FMT:
‘Stupid’ to place MACC under EAIC, says ex-director
Bahri Zin also says it will be a waste of public funds to place the anti-graft agency under the purview of the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission.
Former special operations division director Bahri Zin said it would be better to enhance the internal disciplinary department in government agencies. (Bernama pic)
PETALING JAYA: A former director of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has slammed a proposal to place the anti-graft agency under the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC)’s purview, describing it as a “stupid move”.
Bahri Zin, who played a vital role in the SRC International Sdn Bhd investigations, also said it would be a waste of public funds as the MACC was already being monitored by five bodies – of which the government was already spending a lot on.
The five are the Special Committee on Corruption, the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Complaints Committee, the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel as well as the Operations Review Panel.
Bahri, a former special operations division director, also said that every enforcement agency had its own disciplinary department to keep them in check.
“It is ridiculous that when these departments fail to function, we decide on establishing a different body to take over their roles or in this case put it under the EAIC’s purview.
“What we really need to do is to enhance the disciplinary department and give them more bite,” he told FMT.
On Tuesday, law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said said a proposal to place MACC under EAIC’s purview was made during the first meeting of the pro-tem committee.
The committee met to discuss Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s proposal for a new body to oversee and investigate all complaints against law enforcement bodies.
There are currently 21 enforcement agencies listed under the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission Act 2009, with MACC exempted through provisions under Subsection 1(5) of the Act.
Bahri said the government was focusing on the wrong issue and should instead look into further empowering the MACC.
PETALING JAYA: A former director of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has slammed a proposal to place the anti-graft agency under the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC)’s purview, describing it as a “stupid move”.
Bahri Zin, who played a vital role in the SRC International Sdn Bhd investigations, also said it would be a waste of public funds as the MACC was already being monitored by five bodies – of which the government was already spending a lot on.
The five are the Special Committee on Corruption, the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Complaints Committee, the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel as well as the Operations Review Panel.
Bahri, a former special operations division director, also said that every enforcement agency had its own disciplinary department to keep them in check.
“It is ridiculous that when these departments fail to function, we decide on establishing a different body to take over their roles or in this case put it under the EAIC’s purview.
“What we really need to do is to enhance the disciplinary department and give them more bite,” he told FMT.
On Tuesday, law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said said a proposal to place MACC under EAIC’s purview was made during the first meeting of the pro-tem committee.
The committee met to discuss Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s proposal for a new body to oversee and investigate all complaints against law enforcement bodies.
There are currently 21 enforcement agencies listed under the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission Act 2009, with MACC exempted through provisions under Subsection 1(5) of the Act.
Bahri said the government was focusing on the wrong issue and should instead look into further empowering the MACC.
There have been numerous allegations of people being pressured during MACC interrogations to falsely incriminate someone else for corruption , or the other way to withdraw, whitewash reported accusations of corruption.
ReplyDeleteIt is high time for MACC activities to be subject to independent oversight on allegations of investigative misbehaviour.
None of the five existing oversight bodies over the MACC have powers to investigate specific allegations of malpractice by MACC officers during investigations. They are more for general oversight of Operational efficiency, effectiveness.
A mere internal disciplinary department will just be a cosmetic action. Tutup kes.
I agree that it is stupid to place the MACC under another agency.
ReplyDeleteWhat needs to be done is to revamp the 5 bodies monitoring the MACC. After all these years, it is very obvious these 5 bodies were/are useless too.
The MACC's reputation is not a sterling one with the head himself tainted by his shares debacle.
Malaysia is no closer to solving the Teoh Beng Hock issue. Where were these 5 bodies when TBH fell to his death while under MACC custody?
The Free Malaysia Today article was very badly written, as they often are. I treat FMT as a pretty low quality "news outlet".
DeleteThe proposal is not to bring MACC under EAIC "supervision".
What is being proposed is that, just like complaints against Police for alleged malpractice, allegations of malpractice against MACC be included under EAIC ambit to investigate.
I have my own criticisms of EAIC as being defanged vs. the original IPCMC proposed by the Royal Commission.
What is Bullshit is the current practice where any allegations of MACC malpractice or abuse of power are investigated Internally by a "displinary committee".
Such non-independent internal committees are hopeless and helpless to investigate law enforcement malpractice, as is understood wordwide.