One of the most important tests of any government is how it responds when allegations of corruption or abuse of power surface within powerful institutions.
What matters is not how loud leaders speak about integrity, but whether systems are allowed to function calmly, firmly and without interference.
Recently, the country was unsettled by reports involving a senior figure in the army, linked to allegations of corruption and misuse of power. Given the sensitivity of the position, public concern was expected. What followed, however, offered a clear indication of how the administration is choosing to act.
The defence minister’s decision to immediately place the individual on leave pending investigation was administratively sound. Such a move helps ensure that inquiries can proceed without disruption, undue influence or conflict of interest.
It also signals that no position, however senior, is immune from scrutiny. This is how confidence in institutions is preserved.
However, for roles of this magnitude, leave alone should not be the end of the conversation.
When senior command positions are involved, a full and formal handover of duties is more appropriate. Institutions must continue to function without uncertainty, and chains of command must remain clear.
Restoring predictability
Capable and qualified officers exist within the system, and leadership continuity should never hinge on a single individual. Governance must always be larger than personalities.
This approach reflects a wider pattern that has emerged under Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. Enforcement bodies such as the MACC, the police, the tax authorities and the Customs Department have been allowed to carry out investigations without political shielding.
The legal process is no longer paused or softened because a name carries weight.
As a result, cases involving large sums of money, senior figures and complex networks are increasingly visible. This is not about creating fear. It is about restoring predictability. When people know that investigations will proceed regardless of position, deterrence begins to take shape naturally.
Within the civil service, this standard must also apply. The chief secretary and the Public Service Department have a responsibility to act decisively when misconduct arises.
Public officers exist to serve the public interest. When that trust is breached, removal from service is not punishment. It is the protection of the system.
Agong’s role
Equally important is the role of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. The appointment and endorsement of senior public officials should prioritise integrity, competence and independence, not networks or personal ties.
The monarchy’s constitutional role as a guardian of public interest carries significant weight, particularly at a time when public confidence is fragile and expectations are high.
It is well known that His Majesty has consistently shown concern for the welfare of the rakyat, and that principle must extend to institutional leadership.
Recent trends in high-profile corruption investigations also raise uncomfortable questions. It has become increasingly common for suspects to enter hospitals shortly after investigations begin.
This pattern has appeared in several major cases involving political figures and business elites, including cases where large sums of cash were seized during investigations linked to infrastructure projects and past administrations.
Hospital as temporary refuge?
It is also being widely noted that, according to information circulating internally and in public discussion, the individual under investigation has reportedly been admitted to the hospital.
While medical needs must always be treated with seriousness and humanity, the public cannot be faulted for recognising a familiar pattern.
Repeated instances of high-profile suspects entering the hospital at the early stages of investigation have, over time, shaped public scepticism. This perception, whether fair or not, underscores the need for clearer procedures that protect both individual rights and the integrity of investigations.
The question many rakyat are now asking is simple. Has the hospital become a temporary refuge for those under investigation? When patterns repeat often enough, trust erodes, even if each case has its own explanation.
This is why it may be time for enforcement agencies to consider specialised detention or medical holding facilities within the prison system, equipped to provide proper healthcare while ensuring that investigations and legal processes are not delayed.
Such facilities would remove ambiguity, reduce public suspicion, and ensure equal treatment regardless of status.
Delaying tactics, whether through legal manoeuvres or prolonged medical absence, weaken public confidence. The law must move at a pace that reflects seriousness, not convenience.
Courage required
Ultimately, the true measure of reform lies not in statements, but in systems that function without fear or favour. When allegations emerge, individuals step aside, investigations proceed independently, and institutions remain intact. That is how confidence is rebuilt.
Malaysia does not lack capable officers and honest civil servants. What it requires is the courage to let institutions work as designed, without shortcuts or special treatment.
Continuity of service should never come at the expense of public trust.
The fight against corruption is not won through declarations. It is won when institutions are allowed to act, when power does not interfere with process and when accountability applies equally to all.
On this front, allowing the system to function may be the Madani government’s most important achievement so far. - 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.