THE Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) was established to address issues of integrity and boost public confidence in enforcement agencies.  

Last month, EAIC CEO Norhayati Ahmad reportedly said of the 6,683 complaints the commission received, only 1,113 cases were investigated and resolved. 

About two years earlier, EAIC chairman Mohd Sidek Hassan had admitted that enforcement by the commission was lacking. He said the commission was unable to ensure integrity was practised in the 21 enforcement agencies, as the EAIC had only 78 staff members and an annual budget of RM8 million. 

“So, that is not possible. We have to work with other agencies, especially those under our purview,” he was quoted as saying. 

“The police force itself has 130,000 staff. With EAIC’s 78 staff, how can we oversee 130,000 people?” he added. 

Four months later, Mohd Sidek told reporters after officiating the EAIC’s 10th-anniversary that even if the EAIC “is enlarged tenfold, to 780 people or a budget of RM80 million a year, we will still have the issues we face now.”   

So, there is already a good reason not to add the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to the 21 agencies under the EAIC. 

It is therefore baffling that Law Minister Azalina Othman Said, in announcing the establishment of a pro-tem committee to look into strengthening the EAIC, should say, “Pro-tem committee will, among other things, study the need to include the MACC as one of the enforcement agencies listed under EAIC’s supervision.”

The pro-tem committee was agreed to by the cabinet on April 19, 2023.  

Despite Mohd Sidek’s forthright comments of the commission that he chairs, the EAIC may well need strengthening, but not by “enlarging” the number of enforcement agencies in its list. 

Section 1(5) of the EAIC Act 2009 exempts the MACC from the EAIC’s supervision – for good reason. The MACC already has its own independent oversight bodies, five in total. 

The five bodies are the Special Committee on Corruption which consists of seven members of parliament, the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Complaints Committee, Operations Review Panel, and Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel. 

Why the need to add the EAIC as the sixth oversight body? 

Having said that, there are good reasons to reform the MACC. This despite the commission having been established under the MACC Act 2009 as an independent commission and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim saying in parliament that the MACC is already “an independent body.” 

Independence, I wrote, should be secured, among others, by giving the MACC chief security of tenure.

The appointment of the MACC chief should be made by the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong on the recommendation of the prime minister after the recommended candidate has been approved by a parliamentary select committee. 

The MACC will thus be overseen by a parliamentary committee. 

Strengthen the EAIC by all means, but reform the MACC as well. – May 5, 2023.  

* Hafiz Hassan reads The Malaysian Insight. 

* 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.