ACA's failure in curbing corruption in Malaysia

Weak Political Will, Political Interference and Skepticism regarding the Benefits.
Even if the determination to tackle corruption is initially strong (usually upon the accession of a new government to power), it often diminishes as the realities of office, the vested interests in the status quo and the pressure of more immediate tasks bear on the actions of government. It is therefore highly advisable from the outset to create an institution that is as politically independent as possible. Interference in the administration of the ACA should be minimal, while the necessary accountability should be ensured.

Lack of Strategy.
Lack of strategy regards, in particular, the traditional reliance on enforcement alone. The understandable reaction to extensive corruption is the criminalization of more offences, and the implementation of severer penalties and stronger investigative powers that erode human rights. Such a strategy ignores established experience that enforcement alone never resolves the problem of corruption, but on the contrary, tends to exacerbate it. Countries tend to deal with corruption exclusively by investigating, prosecuting and sentencing, but they often do not try to prevent corruption by eliminating the opportunities for behaving corruptly. Nor do they try to change people's attitudes towards corruption by building integrity, especially among the youth and new government officials.

Lack of Co-ordination.
A country may recognize that fighting corruption requires more than merely enforcing the laws and may adopt a strategy that involves elements of prevention and public education. However, this strategy will fail if its elements are not advanced together and in a co-ordinated way and therefore do not reinforce each other.

Adequate Laws.
Often the laws against corruption are ineffective because they: (i) are either too complicated and unintelligible, (ii) fail to contain some basic offences, (iii) do not fit in well with existing laws either because they contain duplications or because they are incomplete, or (iv) require evidence which is not sufficient taking into account that corruption is a secretive act and therefore evidence is particularly hard to gather.

Lack of Focus.
The responsibility of fighting corruption is sometimes delegated to a body already charged with other functions. Therefore, not surprisingly, the fight against corruption may not be the most important item in its portfolio. Sometimes an ACA is given additional responsibilities that distract it from its main function. In either case, the result is usually insufficient and ineffective investigation. On the other hand, assigning the entire universe of corruption related offences to a newly established agency might be beyond its capacities. This could then result in a situation of even greater impunity.

Dealing with the Past.
The past is especially a problem in countries that have suffered widespread, systemic corruption for many years. If the government announces a new initiative to launch an ACA to address the problem, public expectation is raised. When the agency opens its doors for business, two things can happen. The new agency may be swamped by information from the public, much of it going back years, that it is unable to handle properly. Due to lack of qualified staff, time and resources, current corruption goes unchecked. Alternatively, resentment from influential sectors of the community against the effective action taken on past misdeeds may increase and the political will to continue the fight may fade. Therefore, it is essential to make a clear decision at the outset on how to deal with the past.