CONTROVERSY on the acceptance of the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) surfaced recently. Earlier this year the 2021 CPI was announced and Malaysia was ranked 62 with a score of 48, which is another drop for two consecutive years, and this caused a corruption watchdog to criticise the CPI report on Malaysia.

Most recently, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner made a statement that the CPI is not a true measure of “the reality” of corruption in the country and was merely a “perception”.

In fact, statements like this show the lack of understanding of the parties making such statements as to how the index is derived and their effectiveness in gauging the level of corruption in a country. Allow us to explain what exactly the CPI is but as a preliminary point let me state that Transparency International (TI) has never, since this index was first released in 1995, made any statement implying that the CPI is a “true measure of corruption”.

I repeat, never.

The CPI serves as an index that functions more as a “measured indicator” because such indicators help to give a signal on many things that happen in the country, each of which correlates with the corruption problem that the authorities such as MACC need to focus on.

Notwithstanding the negative voices on the CPI, many parties welcome the results of the report by urging that it be used as a lesson to improve Malaysia’s position, thus achieving the goals of the National Anti-Corruption Plan.

For educational purposes through this article, we would like to focus on the criticism claiming that the CPI has unfairly tarnished the country’s image. That is absolutely not the intention of any agency that produces an international level index. The same party criticising the CPI has thrown various questions at TI Malaysia (TI-M) and also recommended Malaysia to leave the CPI survey as some countries do.

The polemic on the CPI involving Malaysia should be seen in a positive light and not one of “let’s get out of it because we don’t do well in it”. This is not the first time CPI results have been criticised by some parties in the country. Looking at the background of the said critics, TI-M is somewhat ambivalent about why they choose not to accept the fact that Malaysia’s position in the CPI has declined. These same persons were quick to cheer when the country’s ranking was said to be good, as was the case for the 2019 report when Malaysia for the first time managed to improve its score from 47 to 53 and improve its position from 61 to 51 out of 180 countries in the world. In such occasions, these parties accepted the CPI with open hearts.

Surely the maturity of a nation is measured by the ability to accept bitter findings, thinking deeply and figuring out together how to improve the country’s position.

The important question we need to ask is how did we managed to score 53 in 2019 from 47 in the previous year, and later dropped two years in a row, as announced at the end of January this year.

Like it or not, Malaysia’s success in improving its position in the CPI for 2019 was something to be proud of. This shows we have the knowledge and the people who are given the responsibility to determine planning and policies related to integrity, governance, and anti-corruption know what needs to be done and have succeeded in restoring the country’s image in the eyes of the world. This is empirical evidence that cannot be denied by any party – that Malaysia can be among the best countries in this CPI.

Unfortunately, many of us today seem complacent and are not carrying on the concrete efforts to combat corruption in an exhaustive manner, which was started in 2018 through the initiatives contained in the NACP. The country needs to maintain a continued strong momentum in increasing the score or points, which is the determinant of the country’s position in the index.

There is no shortcut to achieving the goal of making Malaysia a truly corruption-free country. Efforts to achieve those objectives must be carried out with full discretion, vigour and commitment.

Perhaps not many people realise that the CPI produced by TI, besides measuring 180 countries, also uses at least nine to 13 other indices.

Each country measured has data that can be compared to each other. The three best countries in the world – Denmark, Finland and New Zealand – scored 88, which put them at the top while South Sudan was at the bottom with a score of 11/100.

A country’s score is given based on several surveys and expert assessments, which looks at various factors in a country including democratic aspects, openness to foreign investors and economic factors. Malaysia is believed to be capable of becoming even better. Therefore, it is important for us to understand how TI came up with the calculation of points, and how the government can devise strategies to obtain better scores.

Please refer to Dr Anis Yusal Yusoff in his column “Rintihan Rakyat” in the Sinar Harian daily dated January 27, which gave a good explanation in “CPI: What do we need to know?”.

Therefore, for Malaysia to rise again, every other aspect or factor needs to rise or be improved. Malaysia needs to become a country where investors find it easy to come and do business, besides becoming a more democratic country.

This is not a one-party effort – whether MACC or the Governance, Integrity and Anti-Corruption Centre. Instead, it involves the role, function and responsibility of every agency and ministry, as well as the people’s support. – July 25, 2022.

* Dr Muhammad Mohan is president of Transparency International Malaysia.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.