The Constitutional Basis of Deputy Ministers

In a recent podcast episode, Dato’ Seri Mohd Rafizi bin Ramli (“RR“), the former Member of Parliament for Pandan and Minister of Economy, said the following in the Malay language:

“Contohnya kan di peringkat Persekutuan kan, Perlembagaan yang ada hanyalah untuk jawatan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri-Menteri. Jadi, contohnya, Timbalan Menteri hatta Timbalan Perdana Menteri sendiri sebenarnya tidak mempunyai sebarang punca kuasa di sisi undang-undang.

…

[Timbalan Menteri] tiada punca kuasa atas kertas.” (RR 00:18:11-00:18:50)[1] [“Impugned Statement“]

The Impugned Statement can be loosely translated into English as follows:

“For example, at the Federal level, the Constitution only provides for the position of Prime Minister and Ministers. So, for example, a Deputy Minister, even the Deputy Prime Minister himself, actually has no source of legal power/authority whatsoever.

…

[The Deputy Minister] has no source of power on paper.”

With all due respect to RR, the Impugned Statement is, in substance, constitutionally incorrect.

Article 43A of the Federal Constitution (“FC“) was introduced via Section 6 of the Constitutional (Amendment) Act 1960[2] which came into force on 31st May 1960.

Article 43A of the FC constitutionalised the office of “Assistant Ministers”.

The term “Assistant Ministers” in Article 43A of the FC was replaced by the term “Deputy Ministers” via Section 10 of the Constitutional (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1971[3] which came into force on 24th March 1971.

Article 43A of the FC, in its present form, reads as follows:

“(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may on the advice of the Prime Minister appoint Deputy Ministers from among the members of either House of Parliament; but if an appointment is made while Parliament is dissolved a person who was a member of the last House of Representatives may be appointed but shall not hold office after the beginning of the next session of Parliament unless he is a member either of that House or of the Senate.

(2) Deputy Ministers shall assist Ministers in the discharge of their duties and functions, and for such purpose shall have all the powers of Ministers.

(3) The provisions of Clauses (5) and (6) of Article 43 shall apply to Deputy Ministers as they apply to Ministers.

(4) Parliament shall by law make provision for the remuneration of Deputy Ministers.” [Bold and underline mine]

In addition, Article 160(2) of the FC defines a “member of the administration” as, “in relation to the Federation, a person holding office as Minister, Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Secretary or Political Secretary and, in relation to a State, a person holding a corresponding office in the State or holding office as member (other than an official member) of the Executive Council”. (Bold and underline mine)

The express inclusion of “Deputy Minister” within the definition of “member of the administration” under Article 160(2) of the FC further reinforces the position that the office of Deputy Minister is one that is constitutionally recognised and defined, rather than one devoid of any source of legal power/authority.

Having in mind the above, contrary to RR’s contention in the Impugned Statement, the office of “Deputy Ministers” has a source of legal power/authority on paper.

Notwithstanding the above, the Impugned Statement is not entirely incorrect. RR’s contention in the Impugned Statement that the office of “Deputy Prime Minister” is not expressly provided for in the FC is constitutionally accurate.

[1] Rafizi bin Ramli, Mohd. “Isu Pelaburan eFishery, Lama Mana Kerajaan MADANI Akan Bertahan? | YBM #56.” YouTube, 24 July 2026, https://youtu.be/nXMJ_FxwfjM?si=kdAr9X2BBIkEffGu.

[2] Act 10/1960.

[3] Act A31.