Several days ago, I received an urgent message from a friend inviting me to a seminar on ‘Corruption Prevention in Business Sector 2009’ organized jointly by the MACC, MACC Consultation and Prevention of Corruption Panel and the Business Ethics Institute of Malaysia.
The friend – whose name I need not mention here – is an MACC advisory committee member who knows full well my scathing opinion of the MACC and its work to date. “Come to the seminar as my guest and hear them out” he urged me. “Rome was not built in a day; we must be constructive not destructive”.
Now I have criticized the MACC on several occasions in public speeches as well as in writing, especially in relation to its involvement in the Teoh Beng Hock tragedy. I have also called for the MACC advisory committee members to resign in protest against the death of Teoh when the young man was under MACC custody.
Although some readers may get the impression that I am an inflexible, uncompromising or implacable critic of the MACC, the fact is that I and others that have spoken out against the MACC, want to see it reformed and truly effective in its work mission.
I recognize the great value that a dedicated, fully professional and efficient MACC can bring to the fight against the scourge of corruption which has seeped very deeply into all segments of the society. Hence, my criticisms are not meant to bury the agency; rather they are intended to expose key flaws and weaknesses in the MACC that have prevented it from carrying out its duties under section 7 of the MACC Act 2009.
I and other critics may not be MACC advisory members but our role in identifying the root defects and inadequacies that have marred the MACC’s performance, and in suggesting solutions perhaps may be just as – if not more – useful than that of advisory members.
Hence, my decision – despite the late notice – to attend the seminar and to find out specifically if there had been any new developments that may have taken place in the MACC that would warrant me to change my negative view of the agency.
Deputy Chief Commissioner’s address
I must say that I was very surprised by the welcome speech of the MACC Deputy Chief Commissioner, Dato’ Haji Abu Kassim bin Mohamed. This was not your usual scripted introductory address full of niceties and protocol
He spoke candidly and unusually for a senior civil servant, almost off the cuff, and from the heart, of the many problems and issues that his organization faced, not least of which is the public perception that the MACC has under-performed.
I was struck by the almost evangelical pitch he used in condemning the widespread acceptance of corruption in the society at large. I was also struck by his faith in the government’s commitment to the fight against corruption.
“Believe me, the government wants real reform; it wants change; it wants accountability”. There was also much flag waving by Dato’ Abu Kassim of the MACC’s five committees and 42 members. They are “really independent” and “representing the public’s interests”.
I was struck but I must say that I am not yet persuaded by his rhetoric in the ability of the MACC to do its job without interference from any quarter or to retrieve that lost public confidence in its autonomy and independence.
Restoring public confidence
I had the opportunity during the short Q & A session to express my opinion on what can restore public confidence in the MACC and help to ensure that it is a body of unquestionable integrity and professionalism. In my view (shared by many Malaysians), the fatal flaw of the MACC is that it is not politically neutral.
I stressed to Dato’ Abu Kassim that until this issue of political neutrality is satisfactorily addressed, there will continue to be a lack of confidence with the way in which the MACC investigates complaints, collects evidence and undertakes prosecution.
In my delivery, I also made three suggestions to Dato’ Abu Kassim on how to address the issue of political neutrality.
-
Firstly, that the mission statement of the MACC includes clear wording that the agency will scrupulously ensure and maintain political neutrality in the way it conducts its work.
-
Secondly, that a sixth committee on “safeguarding and ensuring political neutrality” should be established and tasked with the oversight of the political neutrality of the MACC
-
Thirdly, that the MACC reports to Parliament and not to the Prime Minister of the day
Finally, I pointed out that these suggestions would assist MACC staff in their work by helping ensure that they are beyond reproach and not made to suffer on the issue of political bias or selectivity. Implementing the suggestions would also help the government convince the public that it is serious about eradicating corruption.
I was pleasantly surprised at the generally positive response provided by Dato’ Kassim to the suggestions. Although he responded that the proof of the MACC’s political even handedness was already evident in the cases it had taken up, he agreed to raise them with the Prime Minister and the government.
Rallying to the cause
It is important that Dato’ Abu Kassim does not take up the issue of political neutrality of the MACC all alone by himself. If we – through inaction – allow this to happen, the cause will be lost.
I hope that members of the MACC can fully discuss the crucial issue of political neutrality in their coming meetings and see how this can be made the centerpiece of the terms of reference of the agency and the work of the advisory committees.
I have no doubt that the combined voices of the 42 MACC advisory committee members on this issue can bring quick change. The only question is whether they share the same sense of urgency on the matter that I feel.
In addition to the three suggestions I proposed at the seminar, I would like to add a fourth suggestion and that is that a second Deputy Chief Commissioner be added to the existing senior staff to manage and be responsible for the MACC policy on political neutrality.
If this litmus test of political neutrality is not developed and applied, then I fear it may not be possible to protect the dedicated staff of the MACC from becoming pawns or victims of partisan political interests. Worse, it may mean that the MACC may be beyond salvaging.
Latest TI Corruption Perception Ranking
Quite coincidentally, at the same time as the seminar was taking place, Transparency International Malaysia was holding a press conference to announce Malaysia’s position in the TI Corruption Perception Index 2009. In this latest survey, Malaysia’s ranking has plunged to its worst ever ranking in the last decade (see Table below).
Transparency Corruption Perception Index (1 = Best Performing)
| Year | Ranking |
Number of Countries |
| 2009 | 56 | 180 |
| 2008 | 47 | 180 |
| 2007 | 43 | 179 |
| 2006 | 44 | 163 |
| 2005 | 39 | 158 |
| 2004 | 39 | 145 |
| 2003 | 37 | 133 |
| 2002 | 33 | 102 |
| 2001 | 36 | 91 |
| 2000 | 36 | 90 |
Source: http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi
The choice for the MACC is clear: embrace political neutrality in its terms of reference and practice it fully in its work or be seen as a tainted and partisan agency engaged in selective and politically motivated action.
Final Thought
When I sent this draft to my MACC advisory committee friend, he reminded that “a declaration of political neutrality is not the panacea” for all of the MACC’s ills and woes. It is not. However, it is an important – perhaps the most important – requirement for the restoration of legitimacy and integrity to this much maligned agency.
For your info, “Believe me”, “Percayalah”, “Yakinlah” have been used by Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Speaker, Deputy Speaker in the Parliament over the past few weeks. I believe this is part of the public relation’s strategy.
2nd, MACC was not born in January 2009. Its former name ACA have been around for so long (really, LTG and everyone else does not this reminder). You telling me that their main problem is political neutrality? It is indeed a problem. But the whole organisation is rotten to the core.
first change: remove macc’s reporting to the pm. get the macc directly reporting to the parliament or any special committee that is clear of the influences from the executives.
“Believe me, the government wants real reform; it wants change; it wants accountability”.
Yeah, it sure wants change. Look at how it changed the PR state govt in Perak, how it changed Altantoo’s body into dust and how it changed TBH from a lively young man into a corpse.
“the government wants real reform”
This, to me, catches the essence of what appears to be wrong with the MACC. Why the need to mention the government? Put another way, would the MACC reject reform if the government didn’t want it to? Or even – would the MACC prioritise its targets based on what the government wanted?
I think your third point is a good one – for real independence, it seems crucial that the MACC report to Parliament as a whole, or some other body drawn from a representative sample of Malaysians.
The macc, the pdrm, judiciary and the government are all interconnected. Lets assume that macc perform their duty with integrity and political neutrality, how far can their cases go. The pdrm, the AG and judiciary must also perform on the basis of political neutrality, if not all the hard work of the macc will come to zero and it will still reflect that the macc is not independent.
Malaysia For All
GE 13 – Change The Federal Government No matter what, we must ensure that racist umno bn do not regain the power like they had for over the past fifty two years.
Hahahaha didn’t see the other replies until I posted mine – we’re singing in harmony!
‘Believe me..’ or ‘Percayalah…’ are words that even Najib himself says to himself.
It does not mean anything period..Words don’t change anything, wanting don’t change anything. What changes things is actions and consequences. And the bottom line is consequences and actions falls far far short..
BN is a component of 17 parties. Everybody knows who are the other 4 component parties.
The recent news of MACC detaining several UMNO members in Kota Tinggi seems to be some sort of a ‘hangat-hangat tahi ayam’ response to the doubts of MACC’s political neutrality, in being a major factor contributing to the drop in Malaysia’s 2009 Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index ranking.
Why is MACC trying to catch only the ‘small fishes’ in UMNO’s BN while ignoring the ‘big fishes’?
When UMNO’s own discplinary board had admitted that the Malacca CM and the Rembau MP were found to be linked to corruption in the form of money politics, was there any real follow-up by MACC?
There’s a country which has been ranked 24 places higher than Malaysia in the 2009 Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index, and this country has been regarded as a ‘negara haram’ by the Malaysian government, and thus, has no diplomatic & trade relations with it. The police force in that ‘negara haram’ had once investigated and brought charges of corruption against that country’s own prime minister without even needing any form of a separate anti-corruption agency or commission, and without fear or favour. So, it boggles the mind that in what is considered a ‘negara haram’ that such action can be taken, without much problems, against the top-most leader of its government for committing ‘satu perbuatan haram, iaitu rasuah’…
Let’s not be so naive as to even think that MACC is capable of reform. MACC has allowed the TBH case to be dragged on for so long – a strong indication that they want to operate in clandestine mode.
MACC is a murderous institution incapable of serving justice to Malaysians at an even level playing field and must be exterminated!
Sdr Lim, in addition to the three or four suggestions you have made to ensure the effectiveness and neutrality of MACC, may I add two more:
First, the budget for MACC must be approved directly by the Parliament. In other words, MACC do not need to submit the annual budget to the Treasury first. MACC should prepare the annual budget and members of Parliament, either through a select committee or the committee of the whole house shall scrutinise the budget or approve it. Finance is very important. Many agencies are beholden to the Treasury because of that, more so Finance Minister is also the PM.
Second, the selection and promotion of MACC officers must be transparently done. If possible members of Parliament must come up with specific guidelines on the selection and promotion of MACC officers. The appointment authority, the Public Services Commission, must adhere to the guidelines in terms of racial compositions, qualifications and experience. The same principles apply to promotion. If possible, during the initial period experienced officers from other services (even those who have retired) who have impeccable records shall be appointed to fill up the shortage.
by Bigjoe on Saturday, 21 November 2009 – 2:25 pm
‘Believe me..’ or ‘Percayalah…’ are words that even Najib himself says to himself.
It does not mean anything period..Words don’t change anything, wanting don’t change anything. What changes things is actions and consequences. And the bottom line is consequences and actions falls far far short..
On the surface, the Pekan MP’s ‘1 Malaysia’ sloganeering appears admirable enough in promoting racial unity & multi-culturalism.
The man also said that his political party is not racist.
But after that, when some members of his party members made some racist remarks, he tells the rakyat to just ignore them.
Yep, on the surface, he can ask the people to believe & trust him, but below the surface, well, it’s anybody’s guess……
What he really means is: “Percayalah saya, lu ini pendatang dan limpeh tuan”
Did they engage apco international to manufacture all these fake niceties and speeches to hoodwink public opinions on rotten govt. agencies?
They have all the trademark speeches made by the former US presidents. Hmmm… I wonder.
Read my lips – believe me
My dear Dr.Lim,how often have you heard our politicians and leaders been saying “believe me ” ? . For your info,I have known hundreds of people especially Umno/Bn politicians and its cronies who have said such word ended up with themselves rich and famous whereas the country CPI dropped to 56th position as at 2009.
“Although he responded that the proof of the MACC’s political even handedness was already evident in the cases it had taken up, he agreed to raise them with the Prime Minister and the government.”
It is the running to the umno gobermen ever so often that gives people the impression that the macc is under umno’s thumb.
Dear Dr Lim,
Your statement refers : “However, it is an important – perhaps the most important – requirement for the restoration of legitimacy and integrity to this much maligned agency.”
I disagree with your statement that the MACC is a much maligned agency. Do you mean to say that most of the allegations against the MACC are false or untrue?
Cut the crap !!! Change MACC to ICAC……Independent Commission…..or else shut up !!!!!
The MACC needs to take a leaf out of the book of the Israelis in an object lesson of how to be politically neutral. There even a very popular Prime Minister has to be answerable to his misdeeds.
Can this happen in Bolehland where a tainted Prime Minister is hiding behind his “1Malaysia” multi-million-ringgit advertising blitz to burnish his reputation?
Dr Lim,
Your 1st and 2nd suggestions (on MACC’s mission statement and 6th Committee) are Ok though the more important is the 3rd suggestion – that the MACC reports to Parliament and not to the Prime Minister- is the more important.
I have 3 other suggestions based on your premise “in my view (shared by many Malaysians), the fatal flaw of the MACC is that it is not politically neutral.”
The first is that MACC’s prosecution must be independent of the “go ahead” or “no go” from the Attorney General (AG). Section 58 of our MACC Act states that a prosecution for an offence under the MACC Act “shall not be instituted except by or with the consent of the Public Prosecutor(AG)”. The AG is the government’s lawyer, member of cabinet. So how could there be neutrality if it reposes on AG to decide whether to prosecute or not? So Section 58 has to be amended/deleted.
My second suggestion is that things will not improve unless there is a constitutional amendment making the PM’s position one that is directly voted upon by the rakyat. Presently his position in dependent on votes, support and graces of party warlords influencing delegates to vote him to vice president and from there to deputy president and president of the party.
This cannot work where party warlords have vested interests in the present corrupt system and will not support any person evincing a modicum political will to really combat corruption.
The third suggestion – which is even harder to execute – is withdrawal of NEP.
Corruption flourishes more pervasively in a milieu of an interventionist state actively engaging in all aspects of the nation’s economic life under the justification of NEP and generating rents for collection by the favour few connected to those in power dispensing license, contracts and other largesse in quid pro quo exchange for favours, financial or otherwise.
The three aspects I raise – 1. making MACC’s prosecution independent of AG 2. direct election of PM by the people instead of by party warlords, 3. withdrawal of NEP – go to the root of political will, the first prerequsite to combatting political corruption.
Uncle Lim, I am very gratified to note that there is a lot of very healthy cynical reaction to what Dr Lim has said.
In fact, it revived in me the belief that Malaysians have at long, long last woken up from their slumber.
Let me put things this way. The UMNO/BN government is very, very desperate to win back the five states that it has lost in the last GE. Secondly, it is even much more desperate in getting back its historical two-thirds majority!
It will agree to do anything and promise anything to get these two nuggets back.
SO, DON’T EVER LISTEN TO ALL THIS HOGWASH!
ONCE YOU HAVE GIVEN THESE BACK TO THEM, YOU’LL RUE THE DAY YOU WERE BORN!
WHAT IS THERE TO STOP THEM FROM DELETING ALL THESE SO-CALLED PROMISES ONCE THEY HAVE WHAT THEY WANT?
AND, WITH THE TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY, THEY CAN CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE OPPOSITION JUST CANNOT EXIST!!
You all know their performance all these fifty over years, don’t you? Look what it has brought everybody?
Do you still want them to prolong your misery and suffering?
Made in Malaysia MACC trying to equate itself with ICAC of Hong Kong? That is the joke of the century!!!!!!
Nothing is incorruptable when it is appointed by the PM and to be reported to him.It’s okay if PM wanted to appoint a person say to head the MACC but the PM man must go through a parliamentary select committee to verify his integrity and suitablity for the job before he can be confirmed .He should aslo report direct to the select committee,not the PM.I think this is one of the best method to reduce corruption.The american has applied it and it works.Malaysia can try it or maybe PR can do it when it comes to power.
There is fine line between destructive and constructive. M’sia is falling fast in our TI corruption perception ranking, b’coz or MACC!. Our crime rate is sky rocketing, b’coz of our PDRM!. We are at present judiciary standard and public confident, b’coz of our quality judges. We can’t effort to enjoy quality car, thank to proton!. We have something called “broadband” like speed connectivity, thanks to Telekom. The list goes longer as it goes, question : why most of our government agencies felt like performing at the opposite side of their charter? The situation is getting worse year after year to a state, like many Malaysia, I, for one, perceive these agencies are part of problem rather than solution.
MACC has problems, so do other agencies like PDRM, Judiciary, AG and etc.; in fact they never deny that, they could not deny that.. The main problem of these agencies is they do not have the courage and strength to correct these. Look at cases like TBH, Perak state government, Linggam, PI Bala, is not one agency they are facing, more like against the whole government. Let’s not putting much expectation of any real reform; those are only rhetoric slogan and nothing else. Anyhow, expectation is good! That makes you change the government by next GE.
Because this is Malaysia and because this is MACC, political neutrality can only happened if M’sia achieves neutrality in political power. Political neutrality can only be achieved when both political masters have equal power and opportunity to lead. Other than changing the current regime there will be no reform. In fact the current regime is asking us to help them reform, we have to vote current regime out, in order for MACC and other government agencies to achieve political neutrality and reform.
Like what happened in Penang last GE12, the ex-CM is urging penangites to “zhai zhuan bian” which simply means “made another change” that’s why we get DAP to lead the state government. We are Malaysia, we are stupid, we follow what the government say, let’s reform the government. So, you really don’t know which is destructive and which is constructive!.
When your are truthful .you need not fear to tell the truth…even the devil deciples.. invite you to a Forum.
I am sure..agree to disagree will be played again.
Agreeing to the 3 points…..it with take months..even years to change.
If Najib is proven weak…the changes will be swift…as MACC do play politics..knowing next boss maybe LKS….hahahahahahaha.
The biggest flaw of MACC is letting Umno hijack its purpose. It has now become another political tool of Umno, just like the judiciary, police, NRD(which churned out a lot of phantom voters)..
“Believe me, the government wants real reform; it wants change; it wants accountability”.
Orang Rojak is absolutely correct. This comment by the MACC No. 2 betrayed his true political inclinations. Perhaps Dr Lim was seduced by Dato’ Abu Kassim’s honeyed words that he missed the implications of these words, which clearly proves where the biaseness of the MACC lies. If Dato Abu Kassim is sincere in MACC’s neutrality he would have said “Believe me, MACC wants real reform,……”
Until the day I see those huge corrupted sharks from the BN or connected to them are actually behind bars, all these are mere rhetoric. I would not even give the time of the day, let alone believe them.
1. “Rome was not built in a day; we must be constructive not destructive”.
To qualify what this “Advisory Committee” said, he better present what have been “Constructive” by ACA and MACC and what have been destructive by the Public or other Parties.
2. After many abuse or much lacking of actions by ACA and MACC, especially the TBJ case, no one had seen any investigation report by those Advisory Committee. They have performed NOTHING!! They. themselves, are destructive!!
PERSONALLY, I DO NOT SEE HE SHOULD HAVE THE FACE TO COMMENT OTHERS!!
The problems with the Malaysia is there are TOO TOO MUCH of these kind of “careered” Red Herring!! Wasting of Public Money, blocking normal operations, doing lip-service only!
A report to ACA some years ago on the flattening of Condo expense by the MC, the reply was it is regarded as “Misappropriation”, report to the Police!”
CODE OF PRACTICE or RULES OF PROCEEDING, had never been the backbone of this type of so called “Disciplinary Force”! Same goes go for the majority of the Government!
HOW CAN THEY RUN THE GOVERNMENT??
————————————–
A complaint was made to the Court with copy to the Chief Judge. The Court reply to the Chief Judge instead of the Complainant!! But, without giving anything that could answer any point of the complaint!!
The Chief Judge office replied the Complainant to refer to the reply from the Court!!
DO THEY KNOW WHAT IS ADMINISTRATION AND WHAT SORT OF DUTIES THEY HAVE TO PERFORMED?
Administration by Puffing??????