By Azizan H Morshidi
KOTA KINABALU: The Bernama feature “As AI Rushes In, Malaysia Races to Save Jobs, Human Connection” offers a compelling overview of how rapid automation is reshaping work and society at the national level. Its warning that up to 92 percent of clerical and administrative positions are vulnerable to generative AI captures the scale of potential disruption, while its case study of a major bank’s misstep with a voice-bot underscores the perils of displacing human judgment.
Applied to Sabah’s imminent 17th State Election, these lessons resonate deeply: the same technologies that threaten routine jobs also possess the power to either fortify or fracture democratic engagement, depending on how stakeholders choose to deploy them.
Sabah’s economy and public administration are still heavily reliant on manual processes and in-person interactions. Many district offices use paper-based record-keeping, and intermittent broadband coverage in rural areas has slowed digital uptake. While this infrastructural lag might temporarily shield local workers from wholesale automation of clerical tasks, it also cements a growing digital divide. In urban centres like Kota Kinabalu and Sandakan, private-sector employers are already experimenting with AI chatbots for customer service, yet these systems often falter when confronted even with popular Sabahan dialects such as Kadazandusun or Bajau.
The bank example from the Bernama article is instructive: without investing in nuanced language models and human oversight, automated interfaces frustrate users and erode trust, an outcome equally damaging during an election when citizens seek clear communication from both government agencies and political candidates.
Beyond the risk of job displacement, AI-driven manipulation presents an acute threat to the integrity of PRN17. Deepfake videos have surfaced on messaging apps, falsely depicting infrastructure projects in Sabah as non-functional, thereby inflaming public frustration over supply disruptions. Social-media algorithms, by curating content based on previous interactions, can inadvertently confine young voters to politically homogeneous echo chambers. This echo-chamber effect magnifies sensationalist claims—whether about infrastructure failures or exaggerated manifestos, while muting fact-based discourse. In an election where youth turnout could tip the balance, such distortions risk alienating first-time voters or, worse, swaying them on the basis of fabricated evidence.
Yet the Bernama analysis did more than highlight perils; it outlined a blueprint for human-centred automation that Sabahan stakeholders may embrace. AI should be leveraged to amplify human strengths, contextual judgment, empathy, cultural knowledge, rather than replace them. For instance, predictive-analytics tools can help state engineers forecast drought risks and optimize water allocation, but human technicians are indispensable for interpreting sensor data in light of local terrain and community needs. Similarly, natural-language processing can translate election guidelines into Sabahan dialects, widening civic participation, but human moderators must verify translations to prevent misunderstanding.
The urgency of upskilling cannot be overstated. Young Sabahan voters are digitally savvy, often consuming political news and campaign materials online. However, their media-literacy skills, particularly the ability to distinguish deepfakes from authentic footage, remain underdeveloped. If Sabah’s youth are to become true stewards of democracy instead of passive data consumers, the state education system must integrate digital-citizenship modules that cover AI ethics, fact-checking techniques, and the science behind algorithmic recommendations. Community colleges and religious study centres in Tawau, Beaufort, and the Interior should host practical workshops where participants examine manipulated media, learn to use open-source verification tools, and discuss the civic implications of unchecked misinformation.
Small and medium enterprises in Sabah are another focal point. Many shopkeepers and agribusiness operators still rely on cash transactions and manual ledgers. Bernama’s survey of nationwide corporate hesitancy, rooted in cost concerns, technical inexperience, and fear of complex deployment, mirrors reality here. To prevent Sabah’s SMEs from falling irreversibly behind, the state government, in partnership with industry associations, must roll out mobile AI-literacy labs. These units would travel to remote communities, offering hands-on training in basic AI tools for inventory management, customer-relationship tracking, and crop forecasting. By bundling these sessions with micro-financing advice, Sabah can stimulate grassroots innovation while building resilience against both economic and informational shocks.
Regulators and digital-platform operators bear a shared responsibility to protect election integrity. The federal election commission’s recent collaboration with social-media companies to take down false election-date posters sets a positive precedent. In Sabah, this effort must be expanded: local research centres and university laboratories should install AI-powered monitoring systems that flag suspicious content in real time. These systems can identify coordinated inauthentic behaviour such as multiple accounts posting the same deepfake, while human analysts evaluate context and escalate confirmed threats. Simultaneously, regulators need to develop clear guidelines on political advertising algorithms, mandating transparency in how campaign messages are targeted to specific demographic groups.
Political parties and candidates themselves have an opportunity to set a higher standard for digital campaigning in PRN17. A public‐pledge initiative could require each candidate to commit to zero tolerance for AI-generated misinformation and to disclose any use of automated tools in their outreach. Those candidates who harness AI for legitimate innovation such as localized chatbots that answer voter queries on polling logistics or automated platforms that gather constituent feedback on infrastructure priorities, should be recognized and celebrated. Embedding responsible-AI clauses in party manifestos will not only build public trust but also signal to voters that tomorrow’s leadership values both technological progress and ethical restraint.
Civil society organizations, from youth councils to interfaith coalitions, have a vital role in bridging divides through technology. Sabah’s communal rice-planting ceremonies and traditional handicraft workshops exemplify the state’s cultural richness, networks of reciprocity and trust that must be preserved in the digital realm. Public hackathons can channel this communal spirit by inviting Sabahan teams to co-create AI applications that promote tourism, streamline fishery supply chains, or map rural heritage sites. These events do more than generate code: they foster inter-ethnic collaboration and surface solutions grounded in lived experience, ensuring that AI supports inclusive prosperity rather than exacerbating inequality.
For Sabah’s youth, the stakes could not be higher. As PRN17 approaches on the heels of Malaysia Day 2025, a moment to celebrate national unity and collective advancement, young voters stand at the crossroads of technology and democracy. They can either succumb to manipulated narratives that breed cynicism or rise as digital champions who demand transparent governance and equitable development. Cultivating this second path requires sustained mentorship from university innovators, local entrepreneurs, and civil-society mentors who can model ethical use of AI in campaign strategy and public service delivery.
By weaving together these elements, human-centred automation, targeted upskilling, robust regulation, ethical campaigning, and community-driven innovation, Sabah can embody the Bernama article’s core thesis: that technology’s true promise lies not in supplanting human connection but in magnifying it. The state’s unique linguistic diversity, patchwork of rural and urban communities, and vibrant youth culture give it a comparative advantage: a living laboratory for demonstrating how AI, guided by cultural nuance and democratic principles, can accelerate shared prosperity.
As voters head to the polls for PRN17, they are not merely casting ballots on infrastructure plans or party platforms; they are choosing how Sabah will navigate the 21st-century challenges of automation, misinformation, and digital inclusion. The Bernama analysis, when adapted to this context, offers both a sobering caution and an inspiring roadmap. It is now up to Sabah’s citizens, leaders, educators, and entrepreneurs to decide whether AI will become a wedge that divides or a bridge that unites, whether our island state will emerge fragmented by technocratic fear or strengthened by a collective commitment to human dignity and mutual progress. In the balance lies not only the outcome of an election but the future shape of democracy and opportunity in East Malaysia.
