Academic lauds corporate corruption additions to MACC Act but stresses need for fair enforcement

KUALA LUMPUR, July 23  —  Universiti Malaya’s Professor Edmund Terence Gomez praised the inclusion of corporate corruption to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act but warned against selective enforcement and prosecution when it comes to government-linked companies (GLC).

During a radio interview at MACC.fm today, he said for the law to be effective, there must be proper enforcement and prosecution without any fear or favour from high ranking politicians by MACC officers and the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC).

“If it is to be effective, it comes back to enforcement. When we do have disclosure of corruption, are we sure we have proper enforcement. Will it go all the way up to the top? Will AG prosecute this or will we have selected prosecution on this.

“This is where I’m most concern about. Once or if it happens, I want to focus on GLCs because control by politicians. Can we be sure enforcement will be done or not?” he asked during the SPRM360 radio talk show.

Under Section 17A of the MACC Act 2009 (Amendment 2018), commercial organisations including GLCs were now liable for punishment if their employees or associates are involved in crimes of corruption.

He pointed out that despite having good legislation on the matter, the problem that could be facing the country’s war against corruption was the lack of institutional reforms especially since under the Perikatan Nasional (PN) administration, Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has appointed many active MPs on the board of various GLCs.

Gomez observed that these institutions, including MACC and the AGC that has oversight of such organisations might not pursue corrupt practices within GLCs due to political influence or pressure.

“(Some) institutions didn’t have the power. Do these institutions that have oversight of these companies can ensure there’s no corruption can enforce it without fear or favour of who is in these companies? Or will we have selective prosecution?

“We must learn from our history. Some people were not prosecuted because they are politically well connected. When you have a very strong government, then you will begin to see examples of selective prosecution.

“Has there been institutional reform to ensure that oversight agencies to they are truly independent without fear or favour? Even under Pakatan Harapan (PH) there was not much (reforms). If we are to take this seriously, there must be institutional reforms,” said Gomez.

The expert in GLC links to political corruption added that one of the main problems facing the country when it comes to these government own companies is the fact that no one, not even the government, knows how many GLCs are currently operating.

He revealed that even his team, as well as former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had failed to identify the number of GLCs in business and propose that the first step to overcome issues such as corruption, political patronage and abuses of power in these organisations is to quantify the GLCs at state and federal level.

The next step that Gomez proposed was to clean up the system and shut down companies which are not required but to maintain the statutory bodies such as Khazanah and PNB, strategic assets such as Petronas and TNB, as well as wealth redistributing bodies such as Felda and Mara.

“Next, is an independent commission on GLCs. It is also responsible to overlook who are the directors of these GLCs. This independent commission should have oversight and how directors are appointed because these are public institutions utilising public funds.

“That’s why oversight is important. Right now, there’s no oversight in GLCS. This independent commission should be accountable to Parliament. All GLCs must also have annual accounts that are publicly disclosed.

“It must also explain why directors are appointed or removed. This will allow the public to keep a closer eye on how the company is being run,” he said.

Gomez also took note that the amendment which came into power in the middle of the movement control order (MCO) on June 1 is timely especially because Putrajaya is now utilising these GLCs to assist in Malaysia’s economic recovery.