Readers' expectations were high indeed when attracted to the Star's headline 'ACA opens up' with subtitle 'Agency adopts three measures in response to public concern for transparency'.

That excitement soon turned into disappointment when they found out that the so-called transparency measures were merely confined to the anti-corruption agency's willingness to inform complainants on the status of the cases during the investigation stage.

This new move is no doubt an improvement over the past when such information is withheld until the case is brought to court, but it is irrelevant to the factors that make ACA a miserable flop as a corruption-fighting body.

In this country, ACA is generally seen not only as an ineffective corruption-fighter, but worse, as a sanctuary that provides shelter to scandalised top political leaders from being hounded by critics. One only needs to observe the haste and enthusiasm with which such leaders have opted to be investigated by ACA or police to sense such delicate role played by the latter.

Once landed in the lap of ACA or police, the so-called 'investigations' will drag on for many years without conclusion, or terminated after a long lapse with a terse announcement that the case is closed due to "insufficient evidence".

There are numerous such cases. Just to name a few handy examples:

On-going cases:

  • Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad - named by former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim as involved in the RM10 billion Perwaja Steel scandal. In Anwar's police report dated July 22, 1999, Mahathir was alleged to be in direct control of then CEO whose questionable management was blamed for this massive fiasco. ACA investigations are still on-going and no one has been charged in spite of seven long years of 'investigations'.


  • Former transport minister Ling Liong Sik - involving in his young son's corporate acquisition spree that amounted to over a billion ringgit several years ago. Reported by former opposition leader Lim Kit Siang for investigations some six years ago. No progress of this case has been reported.
  • Minister of information Khalil Yacob - involving in alleged improprieties in the administration of timber concessions while he was menteri besar of Pahang several years ago. No progress of this case has been reported.

Concluded cases:

  • Minister of International Trade and Industry Rafidah Aziz - corruption case recently closed due to "insufficient evidence, in spite of the attorney-general's decision several years ago to proceed with prosecution.


  • Former Melaka chief minister Rahim Thamby Chik - ditto.
Over the years, ACA has only netted small fry, not the big fishes. This failure to tackle corruption at the higher echelons of power has rendered the organistion a write-off as far as the battle to eradicate corruption is concerned, for the obvious way to win the battle is to fight top-down, not down-top.

If the top leaders are seen to be corrupted and immune from prosecution, the political leadership will have lost the moral authority to instill discipline and fear in the entire government administration. And no amount of dressing on the corruption-busting agency will do much good to stop the rot from spreading. This, in a nutshell, is the sad scenario in this country.

Corruption is not an evil that cannot be eradicated. Hong Kong in the 60s and 70s was mired in corruption and red tapes, hindering its economic spurt. But the subsequent establishment of an anti-corruption body that bypassed the Hong Kong governor and answered directly to London has been instrumental in wiping out this vice and turning Hong Kong into one of the best administered places in this region.

So, too has Singapore successfully rid the city-state of corruption that was once rampant, under a squeaky-clean political leadership. We all know too well how these two societies have subsequently prospered and excelled to become the envy of the world, in spite of the complete lack of natural resources and high densities of populations.

In the case of Hong Kong, the turning point of its fight against corruption came when the control of operation was re-routed to London instead of the local colonial administration, thus avoiding improper patronage by the local head of administration. And in Singapore's case, such success would not have been possible if its top political leadership had not remained impeccably clean.

Turning now to Malaysia, what must we do to wipe out corruption? The answer lies in the removal of two major bottlenecks.

First, make the ACA report to parliament instead of the prime minister. The necessity of making this change is amply demonstrated in the Perwaja case, where the prime minister himself was alleged to have been improperly involved in the scandal-ridden management that caused the massive losses.

The prime minister's dual role as a subject of investigations while remaining as the cabinet minister in charge of ACA makes it impossible for him to act impartially. This conflict of interests is widely perceived as the underlying cause for ACA's futile chase for Perwaja's elusive criminals for the past seven years.

Viewing such dismal record of ACA, it is an inescapable conclusion that ACA must be made a truly independent body, responsible only to parliament, if it were to fulfill its mission to clean up the executive.

Second, prosecution power must be vested with ACA, not with the attorney-general. The present legislation which gives the AG sole and absolute discretion to prosecute a corruption case has been a major stumbling block to many a prosecution from reaching court, particularly where high power political leaders are involved.

In fact the AG's Chambers has been much criticised in the past for practicing selective prosecution, and its role vis-a-vis the corruption cases has been seen as the final sieve to prevent cases deemed politically undesirable for prosecution from going to court. The continued existence of such legislation depriving ACA prosecution power will undoubtedly be a major demoralising factor to ACA while rendering the latter a toothless buster.

It is therefore pointless to make ACA reporting to parliament, unless it is also given the power to prosecute. These twin amendments to our legislation must take place hand in hand if the ACA is to be converted from its present lame duck status to one of credibility and power.

Meanwhile, any measure short of these, such as the current "transparency measures" may be useful for political propaganda purpose, but will not advance the cause of purging the scourge of corruption.