In response to MACC Chief Commissioner Azam Baki’s recent public announcement where he hinted at the end of his tenure once his contract expires in May 2026, the Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center) emphasises the need for wider structural reforms to the MACC beyond simply replacing the head.
Azam Baki’s tenure as Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief has already been extended three times previously, despite having passed the mandatory retirement age of 60.
It goes without saying that Azam’s inadequately addressed criticisms are unacceptable and his removal from the post is imperative, as his continued tenure is directly at odds with the principles and interests of the commission.
However, this issue goes far beyond him alone. The appointment process of the MACC chief commissioner has long been a subject of criticism.
Given that Article 40 of the Federal Constitution renders the advice of the cabinet binding upon the king for most of his functions under law, the discretion to appoint and remove the chief commissioner under the MACC Act 2009 is effectively held by the prime minister as the leader of the cabinet.
- 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 pledge or schedule an auto donation to Aliran every month or every quarter
- Become an Aliran member
This obviously creates an inherent risk of political considerations influencing the decision of who heads the national anti-corruption investigative body.
The national anti-corruption plan for 2019–23 seemed to provide a possible solution by proposing a public appointments bill to “regulate the exercise of Executive Power in respect of Public Appointments to certain constitutional and statutory offices”, which presumably would cover the statutory office of MACC chief. However, this plan’s initiative was never implemented.
Under the current national anti-corruption strategy for 2024–28, an initiative calls for “relooking” at the requirements for the appointment and dismissal of the MACC chief as a long-term substrategy, with an anticipated period of four to five years for implementation.
Do people in Malaysia have to wait until 2029 for a change to be made to the appointment process of this key public institution?
This issue goes beyond Azam’s tenure alone. It is not an individual problem, but a structural one – and this will not be resolved by simply selecting a replacement for Azam.
The selection and appointment process for the position of MACC chief cannot be centralised in the hands of a single person. It must be democratised and be made more transparent by incorporating the role of Parliament and introducing open calls for candidates.
Collective parliamentary appointment, either through a direct vote of the House of Representatives or a parliamentary select committee, would mitigate potential conflicts of interest in the selection process.
Parliamentary select committees in particular are required to reflect the balance of political parties in the House of Representatives, which would reduce the possibility of candidates being selected on the basis of political interests.
This would align with Recommendation 55.93 received and accepted by Malaysia during its fourth Universal Periodic Review in January 2024, which called for the creation of “permanent independent bodies, such as parliamentary select committees, to oversee appointments to anti-corruption and all oversight institutions”. This has been incorporated as strategy G1.7 in the national action plan on business and human rights for 2025–30.
On a related note, the government’s development of a national ombudsman must be considered in tandem with MACC reform.
On 10 December, Azam stated that the mandate of the MACC shall not overlap with that of the ombudsman in handling integrity and governance cases.
Though this is useful to ensure duplication of function does not occur, it is important that the ombudsman is not prevented from investigating issues of maladministration within the MACC.
Internal oversight mechanisms such as the MACC’s complaints committee are insufficient to provide effective checks and balances. Hence, the ombudsman’s statutory jurisdiction must be extended to cover cases of maladministration within the MACC and other enforcement bodies.
In conclusion, the Anwar administration should not misread the public outcry over Azam’s continuous reappointments as being limited to his tenure alone. Even if a new person is appointed to the role, the flaws in the system remain.
The government must quickly commit to developing and implementing structural MACC reforms – in consultation with all relevant stakeholders – such as:
- The appointment and removal of the MACC chief through open calls for candidates and a parliamentary selection process, such as a parliamentary select committee
- The ombudsman must be granted the mandate to exercise external oversight of the MACC for misconduct and maladministration issues, notwithstanding the MACC’s existing internal oversight mechanisms.
– C4 Center
AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama
- 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
