I’m quite
surprised by the process of appointing the new Chief Commissioner of the MACC
(Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission). Instead of appointing a person who is
controversial in terms of its personality, I think it is better to appoint
someone from the MACC office through the promotion process to hold this
position. It is assumed by the public that internal officials must have a
better understanding of the tasks of the MACC and proper procedures to carry
out the task. Bersih 2.0 and the Malaysian Bar Council also questioned how the
new Chief Commissioner of MACC was appointed. We know that we need a
constitutional amendment to make the appointment of this important office be
instituted, whereas the appointment process should go through a nominating
committee, Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC), Prime Minister (PM) and then
to the King. However, before the constitution was amended, the PM was able to
demonstrate the spirit of transparency in making decisions by allowing the PSC
to carry out their duties in appointing the key appointments as promised in the
14th general election manifesto. If the appointments of important posts such as
the Chief Commissioner of the MACC are made by an individual (e.g. PM), and not
by a special committee, then this individual may be terminated by the PM
without consulting anybody when he disagrees with this officer’s. I think the
decision of the committee is better than an individual for important posts such
as the Chief Commissioner of the MACC.
