THE controversy surrounding the appointment of the new Chief Commissioner for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) should hopefully be a side distraction and blow away soon.
Corruption seems so endemic these days that there is no time to lose to get cracking and most Malaysians, including detractors of Latheefa Koya’s appointment as MACC head, seem to agree she is the right person for the monumental task ahead of her.
Latheefa may be forgiven if she is momentarily stumped over where to start in what she is embarking on, which is nothing less than a crusade. No sooner had her appointment been announced, the social media in Sarawak lit up with speculation as to whether she will finally take on long-simmering mutterings and revelations surrounding the long-serving former Sarawak chief minister and current Yang diPertua Negeri, Tun Abdul Taib Mahmud.
Indeed, it was largely going after Taib that whistle-blower website Sarawak Report was created before it got massively side-tracked by the 1MDB scandal. Now that those associated with 1MDB are seeing their day in court, the big question animating many in Sarawak is whether the spotlight will shift back to Taib and governance issues in the state he had continually led from the same year Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad first came into office: 1981.
It will not be surprising if those in Sarawak baying for blood are again to be disappointed. But probably not for any lack of trying by those previously tasked to look into this. The stock official reply each time this cropped up is “lack of evidence”. This may appear to many as counter-intuitive but there may be more than a grain of truth to it.
Taib had previously challenged anyone to prove that any of those linked to him benefited improperly from his decisions as chief minister purportedly favouring them.
Anti-corruption officials may have to put on trial the whole governance structure at the time Taib was in power.
Is that even the proper role for MACC, or will it be creeping encroachment on the realm of the political?
If it was the whole governance super-structure in the state that was really at fault, there is already partial success in breaking it down with Taib’s resignation as chief minister, albeit somewhat reluctantly, and, ironically, with some discreet pressure applied by the then prime minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak. State nationalists railing now against federalism, take note that federal check-and-balance did its part to check the perceived excesses of Taib’s rule.
Far more worthwhile for those demanding action against Taib may be to clamour for the political structure he built to be progressively dismantled and state political leadership to become far less personalised, the better to avoid any repeat of the cronyism that evidently thrived under his stewardship. Enforcing term limits for political leaders is a low-hanging fruit crying to be plucked. Never again should another chief minister be in power for more than a decade.
Public clamouring for such institutional rebuilding and reform efforts is unfortunately sorely lacking in Sarawak although such efforts may be far more effective in the longer term than the understandable public desire to see Taib or any of his purported cohorts in court.
Latheefa and her officials in MACC have their collective work cut out for them hunting down crooks.
There will be no shortage of more cut-and-dry cases for them to go after. Let them get on with the task and not be needlessly burdened with unrealistic popular expectations.
In any case, the task to ensure a relatively corruption-free Malaysia is the collective responsibility of all Malaysians and it requires a multi-dimensional approach.
Those in Sarawak hoping that an egregious phase in its political history that they have just come out from will never be repeated must do the heavy lifting themselves instead of leaning principally on hopes that MACC will do the job for them.
The writer views developments in the nation, the region and the wider world from his vantage point in Kuching, Sarawak