Ex-Hong Kong graft buster says MACC on the right track

UPDATED

By Neville Spykerman

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 12 — The former deputy commissioner of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption, Tony Kwok Man Wai, today gave local graft busters the thumb’s up despite various controversies plaguing it.

The anti-corruption consultant expressed optimism in the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) which is directly modelled on Hong Kong’s successful anti-graft body.

Kwok, who has visited the country seven times and has been assisting the MACC academy in its training courses, said Malaysia should be congratulated for having the system of advisory committees.

These committees include the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, Special Committee on Corruption, Complaints Committee, Operations Review Panel, Corruption Consultation and Prevention Panel.

“Since retiring, I have visited 21 countries where I advise on fighting corruption matters, but I can say very few have this system of advisory committees.”

So the setting up of advisory committees, a successful model practised in Hong Kong for 30 years, introduces a system of check and balance in anti-corruption work, he told reporters after briefing members of the five MACC advisory committee on their roles and responsibilities.

He said governments and legislatures in many countries fear anti-corruption agencies will become a secret police, so they try to restrict resources and their powers to check the potential for abuse.

This is wrong as it stifles the effectiveness of these agencies, he added.

Kwok said anti-graft bodies should be fully empowered but there should be built-in safeguards such as advisory committees, which represent the public and which act as an internal watchdog.

Besides ensuring there were no cover-ups in corruption cases, he said the advisory committees comprising experts in various fields must advise anti-graft agencies to do a better job.

For example, he said the role of the MACC’s Corruption and Prevention Panel was to advise on system enhancement and how to promote integrity in society, while the Advisory Committee was to help MACC formulate policy, such as assessing what kind of resources was required.

However, most important is the Operations Review Panel, which has the power to scrutinise, review all MACC cases and decisions, he added.

Kwok also urged the media to exercise restraint by not exposing initial investigations which could tip off suspects or allow them to dispose of evidence.

In other cases, the suspects could be innocent, but reports in the press could destroy reputations and for these reasons, he said, investigations should be confidential.

According to him, the media should only start reporting cases once the suspects had been arrested.

Meanwhile, MACC deputy Chief Commissioner Datuk Abu Kassim Mohamed said the existence of the operations review panel will counter claims that of political interference and selective prosecutions.

All cases which are closed need to be presented to the committee and its members are independent, he said.

“They can ask MACC to review any investigation if they feel there are things which are not done or there are issues which had not been considered,” he said, adding this was crucial in the new set-up of the MACC.

He said the operation review panel, which had already met up twice this year, had recently broken a deadlock in a particular case, where the MACC wanted to charged an individual but the legal department was against it because of the lack of evidence.

The issue was brought before the review panel, which supported the legal department.

Abu Kassim said the MACC will also have to explained to the review panel how it lost three high profile cases in court.

Contrary to public perception, he added, the MACC is not under the Prime Minister’s Department or the prime minister.

“We report to the review panel and to parliament, I don’t understand why people keep thinking we are under the prime minister,” he said.

Only administratively – like the graft busters in Hong Kong which reports to the chief executive – is the MACC accountable to the prime minister, he said.

Bookmark

Email This

Comments (22) Add Comment

Show/Hide comments

...
written by don't trust MACC, October 12, 2009

When MACC has officers who were previously lorry drivers, machine operators, unemployed people with only SPM qualification suddenly became MACC investigators after just 6 months in Pulapol and Malaysians had heard stories of tortured by such half-past six officers, investigation rooms without camera, no rights to an attorney during interrogation, going after RM24.00 instead of RM24mill ............you expect Malaysians to have faith in MACC?

...
written by Tcoat., October 12, 2009

Well, read between the line. We are only good with creating laws and rules.
it is a totally diff things when come to implementation.

eg. What has the advisory committ done since inception? Even with the death of TBH?
Zilch....

I rest my case.

...
written by james, October 12, 2009

Yeah, it may be good to have the system of advisory committees. But it is only as good as who do you have sitting in the committees. So far, we have not seen anything new or encouraging coming out from the committees. The case in point is the Teoh Beng Hock controversy. Did we hear all the right noises from the committees?

...
written by Trigem, October 12, 2009

Kwok, you have been too trusting the political system in Malaysia. Unlike ICAC which is an independent agency, MACC reports to the Prime Minister who is suspicious of corruption himself. The prime minister also has absolute power over everything. All those advisory committees can take a hike when he says "stop investigating this or that." Who dare to speak up against him?

In Hong Kong, the people power is strong. They constantly protest on the street if they find foul practices in the administration. Here, you get lock up without trial if you dare gather with 4 other friends. This is why we have tainted top MACC officers still sitting and looking pretty while they are accused of corruption with evidence. Who is questioning them when PM did not give the green light?

Come to work in MACC for three months. You will go home and say something very differently. Got that?

...
written by ginger_cat, October 12, 2009

poor tony kwok. somebody ought to tell him in malaysia there is considerable gap between theory and practice, including the way oversight committees and panels are allowed to function. otherwise we won't have this heavy sense of selective persecution and targeted harassment.

...
written by anakmalaysia, October 12, 2009

He is just talking about the good points of the Advisory Panels but didn't comments on the investigation methods on cases resulting in death of the witnesses and others cover up of the wrongdoing of MACC's. Be truthful to yourself Mr. Tony.

One things i agreed with him is the unnecessary coverage by the printed media on witnesses called in for questioning as though they are already a culprits. Maybe he should ask the Advisory Panels members to initiate speedy actions to correct such wrongdoings first.

In my opinion, the MACC's is no where near the standard of ICAC's (HK).

...
written by soulsberry, October 12, 2009

the thing with malaysia is and always, that we have the good laws but only the people who execute it let the whole nation down, from parliament, police, election and so on.

...
written by pugster, October 12, 2009

No doubt that there are sufficient check & balance introduced in the MACC and that they are not under the purview of the PM.
However one cannot be sure if the people manning the MACC has follow such code of ethics as per required in the standard prudence of practice. That is the difference between ICAC and MACC. The chief of MACC must be seen to be impartial. Otherwise, please answer the people why so many big common secret corruption acts are not being investigated with some outcome the general public could even predict the outcome better than nostradamus?

...
written by Msian returned from HKG, October 12, 2009

Having a system is one thing, proper execution/ checks and balance is another. Our law is also very good, our police system and training is among the best in the world, why then we still see what we see now? It is not the system alone, it is execution.

Simpler analogy - you can give a child the best textbooks and put in best school, if the kid is not interested to learn or could not understand what he learns, all those best material and teaching methods are useless.

...
written by ALIEN , October 12, 2009

Tony Kwok you are damn wrong , now we Malaysians are suspicious of your motive .

...
written by T-Bag, October 12, 2009

I did not know Hong Kongers are so humble.

...
written by casey, October 12, 2009

Ex crime buster from Hong Kong congratulated MACC for having advisory committees. I doubt whether did he acknowledged that the committes are functioning as expected by the public. i believed he should be awared of Teoh Beng Hock death.

...
written by Confused, October 12, 2009

What nonsense is this ? Has he gone bonkers?

...
written by s.s.seelan, October 13, 2009

What? Is this guy joking or what?

...
written by Johan Malaysia, October 13, 2009

So, who are those Panels' members? Except those few that speak up in the Beng Hock case. What have they done so far? Are those panels in functions? It is not you, Abu Kassim, as the deputy chief, who should comment on your own body. It is the members of the panels who should comment on MACC, not you.

To have the system and panels is a matter, but are those panels/boards function independently and effectively is another matter. The first issue now is, for those panels/boards to review the top personnel in the MACC. They should ensure that the top officers are truly credible, qualify and most important, are totally “clean” and independent.

...
written by rakyat malaysia, October 13, 2009

it is true the concept of advisory committee in the MACC is good, even the whole MACC is a very good theory. execution is another story. people appointed to the MACC is another thing. He is a foreigner, he have to say good words about Malaysia. What happen if he said bad things about MACC? kene C4? maybe, i don't know, you tell me.

...
written by RYN, October 13, 2009

Itu ex HK graft buster agreed that rooms for questionings can be WITHOUT camera? Half past six lah.

Since he is earning his 'consultation keeps', might as well he stay put in KL, sit through the whole process of TBH's case - then say again, whether the processes made/done are still 'Thumbs-up'

If he is not sincere, he is actually marring the good image and standard of ICAC Hong Kong.

...
written by leslie fong, October 13, 2009

dont trust them..they at the begining is a UMNO's watch dogs..to arrest those against UMNO wishes.
Why so little BN or UMNO ppl been arrested? No news at all. Cover-up everything. the Beng Hock case is forgotten ka?
The ex-ICAC guy, is just being naive n honest, he doesnt know abt our country systems yet?

Would he be the adviser of MACC..I guess he wont be long there..max. 2 years.

...
written by Netizen, October 13, 2009

How can this Abu Hassan say the MACC reports to parliament? How come even the MPs themselves, eg. like Lim Kit Siang, does not know about this? It means that MACC does not really report to Parliament.
Also, this Tony Kuok only comes in for few days, listens to the MACC on their theories and flies off. Of course, he only hears the good things. There is no doubt that MACC is structured very well, but in practice, it is totally different.

...
written by Aries, October 13, 2009

// “Since retiring, I have visited 21 countries where I advise on fighting corruption matters, but I can say very few have this system of advisory committees.”

So the setting up of advisory committees, a successful model practised in Hong Kong for 30 years, introduces a system of check and balance in anti-corruption work, he told reporters after briefing members of the five MACC advisory committee on their roles and responsibilities. //

Mr Tony Kwok must be in cloud nine to be "honoured and consulted" on the setting up of anti-graft agencies in so many countries, and modelling them after ICAC of Hong Kong.

But then he missed the whole point which is : The other countries, Malaysia included, ARE NOT HONG KONG! What works in HK might not work in the other countries. There are the work culture differences, the differences in mentality, the political wills, the social ramifications, the attitudes, the administrative systems and objectives, the scope and availability of manpower and human resources, the ethnic equation and quota in hiring and placement of workers in government agencies, etc., etc.

There is NO clear and distinct separation of powers between the executive, the judiciary and the legislature. Here the executive wields much much more immense power than in HK. Does who is this Tony Kwok know about this?

Here in Malaysia there are so many other layers of powers-that-be who could influence the outcome of any events or happenings that no amount of advisory panels could hope to even touch, or rather dare to touch, to avoid incurring someone's wrath, and in turn, their favours. The unwritten rule on patronage and kowtowing to the high and mighty are indescribable, and perhaps unknown to Mr Tony Kwok, or untold to him.

There are so many local factors which would render what Tony Kwok thought to be workable and perfect in HK useless and impotent in the Malaysian context.

Tony would not have accepted an interrogation which was not video-recorded or even properly conducted, and the absence of basic infrastructure such as the CCTV which ICAC takes for granted in its premises. HK is too far ahead for Malaysia to catch up with. OR rather Malaysia was ever NOT willing to catch up with HK because then MACC would have reasons for its glaring failures and shortcomings. There are always loopholes and unwarranted and unacceptable processes to cover up and done away with.

So much for the comparison between ICAC of HK and MACC of Malaysia, and the optimism of an ex-graft buster from HK whose agency serves as the model for Malaysia.

...
written by Legio, October 14, 2009

/sarcasm/ Really? It doesn't seem so from the average persons perspective. Sure your 'advisory' money isn't blinding your judgement? Who is heading the advisory committees? Barisan people?

I was pretty happy when they initially announced MACC, but the latest reports have made me a sceptic..

...
written by taskforce101, October 15, 2009

Which planet are you from Tony? Can I go there? Is there anymore virgins left?

Write comment

Show/Hide comment form

The Malaysian Insider

Related Articles

Ex-Hong Kong graft buster says MACC on the right track

UPDATED

Malaysia Latest

Business Latest

BREAKING VIEWS

Berita Bahasa Malaysia

Most Read

Latest Comments

Sponsored Links