G25, a group of concerned citizens, has issued several statements on moderation in
Islam and the transparency and integrity of the system of governance in Malaysia. We
believe both are important issues for upholding the image of Malaysia as a progressive
country which respects the constitutional rights of the people and their expectations for
justice in the administration of law and order.
G25 has issued statements on the importance of sustaining strong institutions which
are allowed to undertake their functions independent of political interference. In this
context, the appointment of the Chief Commissioner of MACC, in our view, is a matter
of significant national interest and whoever is appointed must meet public expectations
that the nominee can do his or her job as a professional. Meeting this expectation is
even more critical given recent developments affecting MACC.
It is in the public domain domestically and internationally that Malaysia is losing ground
on sustaining its strong institutions, a position Malaysia was seen as a leader. We can
redress this perception in the appointment of the Chief Commissioner of MACC, to be a
person, not only highly qualified, but able to exercise integrity and manage the
operations of MACC with a high degree of independence and accountability in
administering all the powers accorded to MACC by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption
Commission Act 2009.
In the immediate term, G25 would like to support the proposal by IDEAS that the
government appoints an internal candidate who can provide the continuity to
complete the changes being implemented in the MACC to make it a more effective
agency and fulfil its mandate of an independent and accountable anti-corruption
agency.
Relative to the region, Malaysia is lagging behind, having deteriorated
significantly on the measures of corruption indices. In the current environment of
uncertainty, an internal appointment can help restore some level of confidence. The
public and investor expectations in the case of MACC Chief Commissioner are not
different from what they expect of the Governor of Bank Negara Malaysia.
In the medium-term, G25 proposes that the government put in place a more open and
transparent selection process for leadership in key agencies, including the MACC. This
process should be based on best practices in the developed world and now adopted
by emerging economies, whereby key appointments are made in a public manner
through convening a Parliamentary Select Committee with terms of reference to
scrutinise the suitability of the candidates nominated for the job. During the select
committee hearings, the Members of Parliament, as committee members representing
the voice of the people, will examine whether the government is justified in choosing
the most qualified persons based on criteria that is published.
The candidates shortlisted and given to the Parliamentary Committee for selection shall include both
internal candidates in the MACC as well candidates outside the agency. Members of the
public including professional and civil society organisations which have specific
objections will be allowed to make their presentations to the Parliamentary Select
Committee.
It is time for Malaysia to adopt this consultative and open process of making
appointments to top positions in the civil administration in view of the need to get a
buy-in from the public. Gaining public confidence that the candidate is a professional
who can be depended upon to lead key agencies like the MACC without fear and
favour in enforcing the law, is most important for providing legitimacy to the
appointment.
Adopting this open process will make Malaysia on par with regional countries like
Indonesia, where corruption had been a major factor in slowing down economic
development. The changes in the Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi, KPK (Corruption
Eradication Commission) and appointment of its Chief Commissioner by a
Parliamentary Committee and approved by the President have helped improve
Indonesia’s ranking in the global measurement of corruption indices. It has also
contributed to enhancing investor confidence in the long-term economic potential of
Indonesia (Indonesia now receives the largest share of ASEAN inward investments in
IH 2015, at 31% of total FDI into ASEAN).
It is necessary for G25 to state that there has been an erosion of confidence in recent
years on the calibre of top officials and their professionalism in handling crisis
situations involving race and religion, in managing scandalous cases involving public
finance and corporate frauds and in responding to the allegations of cronyism,
favouritism and official cover-ups. Together with all the secrecy rules to deny public
access to information, there is a strong impression locally and internationally that there
is discrimination and selectivity in the administration of law and order in Malaysia. This
is not conducive to the investment climate because investors today are showing more
concern for transparency in government than they used to. Similarly, our own public
expect their government to take into consideration their concern when making pivotal
decisions on crucial appointments because they are more worried than before about
the quality of government officials.
We believe that it is crucial that the government take concrete steps to restore the good
name of Malaysia as a well administered country. One immediate step which can
redeem our credibility is to empower parliament with a greater oversight function, such
as the establishment of a select committee to deliberate on the quality of the candidate
proposed for key positions.