RCI is not shortcut to truth

  In recent weeks, familiar calls have resurfaced demanding a royal commission of inquiry into two issues.

One concerns the shareholding controversy involving MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki. The other relates to allegations of a so-called “corporate mafia” highlighted in a Bloomberg report.

At first glance, such demands may sound like a push for transparency. However, when the same call persists despite ongoing investigations, a more uncomfortable question arises. Is the objective to uncover facts, or to keep the controversy alive?

An RCI is not meant to be deployed whenever public debate intensifies. It is an extraordinary mechanism under the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950, reserved for matters where ordinary processes are clearly inadequate for public interest.

If every allegation automatically triggered an RCI, governance would grind to a halt. The country would be trapped in a cycle of permanent inquiry.

The issue involving Azam has already been subjected to institutional scrutiny. A task force chaired by the attorney-general was established to determine whether any breach of civil service regulations occurred in relation to the share transactions.

MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki

That step alone demonstrates the matter is not being ignored or buried. It is being examined through the proper channels. Calling for an RCI before those processes conclude risks turning accountability into theatre rather than resolution.

A pattern often emerges in heated political disputes. Allegations are made. Authorities begin investigations. When the outcome does not satisfy certain groups, the argument shifts.

Suddenly, the investigation itself is deemed inadequate, and the demand escalates to an RCI. The goalposts move. Under such logic, no conclusion will ever be accepted unless it matches pre-existing expectations.

Press report not same as proof

The same caution applies to the “corporate mafia” claims reported by Bloomberg. Journalism plays an important role in raising concerns, but reporting is not the same as proof.

If wrongdoing exists, enforcement agencies such as the MACC, the Securities Commission, and police possess both the authority and expertise to investigate. Treating media reports alone as grounds for a national inquiry would allow headlines, rather than evidence, to dictate state action.

There is also a deeper institutional risk. Malaysia already has multiple agencies tasked with investigating corruption, financial misconduct, and regulatory breaches.

If their work is repeatedly dismissed in favour of ad hoc commissions, the message sent is clear. Existing institutions are not trusted to do their job.

Over time, this erodes confidence not only in those agencies but in the entire system of governance.

ADS

Use RCI sparingly

RCIs have a legitimate role, particularly when confronting systemic failures or crises of national importance. Their credibility depends on restraint.

When used sparingly, they command authority. When demanded for every controversy, they risk becoming instruments for prolonging disputes rather than resolving them.

Before insisting on an RCI, the more honest question is straightforward. Are existing institutions truly incapable of investigating these matters, or is the demand simply a political strategy to sustain public pressure?

Governance cannot function if every issue is escalated to an extraordinary process before ordinary mechanisms are allowed to run their course.

Accountability is not achieved by multiplying inquiries indefinitely. It is achieved when institutions are permitted to complete the work they are already mandated to do.

Otherwise, the country risks confusing noise with progress, and process with performance.

An RCI should be a tool of last resort, not a reflex. When deployed too readily, it does not strengthen democracy. It signals distrust in the very institutions designed to uphold it. - Mkini

---

MAHATHIR MOHD RAIS is a former Federal Territories Bersatu and Perikatan Nasional secretary. He is now a PKR member.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.