Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Asian Survey
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
COMBATING CORRUPTION:
THE MALAYSIAN EXPERIENCE
Y. Mansoor Marican*
*The author wishes to thank the anonymous referee and Jim Scott of Yale Uni-
versity for their comments on an earlier draft.
1 George M. Kahin, Government and Politics of Southeast Asia (New York:
Cornell University Press, 1964). According to the Secretary-General of the Thai
government's anticorruption committee, over a third of the national budget finds
its way into the pockets of unscrupulous government officials each year. New Sunday
Times, May 28, 1978.
597
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
598 ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. XIX, No. 6, June 1979
A few government leaders and judges have also publicly criticized cor-
rupt practices. Former Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Kadir criticized
corruption in "high places" on several occasions,4 while High Court
Judge Tan Sri Raja Azlan Shah spoke of "a frightening decay in the
integrity of some of our leaders" in his judgement address in the cor-
ruption trial of former Selangor Menteri Besar (chief minister), Datuk
Harun Idris.5 In election campaigns, however, corruption was never an
important issue at the national or subnational levels until 1974. But in
the 1974 general election in Kelantan, a loosely organized group of inde-
pendent candidates, Barisan Bebas (Independent Front) focused mainly
on the issue of corruption in their campaign to unseat the state govern-
ment.
The history of government efforts to combat corruption through
legal measures begins with the enactment of The Prevention of Corrup-
tion Ordinance in 1950. This ordinance replaced the anticorruption
laws of the former Federated Malay States, the State of Johore, and the
former Straits Settlements.6 Two years later, this ordinance was declared
inadequate to deal with many aspects of corruption and was amended
on September 11, 1952.7 After independence, more provisions were
added. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1961, passed by Parliament
on October 18, 1961, broadened the definition of "gratification," in-
creased the maximum term of imprisonment from three to five years,
and brought members of legislative or public bodies within its scope.
In drafting this Act, the Parliament consulted the Singapore Prevention
of Corruption Ordinance (1960), the Ceylon Bribery Act (1954), and the
Hong Kong Prevention of Corruption Ordinance.8
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
CORRUPTION IN MALAYSIA 599
The 1961 Act has been amended twice, in 1967 and 1971. The 1967
amendment increased the powers of the Public Prosecutor in regard to
the conduct of investigations, and placed legislators and members of
public bodies under a legal obligation to make a report of corruption
for a promise of gratification. The 1971 amendment rectified, among
other things, "a hitherto unnoticed flaw" concerning the definition of
"offence under the Act." These amendments, however, fell short of
opposition demands in Parliament, which included provisions to: (1)
ban "floor crossing" in the legislature because this is sometimes the
result of financial inducements; (2) prevent ministers and senior officials
from becoming directors in private companies for a period of three years
from the date of their resignation or retirement to bar them from using
their influence and connections for the company's benefit;9 (3) increase
the maximum penalty; (4) forfeit properties and funds that could not
be accounted for from a person's known sources of income; and (5) re-
quire Members of Parliament to declare their assets in a public register.
Though colonial and postindependence governments were agreed
that legal proceedings must remain the "spearhead" of the attack on
corruption, they perceived the need to supplement it with other mea-
sures. Based on the view that there will be no corruption if there are no
"givers," the High Commissioner of the Federation of Malay decided
in 1952 "to launch a publicity and education campaign designed to
bring home as clearly and as cogently as possible the evils that flow from
corruption."10 Though a Committee under the chairmanship of the
Deputy Chief Secretary was set up to conduct this campaign, no con-
crete steps appear to have been taken. In 1961 the government accepted
an opposition Member of Parliament's suggestion to announce that cor-
ruption is considered sinful in Islam, but nothing was done subse-
quently. In 1971 Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Yosof, then Attorney-General,
proposed that every Member of Parliament "should go to his constitu-
ency and give lectures on the subject of corruption.""1 To date, beyond
general exhortations, the government has not undertaken any systematic
measures that would make individuals less inclined towards corrupt
practices. Measures could be taken through several instruments of so-
cialization. For example, publicizing through the mass media the pro-
cedural steps involved and the criteria used in deciding on land appli-
cations is likely to result in a reduction in corruption in land offices.
The veil of secrecy that surrounds these matters often forces applicants
to resort to corruption as well in order to maximize their chances of
success and also protects the corrupt civil servant.
Publicity campaigns, especially in countries with poor communica-
tion networks and high illiteracy, can be expected to produce results
9 Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, 3rd session, vol. 1, nos. 24-38 (1971), col. 3773
(fourteen Members of Parliament spoke on the amendment), col. 3820, and col. 1474.
10 Federation of Malaya, Proceedings of the Federal Legislative Council, 5th
session (February 1952 to February 1953), p. 231.
11 Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, 3rd session, vol. 1, nos. 24-38 (1971), col.
3833.
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
600 ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. XIX, No. 6, June 1979
only in the long run. In the short run, the government must dem
strate its political will to reduce corruption by engaging in "house
cleaning" exercises. The history of such exercises in Malaya can be
traced from 1940. On April 1 of that year, E. D. Shearn, in a speech in
the Federal Council, charged that "bribery and corruption do flourish
;to an appalling extent in Government departments." The Mines De-
partment in particular had become the target of numerous corruption
allegations. On September 13, 1940, High Commissioner S. W. Jones
appointed a commission under E. D. Shearn's chairmanship to inquire,
among other things, into these allegations. The ten-man commission
found evidence of corruption and gross violations of established pro-
cedures among the officers. This inquiry not only led to legal proceed-
ings and disciplinary actions being taken against the officers concerned
but also helped to clear the name of some suspected officers. A "Minority
Report" of this commission observed that it was "more common for
those engaged in the mining industry voluntarily to offer presents or
bribes than for officers of the Mines Department to demand them."12
Twelve years later, on September 30, 1952, a nine-man commission
with a broader term of reference-to investigate, among other things,
"the incidence of corruption in the Government Services of the Federal
Government"-was appointed by the High Commissioner.13 The estab-
lishment of this commission had its roots in widespread allegation that
"such and such office is corrupt, that the public services were riddled
with corruption, that emergency measures [against the Communists]
were hindered by corruption and so on."''4 The commission's chairman
was E. N. Taylor, a person with vast administrative and legal experi-
ence, and it included the present Prime Minister of Malaysia, Datuk
Hussein Onn. Members of the commission visited various parts of
Malaya and held several hearings, examined government files and docu-
ments, and read about four thousand letters from members of the pub-
lic. The whole exercise took ten months. Though the report was com-
pleted in 1954, it was not published until 1955 because of "a series of
hitches."
With the exception of isolated cases, the commission found no evi-
dence of bribery and other forms of corruption. But it found clear
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
CORRUPTION IN MALAYSIA 601
15 Ibid., p. 60.
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
r- %C' m
4(4 -0 (
ON
k)
C%
Co%
0)
0~~~~0
0~~~~~~0
a 0
0 t
Cos
(*0
'-
w m*
<~~~~
< >~0 O
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
CORRUPTION IN MALAYSIA 603
SOURCE: Malaysia, Oficial Year Book, 1963; and Federation of Malaya, Ogffcial Year Book, 1962,
p. 135.
Complaints received
from the public 6,155 3,895 6,376 4,550 3,422
Cases investigated:
Full investigation 388 236 319 252 226
Preliminary enquiries 2,987 2,454 3,265 2,556 1,602
Arrests made:
Members ofthe public 157 99 115 151 131
Government servants 59 156 67 57 50
16 "Under this Act, the Agency is empowered to investigate, arrest and prosecute
any person without exception. This includes Members of Parliament, State Assembly-
men, Public Servants and members of the public. It is also empowered to investigate
and examine any bank account book, share account or purchase account, expense
account or any other account or any safe deposit in any bank of any person suspected
of being corrupt. The Act further empowers the Agency to require any person to
furnish a sworn statement enumerating all moveable and immoveable properties
belonging to him or members of his family." Malaysia, Official Year Book 1972.
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
604 ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. XIX, No. 6, June 1979
17 Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, 3rd session, vol. 1, nos. 24-38 (1971), col.
3812.
18 Ibid., col. 3816.
19 Ibid., cols. 3818 and 3819.
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
CORRUPTION IN MALAYSIA 605
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
606 ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. XIX, No. 6, June 1979
Complaints received
from the public 3,413 3,380 4,541
Cases investigated:
Full investigation 205 196 273
Preliminary enquiries 1,271 567 848
Arrests made:
Members of the public 132 99 122
Government servants 61 72 91
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
CORRUPTION IN MALAYSIA 607
pockets for their bus fare home and it hurts them very much to be de-
prived of that money when they seek help and consideration from the
officials concerned."24
Several critics of the NBI have attributed its alleged failure to
arrest the "big fish" to its lack of independence. They allege that the
NBI, as a government department, has to obtain clearance from the
Minister before initiating action and that clearance is not easily given
because most "big fish" are very influential people and closely linked
to the government. This allegation has been vehemently denied by gov-
ernment leaders on several occasions. The Attorney-General assured
Parliament that he has "directed that the NBI be allowed to carry out
its duties without restrictions from me or any party."25 This assurance
failed to appease opposition Members of Parliament, especially those
from the DAP, who continue to demand an independent status for the
NBI.
Government leaders have attributed the difficulty in bringing the
"big fish" to book partly to the latter's use of sophisticated methods. In
an effort to ensure that the NBI "is not overtaken by the crooks,"26 the
NBI had periodically provided training to its officers on the latest de-
velopments in the field of corruption investigation. The training ses-
sions are conducted in the Police Colleges and in the National Institute
of Public Administration (popularly known by its Malay acronym,
INTAN-Instituit Tadbiran Awam Negara). The NBI also plans to
send some of its officers to the U.S., Britain, and the Philippines t
methods used there.
NBI's activities have been hampered partly by staff shortages. When
the NMI was formed, ACA officers had to make a choice between return-
ing to their parent departments or joining the NBI. The majority chose
the latter. While this spared the NBI the problem of "starting from
scratch," the number of serving officers was still grossly inadequate to
investigate thoroughly the complaints received from the public, which
were increasing each year. The present staff size of the NBI is 371, but
recruitment plans have been formulated to increase the staff to about
640.
In late 1975 the NBI became the target of "a smear campaign" in
the form of anonymous letters that were widely circulated. These let-
ters cast doubt on the sincerity of the NBI in combating corruption in
general and on the integrity of its Director-General in particular. Ac-
cording to the Attorney-General, "corrupt intellectuals" were respon-
sible for this campaign; he did not mention any names. Sensitive to the
possible damage this campaign might have done, a government back-
bencher suggested in Parliament that a committee of representatives of
all parties be set up "to regain people's confidence in the NBI."27 This
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
608 ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. -XIX, No. 6, June 1979
suggestion was not acted upon by the government. Even if it had been,
it is unlikely that such a committee would have had any significant
impact.
Impressionistically it appears that the Malaysian public has placed
its hopes for a reduction in the level of corruption, especially in high
places, more on the leadership of Prime Minister Datuk Hussein Onn
and less on the activities of a particular department. In his address to
the youth and women's sections during the UMNO General Assembly
in 1974, Datuk Hussein Onn, then Deputy Prime Minister, spoke at
length on the government's determination to deal with the corrupt, re-
gardless of whether they are "mousedeer or dragons." Since assuming
the prime ministership, he has succeeded in projecting himself as an
honest leader determined to establish a clean government. His firmness
in the face of strong pressures, especially from UMNO's youth section,
to "rehabilitate" Datuk Harun Idris, who was convicted on several
charges of corruption, reinforced confidence in his leadership among
significant sections of the public.28 This contrasts sharply with the ear-
lier Tengku Abdul Rahman-led government's decision to use public
funds to pay the legal fees (M$88,323) incurred by the then Education
Minister, Abdul Rahman Talib, who failed "to prove his innocence"
in a corruption case.29
Concluding Remarks
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
CORRUPTION IN MALAYSIA 609
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
610 ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. XIX, No. 6, June 1979
Parliament and controls all state governments. Can the NE keep its
pledge? "The Malaysian public is now waiting for action," remarked
one observer.
This content downloaded from 103.219.237.19 on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:00:48 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms