‘Loud in S’wak, quiet in Putrajaya’: SUPP slams DAP’s ‘check and balance’ calls as political theatre

“Loud in Sarawak, Quiet in Putrajaya”

In a statement released on Aug 24, SUPP Kuching Youth argued that DAP’s repeated demands for checks and balances in Sarawak are nothing more than a “political trap” designed to divert public attention from the party’s own record, principles, and credibility. The central accusation is one of glaring inconsistency: DAP speaks loudly about accountability in Sarawak but falls silent on sensitive federal issues where it is part of the government.

The statement questioned the party’s integrity, stating that genuine checks and balances must “begin with the government one is part of, not only with political opponents”. If DAP is truly concerned about the people’s burdens, SUPP argued, it should explain what it has done at the federal level to seek safeguards and relief measures.

The ‘Malayan Party’ Narrative

SUPP also reinforced its narrative that DAP remains fundamentally a Peninsular Malaysian party whose priorities do not necessarily reflect Sarawak’s interests. The party pointed to DAP’s recent electoral wipeouts in Sabah, Johor, and Negeri Sembilan as evidence that voters have seen through its rhetoric. “This is not accidental. It is a warning from the people. Voters have seen that DAP speaks loudly about reform outside government but goes quiet in power. People are tired of empty talk without real results,” the statement read.

The Lim Guan Eng “Bankruptcy” Remark

Perhaps the most pointed critique in SUPP’s statement referenced DAP national advisor Lim Guan Eng’s 2019 prediction that Sarawak would go bankrupt within three years under GPS rule. SUPP argued that Sarawak DAP echoed this claim but remained silent when Lim later apologised. “Sarawak did not go bankrupt. Instead, Sarawak has maintained sound finances, expanded its revenue base, implemented major infrastructure projects, and secured greater development autonomy,” the party said.

SUPP concluded that Sarawakians still remember who once talked down the state, questioning how DAP can now ask Sarawakians to believe it is here to build Sarawak. The party reiterated that while GPS is not afraid of scrutiny or criticism, such scrutiny must be factual, constructive, and beneficial to the people rather than reduced to “political noise without workable solutions”.

Contradiction with Federal Leadership

The statement added that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has repeatedly praised Sarawak’s development under Premier Abang Johari. “If even Pakatan Harapan’s top leadership can recognise GPS’ performance, DAP’s attempt to package itself as the opposition in Sarawak is clearly contradictory,” SUPP argued. The party warned that when DAP keeps opposing in Sarawak while its own national leadership praises the state’s direction, people will see it as “election theatre” rather than a sincere effort to build Sarawak.

Context and Background

The political spat is the latest in a series of exchanges between SUPP and DAP in the lead-up to the upcoming Sarawak state election. This specific criticism aligns with comments made by SUPP leaders in recent months:

• Earlier in August, SUPP Youth secretary Augustine Chou accused DAP’s youth wing of “double standards” over its demand for equal constituency development funds for opposition representatives.

• In May, Kota Sentosa assemblyman Wilfred Yap (GPS-SUPP) urged DAP to “check yourself before you check others,” accusing the opposition of opposing for the sake of opposing rather than practising democratic maturity.

• In April, SUPP Kuching Youth chief Nicholas Wung declared that DAP’s long-used slogans of “checks and balances” and “defending democracy” were no longer relevant in Sarawak.

• SUPP has also labelled DAP a “Malayan party”, arguing that giving it more seats would only expand the influence of Peninsular Malaysian parties in the State Legislative Assembly.

DAP leaders have pushed back against these criticisms, defending their opposition role and arguing that a functioning democracy requires a credible opposition to provide checks and balances. Sarawak DAP chairman Chong Chieng Jen has rejected SUPP’s calls to shut the party out of the state legislature, while state DAP leaders have previously slammed SUPP president Datuk Amar Dr Sim Kui Hian’s call to give the party “zero seats” in the next election.

Conclusion

As the Sarawak state election approaches, the clash between SUPP and DAP over the meaning and legitimacy of “checks and balances” is likely to intensify. SUPP’s argument that DAP is engaging in “political theatre” by being loud in Sarawak but quiet in Putrajaya taps into a broader narrative that seeks to frame DAP as a Peninsular-centred party out of touch with Sarawak’s interests. DAP, in turn, continues to defend its role as a necessary opposition voice in the state. For now, the debate highlights the deep political divisions that will shape the coming electoral contest.