The Malaysian Bar views with serious concern the findings of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) concerning the management of court bail payments through the e-Jamin system, as set out in its report tabled in the House of Representatives on 5 October.
e-Jamin is a digital platform for depositing court bail money, operated by Dapat Vista (M) Sdn Bhd and administered through the Office of the Chief Registrar of the Federal Court. It allows accused persons and their sureties to make bail payments beyond banking hours (PAC report, supra note 1, pp 16-17).
On 13 May 2024, the Malaysian Bar was informed by the then-chief registrar that e-Jamin would be discontinued from 19 May 2024, and bail payments would revert to the manual process.
The Bar Council disagreed with this decision and raised concerns, due to the risk of prolonged, avoidable and unnecessary detention of accused persons from the bottom 40% group during the transition.
At that time, the Bar was not aware of the absence of contract documentation (or the specifics of the commercial arrangement) between the government and the e-Jamin service provider and has been surprised by the PAC’s revelations.
The PAC report records that the initial view of the Attorney General’s Chambers on 20 December 2019 was that e-Jamin involved a commercial transaction, with the courts merely acting as users, and that no agreement was necessary (PAC report, supra note 1, p 43).
However, the Ministry of Finance subsequent no-objection letter dated 26 December 2019 expressly required an agreement with the provider to protect the government’s interests (supra note 1, p 319).
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN), Maybank a/c 507246118995 or CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a regular pledge or periodic auto-donation to Aliran
- Become an Aliran member
The PAC report further records that at a meeting on 7 May 2024, the MoF recognised that the implementation of e-Jamin was irregular from a procurement and financial perspective, and that the absence of a contract posed substantial risks to the government (supra note 1, p 35).
In these circumstances, the report’s finding that the absence of a formal contract arose from the Attorney General’s Chambers’s advice that no agreement was necessary is shocking.
It is unclear why that view was taken, and why this state of affairs remained unchanged for so many years, notwithstanding the MoF’s requirement for an agreement.
The Bar takes the position that when it comes to the delivery of services to the public, the government must always insist on a written contract with all its service providers that sets out clear terms and minimum service standards under appropriate service-level agreements.
This is to ensure that service providers can be held accountable and that the public (here, largely the families who put up the bail money) are protected by the government, acting in the best interests of the public.
The priority should always be for the government to act in a manner that safeguards and properly accounts for bail money, avoids delays in refunds of bail money, and protects and preserves the administration of criminal justice and the rights and liberties of accused persons.
On the chambers’ subsequent advice dated 12 March 2024, the PAC report states (supra note 1, p 49):
AGC menetapkan secara muktamad bahawa wang jaminan yang dibayar oleh penjamin ialah “wang awam” di bawah Seksyen 3 Akta 61 [Akta Tatacara Kewangan 1957] yang diperoleh melalui Kanun Tatacara Jenayah [Akta 593]. Sehubungan dengan itu, AGC memutuskan bahawa pengoperasian e-Jamin tidak mematuhi Perkara 97(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan Seksyen 7 Akta 61 kerana dana tersebut tidak dimasukkan ke dalam Akaun Amanah Disatukan di bawah Kumpulan Wang Disatukan Persekutuan.
The PAC’s revelations have gone beyond mere financial matters and have exposed serious gaps in governance in the delivery of public services, and have raised important questions about the handling and use of bail money paid by the sureties of accused persons.
It was reported on 8 October 2026 that Dapat Vista (M) Sdn Bhd, for its part, acknowledged the PAC’s findings and recommendations, stating that it had cooperated and has been willing to enter into and complete a formal agreement.
It also stated that e-Jamin was developed and operates under a public-private partnership model, with engagements beginning in 2019 with several government agencies on the proposed operating model, financial arrangements, security requirements and contractual terms.
The MoF had previously issued a letter on 26 December 2019 expressing no objection to the implementation, subject to conditions that included an agreement.
In law, an agreement need not take the form of a single formal written contract, and may, in practice, arise from an exchange of correspondence and/or from the conduct of the parties.
The Malaysian Bar is neither the owner nor the operator of e-Jamin. The Bar’s engagement on e-Jamin has focused on access to bail and the protection of accused persons’ rights.
The Bar has no powers to compel witnesses to give it evidence, no powers to investigate and so on, unlike the PAC, which is a parliamentary select committee. Therefore, the Bar has access only to the PAC report and such limited facts as may be available in the public domain.
The role of the Bar should not be misunderstood nor politicised in a manner that might divert attention away from the state actors and real issues identified by the PAC.
We urge politicians to refrain from using social media to drag the Malaysian Bar into the arena of party politics and instead redirect their efforts towards those responsible.
The Malaysian Bar hopes that MPs would raise these issues in Parliament, particularly by posing questions to the government during Question Time.
These questions should be directed to the MoF, the prime minister, and the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (responsible for law and institutional reform) to uncover any facts not already reported on by the PAC.
Malaysia is counting on the PAC and MPs to strive to ensure that there should never be any gaps in governance and that public services are always delivered to the highest standards of service quality, and the public is always protected under appropriately drafted service-level agreements. – Bar
Anand Raj is the president of the Malaysian Bar.
The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.
- Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
- Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
- Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
- Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
- Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
