Why ministers not bound by new asset rules, watchdog asks

 

Malaysia’s revised asset declaration framework significantly strengthens financial disclosure requirements for federal public officers, but stops short of covering ministers and elected representatives.

Anti-corruption watchdog Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center) said the revised rules represent a major improvement in public sector accountability by introducing clearer asset categories, stricter reporting requirements, and a formal approval process for certain asset acquisitions.

However, it said the framework leaves a significant gap because similar reporting obligations do not apply to members of the administration who are also entrusted with public power.

“The new requirements do not cover other members of the administration who are in positions at risk of financial mismanagement, misappropriation, or corrupt acts, such as ministers and elected representatives,” C4 Center said in a statement to Malaysiakini.

“Without equivalent reporting requirements placed on these individuals, the framework has a glaring gap in terms of whose wealth is subjected to scrutiny.”

The comments came after Malaysiakini revealed the Public Service Department’s biggest overhaul of asset-declaration rules for federal public officers in years earlier this month.

The revised framework, which took effect on June 6, expands the range of assets federal public officers must declare, including digital assets such as cryptocurrency, while also broadening the definition of children and strengthening beneficial ownership reporting by requiring disclosure of assets held on behalf of spouses and children.

It also introduces a list of designated approving officers whose permission is required before certain public officers may acquire assets above prescribed limits.

C4 Center described the approval mechanism as one of the improvements that brings greater clarity to the asset declaration framework.

Verification remains weakest link

The watchdog said the effectiveness of the revised framework will ultimately depend on whether declarations are independently verified.

It suggested that service commissions, including the Public Service Commission and the Education Service Commission, are better placed to perform that role because they already exercise disciplinary control over public officers under the Federal Constitution.

“If there is to be a verification process, the responsibility will likely be most appropriately placed with these commissions as independent checks,” it said.

However, C4 Center questioned whether the commissions possess the institutional independence and resources needed to carry out such responsibilities effectively.

In explaining this, C4 Center questioned whether the commissions have sufficient human and financial resources, as well as the institutional independence to conduct further inquiries into asset declarations and verify them effectively.

It noted that the commissions are constitutionally mandated to exercise disciplinary control over public officers, making them the appropriate bodies for the role.

It said strengthening verification mechanisms should form part of the next phase of reforms to improve integrity and public confidence in the asset declaration system. - Mkini