PETALING JAYA, July 23 – Chief Commissioner of Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Tan Sri Azam Baki’s recent statement discrediting the Transparency International (TI)’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2021, saying that the index was merely a measure of “perception” and not based in evidence is an “extremely shallow take on corruption that belies a lack of understanding and shocking coming” from the country’s top graft buster, says the Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center).
In January this year, TI announced Malaysia’s performance for the year 2021, where it scored 48 points, dropping from 51 in 2020, to an overall rank of 62 out of the 180 surveyed countries. TI’s CPI ranks 180 countries and territories around the world by their perceived levels of public sector corruption on a scale of 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean),
In a statement issued today, C4 Center said Azam as Chief Commissioner should better explain the CPI’s value rather than discredit the country-wide index by stating that that the Index was merely a measure of “perception” and may not necessarily reflect reality.
C4 Center also questioned Azam’s “issue with TI’s decision to include other matters such as human rights and business ethics”, in the assessment of corruption.
Such statements that decouple corruption and its links with democracy, human rights and business interests, are surprising, said C4 Center.
“TI has publishing the CPI since 1995 – based on the composite feedback and assessments of experts and business executives from international financial institutions and banks. Its methodology has also been independently audited and its results endorsed by global stakeholders such as the United Nations and International Monetary Fund. The CPI serves an important tool for foreign investors in assessing the suitability of a given country for investments.
“TI themselves stress that the CPI is not meant to be an absolute measure of corruption within entire nations and its societies, and certainly does not serve to paint a complete picture about the state of corruption within the surveyed countries.
“To state that corruption has little to do with human rights and business ethics is simply wrong – the continued harassment of journalists and crackdown on free speech in an attempt to silence those who would reveal abuses of power perpetrated by the government demonstrates a clear link between corruption and human rights, to provide just one example.
“This lapse in judgement on his part possibly leads to some uneasy questions; is his de-linking of corruption and business interests a consequence of his own corporate scandal, possibly an attempt at minimising his own culpability? The revelation in late 2021 that Azam Baki owned millions of shares in two publicly listed companies comes to mind.
“Notwithstanding the guilt or innocence of any individual in relation to offences regarding corruption, Azam Baki’s insistence on the need for “evidence” in relation to assessing corruption is additionally puzzling. The nature of corruption is such that related acts such as bribery, diversion of public funds, use of public office for private gain (examples of acts assessed by the CPI), etc. are acts done covertly, meaning that procuring evidence for corrupt practices necessitates investigations that can only be undertaken by robust and independent enforcement agencies, like the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.
“If there is a lack of evidence, it follows that there should be more investigations by the agencies who are empowered to do so.
“The evidence on which Azam Baki places so much importance can only be reliably collected by agencies like the MACC and law enforcement, and subject to proper deliberation in a court of law. If investigations against powerful officials are dropped without proper justification, if transparency regarding the allocation of government funding is hidden behind secrecy laws, or if the judiciary are unable to act because of ostensible undue influence, these are also strong indicators of corruption.
“Azam Baki’s notion of “evidence” versus “perception” is a false dichotomy that Malaysians cannot be misled into internalising, as both aspects are necessary measures of assessing and fighting corruption. As Chief Commissioner, Azam Baki should know that the “perception” of corruption that arises from a lack of government transparency or conflict of interest are problems in themselves that do not and should not necessitate “evidence” to substantiate its problematic nature.
“In a climate of political uncertainty and a looming General Election, the need for strong institutions that provide oversight and enforce accountability on politicians both in power and not, is more pressing than ever especially in the wake of a global health crisis that has only provided more in-roads for abuse of power and corruption. While the National Anti-Corruption Plan (NACP) seems to have been relegated to a thing of the past, the MACC should be bearing the standard of continuously affirming its application in policy-making.”
In the statement, C4 Center also said it be more than happy to meet with Azam Baki and other representatives of the MACC for the purpose of providing resources and materials that demonstrate the close linkages between corruption, business interests, and human rights.
It also called upon the International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA) where Azam Baki represents Malaysia as a Board Member, to provide a prompt response and clarification to Azam’s statements.
“It is vital that even the MACC should not be allowed to act without oversight and should itself report to and be accountable to Parliament. As the nation’s foremost authority in fighting corruption, the MACC must not only be transparent and accountable in value, but also carry the “perception” of a body that upholds these values.”