Azam Baki, according to Wikipedia. is 62 years old(born on 12/5/1963), and as a public officer ought to have retired when he reached the current retirement age of 60.
Surely, Malaysia has other persons, in MACC or otherwise, who could have been appointed as the MACC Chief...
So, the question were must ponder is WHY Anwar Ibrahim gave him another short-term(1 year) contract? Some employers resort to short-term or 1 year employment contracts - to subdue employees from demanding or claiming rights (causing 'trouble') for such precarious employees generally will be 'loyal' and fearful of offending employer, for fear that their contract will not be renewed or extended. So, did PM Anwar also give 3 one-year extensions for the same purpose? Did it make Azam Baki do what Anwar wanted? The current system must be REFORMED to appointment until retirement age, with no further extensions for Malaysia surely has many others capable of leading the MACC.
Azam’s new term will run from May 13, 2025 to May 12, 2026. The 62-year-old has held the position since March 9, 2020, succeeding Latheefa Koya, with previous one-year reappointments in May 2023 and May 2024. - .- Malay Mail, 12/5/2025
Before, we move on to other matters - The head of any law enforcement body, be it the police, MACC or some other, it is important that they BE INDEPENDENT and carry out their duty as per law. - including if it involves the PM?
SECURITY OF TENURE is a must, in that they should be secured in their position, and should not be easily removed or replaced by the Prime Minister or the government of the day. The only reason for removal should be a serious breach of duty or serious misconduct.
So, anyone appointed to be the head of MACC, or law enforcement body should have a Security of Tenure - until they reach retirement age, which is now 60.
Thereafter, he should best not be re-appointed - and, if post-retirement re-appointment is allowed, it must be definite and stated in law - 6 months or 1 year...
Why? The PM's ability to extend employment beyond retirement age, and the power to simply end services as he pleases is OPEN to ABUSE.
It's a power that can be used to 'CONTROL' the MACC Chief - 'do as PM 'instructs' or wants, and your service will be extended - if not, no extension or even early termination. Remember, the MACC Chief now '...hold office at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, subject to the advice of the Prime Minister...'
This, in reality, means PM can appoint (or extend tenure), or REMOVE AS HE PLEASES.
The law does not state clearly the requirement of reasons for dismissal - like serious misconduct, breach of duty, breach of Code of Ethics, etc.. There is no mention of a need of any procedure for removal - like a 'domestic inquiry' or a Tribunal of some sort like is provided for removal pf Judges.
Art 125 (3) If the Prime Minister, or the Chief Justice after consulting the Prime Minister, represents to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong that a judge of the Federal Court ought to be removed on the ground of any breach of any provision of the code of ethics prescribed under Clause (3B) or on the ground of inability, from infirmity of body or mind or any other cause, properly to discharge the functions of his office, the Yang di- Pertuan Agong shall appoint a tribunal in accordance with Clause (4) and refer the representation to it; and may on the recommendation of the tribunal remove the judge from office.
2nd issue - Who chooses the head of MACC? It is the Prime Minister, noting that the King can only appoint as advised by the Prime Minister.
Section 5 Chief Commissioner [MALAYSIAN ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION ACT 2009]
(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister, appoint a Chief Commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission for such period and on such terms and conditions as may be specified in the instrument of appointment.
(2) Where the Chief Commissioner is appointed from among members of the public services, the period of appointment of the chief commissioner shall not extend beyond the date of his compulsory retirement from the public service, but where he so attains the age of compulsory retirement he may be reappointed as chief commissioner by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, on the advice of the Prime Minister, on contract for such period and on such terms and conditions as may be specified in the instrument of appointment.
(3) The Chief Commissioner shall, during the period of his appointment as set out in the instrument of appointment, hold office at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, subject to the advice of the Prime Minister.
(4) The Chief Commissioner shall, during his term of office as such, be deemed to be a member of the general public service of the Federation for purposes of discipline....
After Najib, we now know that even Prime
Minister, whilst in office, can commit crimes of corruption, etc. PM No. 8
Muhyiddin Yasin already charged, PM No.9 Ismail Sabri being investigated
now for corruption.
Malaysia’s former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin was charged with four counts of abuse of power involving RM232.5 million (S$70 million) in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on Friday over projects awarded under his government’s stimulus programme. - The Straits Times, 22/11/2024
Why did the MACC not investigate when they were Prime Minister? Could the MACC not investigate because the Prime Minister has 'too much power', and that the PM could without any reason remove any MACC Chief anytime? - so, is the PM's power to appoint, and remove any MACC Chief as he pleases is a Problem - '...hold office at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, subject to the advice of the Prime Minister...'
Why did the MACC take so much time investigating matters raised by Zahid Hamidi - that delay ultimately led to Zahid getting a DNAA in September 2023, and Azam Baki was the MACC Chief then? Zahid Hamidi's DNAA - One reason was MACC needed more time to investigate? Why, after 9 months, MACC not completed additional investigation?
Is this 'excessive power' in the hands of the PM a problem - how come we have not heard of any new investigations by MACC on Anwar Ibrahim, his Ministers and his friends?
Maybe, no crimes OR maybe MACC and its chief
are too 'afraid' or have been 'compromised?...
Section 5(3) should be deleted, because it means the Chief Commissioner can be removed at any time up to the Prime Minister 'at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, subject to the advice of the Prime Minister'
So, if Azam Baki(or any other Chief Commissioner) actively starts investigating Anwar Ibrahim himself, or his friends, now Anwar can so easily remove him. This possibility best be dealt with now
If Azam Baki or any other Chief Commissioner does 'not listen' and do as the PM wants - then the PM can again remove and replace him.
NEEDED REFORMS
1- The Prime Minister power to appoint and/or remove MACC Chiefs, or any other Law enforcement heads must be removed NOW, and the choosing and the appointment of Law Enforcement heads, including MACC must be done by an INDEPENDENT BODY, who will directly advice the King.
Alternatively - The Prime Minister can propose names, but no appointment until Parliament has approved, possibly with the public having the opportunity to provide input. VETTING or Parliamentary approval.. Malaysia should maybe enact a law, as in Kenya's PUBLIC APPOINTMENTS (PARLIAMENTARY APPROVAL) ACT
2. Law Enforcement only has a duty to the public and the law. They enforce the law independently and professionally, and is not BIASED in favour of government of the day, or act on the wishes/instructions of the PM/Government of the Day. In Malaysia, it has already proven that Prime Ministers and Ministers, whilst in power, do commit crimes of abuse of power and corruption. I wonder, if MACC or law enforcement had acted faster against Najib, how much of 1MDB or Malaysian money could have been saved.
Thus, to ensure INDEPENDENCE, and no possibility of being compromised, SECURITY OF TENURE is needed, employment until RETIREMENT AGE only, and no extensions. Removal of such persons must also be difficult, and need to be done by some Tribunal/Court, independent of the Prime Minister or government of the day.
One wonders whether when the next government comes into power, we will see current Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, Ministers, etc all getting investigated, and charged for crimes. The trend of Ministers using power to to commit crimes like corruption, abuse of power, money laundering, etc - Examples include Anwar Ibrahim himself, then Najib - and others who though not yet convicted include the Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi, etc
HENCE, reliance on the current practice, where the Prime Minister and/or Ministers advice the King to appoint persons who head law enforcement, Public Prosecutor and even JUDGES does not work anymore, and must be changed.
We need to FREE law enforcement, prosecution and judges from the powers of the Prime Minister in terms of appointment and/or removal > or any other form of 'CONTROL". Those involved in the Administration of Justice must be INDEPENDENT and professional, free from whatever influence or interference from the PM, Ministers, Government, Political Parties in Government, etc...
AZAM BAKI was a 'controversial figure' - there were allegation that he had 'too much' shares in companies - In my opinion, those in law enforcement should have no shares in any company - for if they do, they might not take needed actions and investigations on such companies (or related companies) fearing that it might cause a DROP in share value.. this will compromise law enforcement?
In response, Azam Baki allegedly said that the shares were his brother's, and he had let his brother use his share trading account. Interestingly, the Securities Commission said no crime > would that mean that now anyone can use anyone's share trading account to trade in shares?
Then, there was the question as to whether Azam Baki made the needed declaration of increased assets, as it was a requirement of all Public Officers.
When Terence Gomez, a member of a Malaysian
Anti-Corruption Commission panel, tried to bring up matters about Azam Baki, etc - the Chairman of the Commission refused to convene the Commission - at the end of the day, Terence Gomez resigned in protest [That incident also highlighted the failings of check and balance mechanisms to ensure MACC functions correctly. Appointing members to the Commission is useless, if it is all 'seat-warmers' not willing to do the duties such check and balance mechanisms are meant to do}
We recall that Azam Baki, sued journalist Lalitha Kunaratnam, a whistleblower, that highlighted to the public alleged wrongdoings of Azam Baki - including about the shares..
The government will examine the implications of a proposal to place the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) under the jurisdiction of Parliament, said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. - Star, 18/6/2024PM Anwar Ibrahim is good on making promises or verbal commitments - and then, we see nothing happening..
Pamela Ling - Another case of Enforced Dissapearance? - Interesting Media Statement by Caged, Why is the Government doing this?
See also earlier posts(there are more - just search in the site):-MACC should be under Parliament, and no more under the Prime Minister ## A simple amendment requiring prior Parliament’s approval....
Hiding identity using others' share trading account, bank account? The Azam Baki case raises concerns
Malaysian Anti-Corruption 'problems', 5 check and blance mechanisms, silence of the Parliamentarians' Special Committee on Corruption?
Azam Baki (innocent until proven guilty) but suitability to remain MACC chief??? Terence (MACC Panel member) 'quits'
Azam Baki says royal assent for MACC reappointment an honour, vows to improve country’s image amid public discontent
PUTRAJAYA, May 12 – Tan Sri Azam Baki has today extended his gratitude to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Ibrahim for consenting to his reappointment as Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner for another year.
In a statement, Azam described the royal assent as an honour for both him and the commission.
“Fully aware of the duties and trust placed upon me, I will continue to lead MACC’s efforts to eradicate all forms of corruption, abuse of power and misconduct in order to build a prosperous, just and harmonious nation,” he said.
He also thanked Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for the latter’s trust and continued support.
He said the commission remained committed to improving Malaysia’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) score and enhancing the country’s reputation internationally.
Azam’s new term will run from May 13, 2025 to May 12, 2026
The 62-year-old has held the position since March 9, 2020, succeeding Latheefa Koya, with previous one-year reappointments in May 2023 and May 2024.
His reappointment has since been met with criticism from some in the civil society, including from Anwar’s daughter Nurul Izzah who said the extension was “unwelcome”.- Malay Mail, 12/5/2025
Terence Gomez quits MACC panel in protest over shares issue
Terence Gomez quits MACC panel in protest over shares issue
He says he had written three times to ask the panel to discuss allegations involving MACC chief Azam Baki and a former chief.
In his resignation letter, Gomez said disturbing questions had been raised about the “nexus between business and law enforcement” and a “conflict of interest” situation involving MACC Chief Commissioner Azam Baki and his alleged extensive ownership of corporate stock.
Gomez also said a former MACC Chief Commissioner was allegedly involved in a conflict-of-interest situation, “suggesting a trend in this institution that must be investigated promptly”
Gomez said he had written thrice to MACC’s Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel chairman Borhan Dollah, to push the panel to discuss the matter. FMT is seeking a response from Borhan.
He had also written to the MACC Anti-Corruption Advisory Board chairman Abu Zahar Nika Ujang on three occasions, proposing that Abu Zahar raise the matter in the advisory board “only to find that Abu Zahar too did not respond to my request, to my disappointment”.
When contacted this evening, Gomez said he had sent in his resignation earlier today to Borhan.
Copies had been made available to the press for fear that, otherwise, the consultation panel chairman and the chairman of the anti-corruption advisory board would not act on the allegations facing Azam, whom he said he had named in his letter to safeguard the integrity of the anti-graft agency.
Gomez said he was first made aware of the allegations against Azam in articles published at a website and wrote two letters to Burhan about the articles.
“I stressed that the information that I had received was deeply troubling as it was based on extensive research. The author of these news reports had also listed her name, indicating she was available to discuss this matter with the panel,” Gomez said.
He said he was extremely disappointed that the advisory board had not met to discuss the matter, even after it was brought up in Parliament on Dec 14 and widely reported in the media.
He said Azam had yet to issue any public statement nor had he responded to statements by MPs on his business dealings.
Gomez told FMT that he is currently pushing for the panel’s response. “The letter was sent to the press to publicise this reluctance to act on an important issue. The press has to help us keep this matter in the public eye until an independent investigation is done. The prime minister should also act on this matter to protect the integrity of the MACC,” he said.
Allegations about a top MACC official were raised in the Dewan Rakyat on Dec 14 by a group of MPs from PKR, led by Sungai Buloh MP Sivarasa Rasiah. He called on the authorities to investigate the official, saying the investigation must be independent and should not be carried out by the MACC.
Gomez was appointed to the panel for a two-year term from June 1, 2020 to May 31 next year. - FMT, 27/12/2021
MACC chief’s libel suit against journalist to be heard in July next year
MACC chief’s libel suit against journalist to be heard in July next year
Azam Baki claims a two-part series on him and his purchase of shares were sensational, scandalous and offensive.
Azam’s lawyer, Shahir Tahir, said the dates were fixed during an online session conducted by High Court deputy registrar Maslinda Selamat today.
“The trial will be before Justice Akhtar Tahir,” Shahir told FMT.
He said the matter will be called for case management on June 7 next year to ensure all pre-trial directions have been complied with by both parties before the hearing begins.
Lalitha was represented by counsel Ibrahim KP Kunji Mohamed.
Shahir, who was assisted by Alya Tadwini Talha, said Azam intends to call two witnesses to give evidence at the trial.
Azam sued Lalitha in January last year over a two-part series she wrote titled “Business ties among MACC leadership: How deep does it go?”
The articles were published on the Independent News Service (INS) portal on Oct 26, 2021 and republished on Dec 15 the same year.
He also claimed Lalitha had shared links to the articles on her Twitter account @LalithaVelvet.Azam said the articles were sensational, scandalous and offensive.
He said they were written and republished maliciously to portray him as a corrupt civil servant who had abused his position as a senior MACC officer for his or his sibling’s interests.
He also claims the alleged defamatory statements suggest that he owns shares and warrants worth millions of ringgit purchased with money obtained illegally.
He said they also suggest he had invested millions of ringgit over a short period of time, and had not declared the purchase of shares and warrants during his tenure as MACC’s director of investigations.
In addition, he claims the articles suggested that he and his brother were directly or indirectly involved in illegal activities through a company known as RI Intelligence Sdn Bhd.
In her defence, Lalitha denied that the articles, taken in their proper context and natural and ordinary meaning, were defamatory of Azam.
In any event, she said, she was entitled to rely on the defence of justification, qualified privilege, neutral reportage, the “Reynolds defence”, fair comment, and several provisions in the Defamation Act 1957.
The “Reynolds defence” was developed by the House of Lords in a landmark case known as Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd (1999).
In that case, England’s apex court held that a journalist reporting responsibly on matters of public concern was entitled to protection from defamation suits even if the report contains allegations which turn out to be wrong. - FMT, 13/3/2023
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment