VIDEO | 2:56 min

Public servants with ostentatious wealth beyond their means may find themselves on the wrong side of the law if the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)’s proposal is tabled and accepted into the MACC Act.

According to MACC senior deputy director of investigation Han Chee Rull, the proposal is in line with the anti-corruption law in Hong Kong which makes it an offence for a public officer to live beyond his means.

The MACC has also proposed a change to the law to make negligence by a public officer resulting in wastage of public funds, as is the case in the Auditor-General’s Reports, an offence.

“In Hong Kong, one does not need to show an offence if a public officer maintains a standard of living commensurate with known sources of income.

“If he is unable to give a satisfactory to court, it is an offence ,and the MACC is trying to have this provision in law,” he said last night.

This could be in the package of amendments the government may be tabling in the March sitting, anticipated by Pakatan Rakyat.

Speaking at a Malaysiakini-organised forum on power and corruption, Han, however, said he is personally concerned about what will happen if this provision goes into law.

“Knowing the Malaysian scenario, we don’t want people to come to MACC’s office and say ‘That guy has five Mercedes Benz cars’.

“We may have to investigate cases like this, but that’s my personal view, not MACC’s,” he said.

Bad experience in asset declaration

As it stands, he said, the MACC cannot just ask someone to declare his assets on the basis of extreme wealth without “reason to believe” an offence was committed.

“An officer of the rank of commissioner in the MACC has to have reason to believe (an offence was committed) based on an investigation carried out, that a property acquired or held is in connection with the offence.

“Then we can get that person to do a declaration,” he said, stressing the wording in the law.

However, he said, the MACC is extremely careful in this matter due to the “bad experience” of being “whacked in court” when it compelled asset declaration in the case of lawyer Rosli Dahlan and former top cop Ramli Yusuff.

“The court took the view that it is wrong to get people to declare assets if it cannot be shown that an offence was committed.

“The deputy public prosecutor was grilled in court on why a notice was given out when investigation is ongoing and there is no documentary proof that the asset acquired is in connection with an offence.

“The law needs to be amended,” he said at the forum which followed the launch of the Centre to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4).

‘Don’t fight the fireman’

He was responding to former electoral reform NGO Bersih chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan, who questioned why the MACC is not compelling asset declarations in high-profile cases.

Commenting on Han’s presentation, Ambiga (left) also sought to find out if the MACC was in any way “thwarted” by the government in its efforts to curb corruption.

“I feel that (the MACC) is like a good football team, which does all its moves excellently but doesn’t score any goals. The goal is eradication of corruption.

“If you are thwarted by government or political leaders, or if there is any interference, we will stand by you. But you need to tell us.

“I don’t see the political will and that is your biggest hurdle, but you have to admit the hurdle,” she said.

To this, Han said that security of tenure of the MACC chief and officers is an important issue which it hopes to solve through a constitutional amendment.

That is to amend the constitution to elevate the commissioner to the same position as a federal judge, and for MACC to have the power to hire and fire its officers in its own service commission.

He added that civil society must also not fight MACC as it would be like “fighting the fireman but trying to put out the fire”.

“Any change to the federal constitution requires support of members of both sides (of the Dewan Rakyat) and I hope C4 can take up this issue,” he said.