I followed with interest the most recent blow-up over the MACC \”spying on their commissioners!\” Anti-corruption has been a theme I have been harping on for years, although mostly in private circles.

My first article on the topic was written for Asian Beacon about 40 years ago. Therefore, I was very encouraged to hear a former MP, who is still a politician, state publicly at a forum I organised on integrity say, \”I have never taken or given one sen as a bribe!\”

Is that not the real pre-qualification criterion for MACC commissioners? Do we then not need commissioners who continue to speak without fear or favour. And yet, in the Malaysian ‘kampung version\’ of the HK-based ICAC, it is blind loyalty to the government of the day.

\"\"

Why then move to become a commission? A commission must develop a professional neutral corporate culture of its own. Therefore, this ‘Savak-type\’ espionage work to create a rebellion within the MACC is not appreciated. I\’m so glad for alternative media, and for Tan Sri Robert Phang.

The other member under the so-called watch list is Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam ( right ), an out-spoken and well established former public servant who is well-versed with the operative culture in the public services.

When Professor Milton Esman of Cornell University visited Malaysia in the early 1980s, I asked him if Malaysian public services should adopt the American model of senior government executives being appointed by the President based entirely upon political considerations.

Blindly compliant

Dr Esman\’s reply was very telling and informative. He said that our British-inherited model of ‘neutrality of the public service\’ is a better model to ensure separation of powers, especially in terms of executive bias.

Unfortunately though, although he was right, unlike the American system of governance which ensured separation of powers and the consequential legitimate enforcement capability, the Malaysian system has deteriorated into public services which is blindly compliant to the powers that be.

How else can the MACC secretariat take orders from ‘someone higher up\’ to undermine the very commissioners who are their bosses? What is more amazing is the blatant attempt to divide and rule. Only selected commissioners were sent the questionnaire or poll.

If that is not selective prosecution, please tell me what it is? Poor science and bad ethics! It is fitting that one commissioner and another Royal used the words, \”kurang ajar and biadab\” to describe this \”kampung-culture\” undertaking.

These are strong words in the Malay culture. I once witnessed a senior government officer take offence with a minister for using the words, ‘kurang ajar!\’ The minister did not respond, rightly so. The officer said that even his father would not use such a word against him. In English language and culture, the words for such conduct in the public arena is poor \’etiquette or decorum.\’

How does one conduct oneself with decorum and proper protocol in any official public setting? Is there a proper way to disagree properly or even conduct an opinion poll? It is only when one who is actually ‘kurang ajar\’ (less educated) or biadab (lacks mutual respect) that one can conduct themselves to undertake such a project so blatantly and stupidly.

Malay culture was traditionally feudal and compliant for the sustenance of life, truth and authority within a simple rural and agricultural setting.

Why the abuse by MACC

Many new entrants therefore take these values and the concept of blind loyalty to their village heads or their bosses, into the workplace. The boss is also the one who pays your salary.

Nevertheless, the head of the MACC must take responsibility and resign. Alternatively, the entire MACC should resign en bloc to tell the government that enough is enough.

The commissioners are not even paid for their services. I texted three commissioner friends asking them to resign over the MACC\’s selective investigations into PKR assemblypersons in Selangor. That was even before the death of Teoh Beng Hock.

\"\"

Why should the commissioners be abused by the MACC staff when they are equally under pressure to perform? How is it that the MACC officers can undertake monitoring and surveillance on their own commissioners? Does Datuk Ahmad Said ( left ) even know what is happening within MACC? His comments on Teoh\’s case were horrible and immature and implied he was not in charge of the entire show.

There was no sympathy for the fact a son of Malaysia was dead! There was no sense of remorse for what took place within the premises of the MACC. Now, the picture is emerging that someone outside is calling the shots. Ahmad Said should resign if he cannot run a tight ship.

The challenge of managers and leaders is to know what is what. Therefore, how can an external person or personages give instructions to MACC staff to undermine their own commissioners!

That is truly \’kurang ajar and biadab\’ but is anyone taking notice? Does the head even know what is happening? May God help Malaysia find truth in all matters