Who's the most powerful man in Malaysia?

Who's the most powerful man in Malaysia?

Mariam Mokhtar
Published: Mar 13, 2026 12:00 PM
Updated: 3:00 PM



COMMENT | Who is arguably the most powerful man in Malaysia today? Certainly not the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, and not even Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

Observers argue it is Azam Baki, the MACC chief commissioner, whose position gives him enormous influence over enforcement, allowing rules to be applied selectively.

While the bogeyman of the so-called “corporate mafia” - the network of business actors and officials whose actions are widely feared but largely invisible - keeps politicians, bureaucrats, and companies cautious, ensuring compliance without full exposure.

The anti-corruption agency is now helping the powerful instead of holding them accountable.

The MACC is the country’s principal anti-corruption body, responsible for investigating everyone else. When its chief comes under scrutiny, a contradiction arises: who investigates the investigator?

Possible mechanisms include the Attorney-General’s Chambers under Dusuki Mokhtar, the Chief Secretary of the Public Service Department under Shamsul Azri Abu Bakar, parliamentary oversight committees, or a royal commission of inquiry.

Disappointingly, the government has chosen to treat this as a civil service disciplinary matter, leaving the chief secretary to decide the next steps. This cautious move preserves institutional appearance and avoids fully confronting the legal and ethical implications.

Minister Fahmi Fadzil's reluctance to disclose further details of the investigation is unacceptable. How is this a disciplinary issue and not a criminal corruption investigation? This hesitancy has arisen because the investigator is being investigated.

The Madani administration brands itself as a reformist government, and the prime minister knows that the Azam issue functions as a political trap: An aggressive investigation could expose weaknesses within the MACC, undermine the agency’s credibility, and give opposition groups leverage to claim systemic corruption.

On the other hand, to delay or dilute the investigation, reinforces public perceptions of insider protection much like a members-only club, eroding trust and making the GE14 reform promises look hollow.

Paradox

Unsurprisingly, the political instinct has been to delay, redirect, or diffuse pressure. Successive governments tend to use this classic tactic to avoid immediate accountability.

Allegations reported by Bloomberg describe a network of business figures allegedly colluding with enforcement officers to manipulate companies. Politically, this reframes the story from “Did the MACC chief break rules?” to “Is there a broader corporate conspiracy?”

While the narrative appears to show decisive action against systemic corruption, it also diffuses pressure on Azam personally. Talking about a bigger corruption investigation makes the government look active, but also reduces the pressure to answer the specific questions about Azam.

Here lies the paradox: the MACC is simultaneously accused of selectively undermining certain businesses while protecting others, yet the perceived threat of the ‘corporate mafia’ functions as a bogeyman.

Companies and officials not directly involved behave cautiously, fearing scrutiny, which reinforces elite control and maintains the appearance of oversight. In other words, the elites stay protected, and the rest walk on eggshells. It may look like oversight is working, even if it’s just a show.

Cast our minds back to the 2018 general election, which ended decades of uninterrupted Umno-Baru rule. Today, the ruling coalition still includes Umno-Baru elements, with many leaders retaining their Umno-Baru DNA despite belonging to other parties.

Reformers must juggle power-sharing and institutional integrity. In doing so, they hesitate to pursue major investigations that might rock elite networks. Coalition politics and influential officials often undermine well-intentioned reforms.

Ask any Malaysian, and they will say that they expect the rule of law, independent institutions and anti-corruption enforcement in the country. Delays in the Azam investigation feed perceptions of double standards, institutional protection, political survival and selfish self-interests overriding reform.

Trust in governance, both on the domestic and international fronts, depends on visible, credible enforcement, especially at the top. Not listening to the rakyat is why public frustration is growing.

Stakes are high

The core paradox boils down to this: systems versus powerful individuals. Investigating systemic corruption, such as the alleged corporate mafia, is politically easier than investigating the head of the MACC.

Selective enforcement, structural protection, and coalition politics converge to create an environment where the most powerful man in Malaysia can operate with relative impunity, while ordinary citizens and businesses face the bogeyman of systemic oversight.

The stakes are high, and a transparent, high-profile investigation would:

• Reassert MACC independence and restore domestic credibility,

• Boost investor confidence by signalling fair enforcement and a level playing field,

• Strengthen the reformist image of the Madani administration ahead of GE16, and

• Ensure governance is predictable, transparent, and resilient.

Failing to act decisively risks entrenching cynicism, undermining public trust, and sending the wrong signal internationally: that Malaysia tolerates selective enforcement at the top while expecting compliance from everyone else.

A rigorous, transparent investigation into Azam and a full probe of the MACC would carry substantial benefits. Public trust would be restored. Institutional independence would be strengthened, and show that the MACC is not a political tool. Investor confidence would be enhanced.

Perhaps, more importantly for the leaders of the Madani administration, whose reputations are declining, they would gain political advantage ahead of GE16.

Decisive action would signal courage and principle, strengthen the coalition’s reformist image, and counter perceptions that parties such as DAP are passive or disengaged.

For Anwar, the choice is stark: Inaction? Or act decisively to uphold transparency and the rule of law?

For the nation, the implications, political, economic, and reputational, could not be higher. Malaysians will not tolerate the most powerful man in Malaysia remaining beyond meaningful accountability.

Editor's note: Amid allegations that its officers are entangled in a “corporate mafia” scheme, the MACC on Feb 24 issued a second firm denial and dismissed the claims as baseless.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a defender of the truth, the admiral-general of the Green Bean Army, and the president of the Perak Liberation Organisation (PLO). Blog, X.