Experts laud govt's proposal to place MACC under EAIC
SHAH ALAM - Law experts laud the government's proposal to place the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) under the purview of the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) as a good move.
Former Malaysian Bar president Salim Bashir said any proposals to strengthen the credibility, enhance integrity, and curb abuse of powers of enforcement agencies are a move in the right direction.
"We should commend the government's proposals to place the MACC under the purview of EAIC.
"However, to enable MACC to be brought under the EAIC radar, amendments to the specific provisions of the EAIC Act are needed.
"There are no reasons as to why MACC, being an enforcement agency clothed with powers to investigate, detain, and question just like other enforcement agencies, should be exempted from the purview of EAIC," he said to Sinar Daily.
Keeping MACC under an independent oversight body like EAIC to investigate complaints and recommend actions for officers is a good move, Salim said, adding that this will ensure transparency and accountability in the mechanisms of dealing with public complaints.
"However, it should be noted that EAIC is an independent body carrying out its given statutory roles but plagued with limitations that need to be addressed.
"EAIC can only investigate and recommend actions against errant officers to the Enforcement Disciplinary Board. There is no real power to ensure further compliance with those recommendations.
"As to whether MACC should be placed under EAIC, I personally would give an unequivocal "yes" for an answer," he said.
Commenting further, lawyer Dinesh Muthal said that, to a certain extent, keeping MACC under EAIC helps oversee and investigate all complaints against law enforcement agencies such as MACC.
"EAIC has the power to investigate complaints against the enforcement agencies. The agency could recommend actions against the personnel involved.
"For now, MACC is not under the purview of EAIC; hence, there is no avenue for complaints; its purpose is merely to investigate, not to take further action against the complaints," he said.
Dinesh further said that having a body to govern the complaints can repair the image by removing the image that MACC is overly independent.
When asked about the changes that could be seen in terms of transparency and integrity, Dinesh said there are good and bad changes.
"It is good for an entity to be kept under the purview of a governing body to ensure fairness, transparency, and integrity.
"But at the same time, MACC being independent is also important to allow MACC to carry out its duties without hinderance.
"Although there are a few complaints that dent the image of MACC, MACC has also acted strongly and effectively in a lot of cases.
"So, there must be some form of check and balance of the need and want that need to be achieved here," he said.
Meanwhile, lawyer Alex Anton Netto said both MACC and EIAC are on equal footing as both are commissions in their own right that serve distinct functions.
"For example, MACC looks at corruption on all fronts and in any form as covered under the Act, while EIAC is specific to wrongdoings perpetrated by enforcement agencies only," he said.
However, Alex points out that there could be a clash in the work carried out by these two commissions.
"I don't see any effect in terms of transparency and integrity. Just the functions of the two commissions could lead to them clashing.
When asked how this would change people's perceptions, Alex said efforts to combat corruption should be seen in a positive light.
"Any effort to address corruption in Malaysia would be and should be viewed positively by the Malaysian people.
"The Prime Minister's call to weed out corruption should be a way of life at all levels of society," he said.
