IJM Corporation Berhad, once a hallmark of Malaysian engineering ambition, is making aggressive moves in the United Kingdom with billion-ringgit investments across London’s property and infrastructure landscape. Yet, while these projects are wrapped in the rhetoric of global vision and innovation, they come against the backdrop of domestic controversy, questionable corporate governance, and significant shareholder losses.
At the heart of the concern lies this contradiction: How does a company under scrutiny in Malaysia for alleged corrupt procurement practices justify expanding into one of the world’s most regulated markets — the UK — without addressing its own unresolved baggage?
The Grand Designs: IJM’s UK Portfolio
IJM’s ventures in Britain appear ambitious — even impressive — on paper:
1. Royal Mint Gardens, London
A technically complex residential project straddling live railway lines.
Phase 1 completed; Phase 2 adds a 15-storey aparthotel and more residences.
2. 25 Finsbury Circus
Acquired in March 2025 for £72.5m; currently undergoing a £150m ESG-led refurbishment to attract high-end tenants in London’s financial heart.
3. JRL Group Holdings Ltd (50% stake)
Proposed £50m investment in a UK construction firm that posted over £80m in losses over two years, raising serious questions about due diligence.
4. Partnership with Network Rail
Co-developing eight urban sites across central London with a combined gross development value of £3bn+.
The risk? Urban regeneration often faces delays, inflated budgets, and political red tape — even in mature markets.
The Risks Lurking Beneath the Surface
While IJM claims these moves signal its emergence as a global infrastructure player, several red flags deserve closer attention.
- Financial Exposure and Dubious Partnerships
JRL Group’s volatile earnings and historic losses make it a questionable bet. If JRL falters again, IJM faces the very real possibility of impairments — potentially hundreds of millions in ringgit losses.
- Oversight, Transparency, and Governance
Stakeholders are left wondering:
• Has IJM adequately stress-tested its balance sheet for UK cost overruns?
• Are ESG commitments genuine, or just packaging?
• Who is monitoring these deals?
In the UK, where regulatory oversight is unforgiving, any deviation from ethical standards will be swiftly punished.
- Reputational Drag from Malaysia
Back home, IJM’s name has surfaced in investigations linked to former Prime Minister Ismail Sabri’s administration, particularly regarding non-transparent tenders and political project awards.
Though no criminal charges have been levelled, the stigma of association with corruption is already damaging. Investors aren’t waiting for convictions — they’ve responded with their wallets.
The Numbers Don’t Lie: Shareholder Confidence Shaken
Since the resurgence of these corruption allegations in Malaysia, IJM’s share price has dropped by 15%, wiping hundreds of millions off its market capitalisation. Institutional investors have reportedly begun trimming their positions, citing “unquantifiable governance risks” and a lack of clarity from the board.
This erosion of trust matters — especially for a company that wants to operate in jurisdictions like the UK, where public perception, corporate integrity, and investor transparency are non-negotiable.
International Ambition Meets Domestic Disrepair
IJM’s move into the UK may be about market diversification, but to many, it looks more like a reputation laundering exercise. Prestigious London addresses and joint ventures with British institutions may polish the brand — but they won’t erase what the company has failed to resolve at home.
If IJM hopes to be taken seriously as a global player, it must do more than build buildings. It must build trust.
And that begins with answering one uncomfortable question:
Why should we believe you’re doing things differently in the UK, when you’ve never truly accounted for how you operated in Malaysia?
