were the BN chairman, I would keep the exit door wide open for you. Coalitions must evolve to survive. Carrying MIC today is like dragging a rusty anchor in stormy waters.
Coalitions need assets, not nostalgia
MIC was once relevant. It once delivered real support. It once mattered. Those days are gone.
In 2025, coalitions survive by relying on parties that add the following: votes, seats, machinery, legitimacy, and momentum.
MIC today offers none of these.
Unless MIC undergoes radical reform, rebuilds genuine Indian support, or proves it can win high Indian voter constituencies on its own strength, it will continue drifting into political irrelevance.
And even if MIC suddenly embraces reform, the task of regaining the community’s trust will be an arduous, uphill slog — one unlikely to bear fruit within the political lifetimes of Vigneswaran or Saravanan.
History is written by those who evolve, not by those who cling to old memories.
Ashraf Abdullah was the group managing editor of Media Prima Bhd’s Television Networks.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.