When the Anti-Corruption Agency was first set up in the aftermath of the May 13 riots, it had so much power that its first director, Harun Hashim, who went on to retire as a Federal Court judge, could send two state mentris besar - of Perak and Terengganu - packing. Another mentri besar - of Selangor was jailed after his conviction for corruption a few years later.

Numerous officials and politicians were warned off. The fear of its reach was enough for all and sundry - civil servants, politicians, the public - to be on their guard.

The ACA then had all the powers it needed. But as time went on, its powers were progressively reduced and its independence circumscribed that it is there to tell the world it exists but little else. It has lost its powers of independent prosecution, and the Attorney-General's Chambers often second guesses it.

In the intervening years, corruption became a staple of public life. This was enhanced by the gradual defanging of the ACA's powers of investigation and prosecution. As the evidence of corruption mounted, the ability to investigate suspected cases was curtailed.

So, while it can find evidence of corruption, the decision to prosecute is not legal but political. The ACA is within the purview of the Prime Minister, and his opposition is fatal to a prosecution. Otherwise, how could it be that the ACA has investigated the high and mighty of the land - cabinet ministers, chief justices, army chiefs, secretary-generals - and not one case come to court? One did, of course, but that was politically motivated, and it was not the clean victory over corruption the authorities had in mind.

Patchy record

When the ACA's new director-general, Ahmad Zaki Husin, wants to amend the law to give it powers to act against civil servants living beyond their means, he revealed more than he should have - the ACA is toothless.

He says the ACA has no power to investigate civil servants who live beyond their means except to ask them to declare their assets. They could only, he says, if they are investigated for graft. This is why everyone investigated can tell the public, untruthfully, he or she has been found to be a model of probity.

The ACA has a poor record. Besides prosecuting the odd policeman or the lowly civil servant for bribe-taking, its record is patchy. In the 30 years it has been around, all its major successes were in the early days, when it had the power. Since then, it is reduced to being used as a threat against those the establishment does not favour.

It has, for instance, kept quiet about the numerous reports the jailed former deputy prime minister, Anwar Ibrahim, revealed about corruption in high places. They were fully documented, but the ACA did nothing. It is not without reason. Every allegation was against a sitting cabinet minister and others equally high in the political world.

Ultimately, the test of an agency like the ACA is how it enforces its authority. The existing laws, even if defanged, suffice. It is not severity of the punishment but the inevitability of it that prevents many a man or woman from committing a crime. Jail sentences or heavy fines are no threat if one is never caught.

Thankless job

Ahmad Zaki Husin therefore has put the cart before the horse. He should demand, instead, that he needs independent powers of investigation and prosecution if corruption is ever to be curtailed. And prove it with regular prosecutions.

This cannot be achieved if he does not enforce the powers he already has. Nor should it demand, as he suggests, police powers to investigate prostitution, drug trafficking and gambling because that "could be covered up due to corruption".

What he should do, if he is serious about corruption, is to enforce the defanged law he has to its utmost. Get his officers to overload the Attorney-General's Chambers with their recommendations for prosecution. It is a thankless job, but it has to be done. It is not done with the importance it requires.

Unfortunately, as in every agency, what the current head has in mind is not what his successor has. The present head feels he does not have enough power to force civil servants to declare their assets but his successor may not think so. So, each sets his own agenda. There is no continuity. Work is therefore behind schedule.

But corruption cannot be curtailed with games like these or without political will, with or without new powers to force civil servants to declare their assets at will.