MACC: Biting the political neutrality bullet — Dr Lim Teck Ghee
NOV 21 — Several days ago, I received an urgent message from a friend inviting me to a seminar on “Corruption Prevention in Business Sector 2009” organised 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 criticised 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 recognise 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, Datuk 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 organisation faced, not least of which is the public perception that the MACC has underperformed.
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 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 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 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 Abu 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 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 centrepiece 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 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. — cpiasia
MI
21/11/09
NOV 21 — Several days ago, I received an urgent message from a friend inviting me to a seminar on “Corruption Prevention in Business Sector 2009” organised 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 criticised 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 recognise 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, Datuk 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 organisation faced, not least of which is the public perception that the MACC has underperformed.
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 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 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 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 Abu 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 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 centrepiece 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 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. — cpiasia
MI
21/11/09
No comments:
Post a Comment