On 11 February, Transparency International released the 2024 edition of its Corruption Perception Index (CPI) rankings, which revealed that both Malaysia’s CPI score and ranking for the year had remained stagnant.
According to Transparency International, Malaysia maintained its place at 57th out of 180 countries, with a score of 50 out of 100 total points.
The Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center) emphasises the urgent need for drastic institutional reform if the government is sincere in its plans to reach a top 25 CPI ranking by 2033.
This stagnation can very likely be attributed to the government’s failures to make good on their promises of introducing robust anti-corruption reforms.
Despite the repeated affirmations by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim of his government’s commitment to anti-corruption, the multiple failures to effectively enact justice on individuals involved in corruption have soiled this rhetoric.
In the past year alone, the government has faced accusations of prosecutorial incompetence throughout their handling of several high-profile corruption cases including:
- Zahid Hamidi: Granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal from 47 charges of corruption in the Yayasan Akalbudi case, as the prosecution needed to conduct “more thorough and comprehensive investigation”
- Najib Razak and Mohd Irwan Serigar: Granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal from six corruption charges involving RM6.6bn after the prosecution failed to hand over several classified documents required by the defence
- Najib Razak and Arul Kanda: Received acquittals in the 1MDB audit tampering trial after the prosecution failed to file their petitions of appeal in time
- Najib Razak: Granted a reduced sentence of five years’ imprisonment and a RM50m fine after being found guilty in the SRC International trial, with the possibility of a further reduction to “house arrest”
Alongside these instances, the government has shown a willingness to welcome scandal-ridden individuals such as Zahid and Musa Aman into the highest levels of government.
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a regular pledge or periodic auto-donation to Aliran
- Become an Aliran member
In view of this, the government must not rely on rhetoric alone to realise their aspirations of a top 25 ranking – it must be backed with action.
Although the pursuit of an improved CPI ranking is commendable, a country’s rank does not necessarily reflect actual changes in the perception of corruption.
With rankings being dependent on the performance of other countries, an increase in a country’s rank can be caused if other countries perform worse for that given year.
To illustrate, Malaysia ranked 61st out of 180 countries in 2022 compared to 62nd out of 180 in 2021, despite the score being higher in 2021, at 48/100 compared to 47/100 the following year. As such, the higher rank did not reflect an improvement in the perception of corruption in Malaysia.
The government’s fixation on the CPI as the primary benchmark by which they measure Malaysia’s real progress on anti-corruption is an approach with limitations that must be taken into account and publicly acknowledged.
The CPI serves its purpose of acting as a stepping stone towards guiding good governance and anti-corruption reforms.
When the government proactively introduces such reforms, it prospectively creates the perception for relevant stakeholders and the public that the nation is prepared to deal with corruption through established mechanisms. These do not necessarily imply that there is a real reduction in corruption.
Hence, it is crucial that the government introduces these mechanisms and critical reforms that facilitate good governance, which would then improve perception and lead to a real reduction of corruption in the future.
Such reforms involve:
- Legislating new good governance laws such as the ombudsman, government procurement, right to information and political parties acts
- Creating asset declaration laws and conflict-of-interest frameworks for politicians
- Amendments to existing laws such as the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, the Official Secrets Act 1972 and Section 203A of the Penal Code
- Ensuring the independence of key anti-corruption institutions such as the separation of the offices of the attorney general and public prosecutor, and the independence of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission from executive influence
Though a number of these reforms have been mentioned within the government’s national anti-corruption strategy for 2024-28, it must be noted that without an effective monitoring and evaluation mechanism, little effect towards grand corruption will be noted.
C4 Center notes the recent launch of the strategy’s dashboard – a live web page tracking the strategy’s completion – and invites the government to engage in further discussion with experts, academics and civil society to further develop this initiative.
In view of this, C4 Center would like to re-emphasise that the “Madani” (civil and compassionate) government must make good on its promises of anti-corruption by instituting long-anticipated reforms.
It is important to recall that not only Pakatan Harapan, but several other major coalition partners, such as Barisan Nasional, Gabungan Parti Sarawak and Warisan, have campaigned for better governance and integrity in the past.
Therefore, the aspirations of greater anti-corruption measures should be a collective effort by all government parties.
In upholding the CPI as the primary anti-corruption benchmark, the government’s pursuit of anti-corruption measures must not merely be done, but also seen to be done.
The pursuit of this goal must be achieved without fear or favour. – C4 Center
- 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
