MACC Written by Julius. , Friday, August 21, 2009 at 12:57 PM, in Labels: occasions.

MACC.

After Teoh's death. Everyone were looking for an answer. What had actually happened? Is MACC responsible? What the hell is MACC doing?

Don't you think the ways of conduct by the MACC had infringe the rights of liberties?

If they choose the harsh and partial way to investigate, they gonna get it soon.

Unlike ICAC in Hong Kong, they have far more experience than us, the fact that they are so good, they actually one of the best to investigate corruption.

What do we really want of the MACC?

Here's the article I read earlier.

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/8/21/focus/20090821072723&sec=focus

By Managing editor P Gunasegaram

1. Be totally impartial. That means inves­ti­gating everyone who may have been corrupt without fear or favour, whether they are from the ruling party or from the opposition, and whether they are black, brown yellow, white or any other shade, race or religion in between. The MACC must not only be fair but must be seen to be fair. It would help too if it became more racially diverse, a problem that the police faces too.

2. Set priorities. The MACC has finite resources, limited manpower and expertise. Like any other organisation, it must learn to prioritise – it must learn to focus, using the Pareto rule, on the 20% of cases which account for 80% of the money. Running around trying to catch the ikan bilis which in real life are smart enough not to swim in schools is rather frustrating. Hauling in a shark or a tuna will be far more satisfying.

Why go for the thousand-ringgit cases when we have big ones like the Port Klang Free Trade Zone (PKFZ) which involve billions? The MACC must learn to make its efforts count.

3. Set procedures. The MACC has the same powers of the police to investigate. In the haste with which it was set up (Jan 1 this year), its procedures may not have been explicitly set out. It must do so now. Ques­tioning a witness from evening until 3.45am cannot be an acceptable method of investigation. Rules and procedures will avert such situations.

4. Set controls, checks and balances. The MACC, like any other organisation, should realise that not all of its members act within acceptable boundaries. It must therefore set up controls, checks and balances to ensure that they do.

Since there is no independent commission to oversee enforcement agencies, the MACC must police itself, and must therefore set up the mechanism to enable that.

5. Stick to the mandate. The clear mandate is to fight corruption wherever it occurs.

Politics or politicians are not the concerns. The overriding aim is to come up with good, effective ways of beating back the scourge of corruption and hence saving this country from descending into an abyss from which it cannot come out off. That’s as noble a mandate as anyone can get – and like one shoe company says, just do it.

6. Look for symptoms of corruption. If lowly politicians live in massive mansions and are driven by chauffeurs in colossal cars and are otherwise clearly living beyond their means, the MACC should swing into action. There are laws which require that people are able to account for their assets.

If skyscrapers sprout out in unlikely spaces, chances are someone is not doing his job or, worse, is being induced into stupor. If even public parks need periodic “renovation”, something is surely amiss. If companies with no expertise get contracts, is there not a sorry tale somewhere? The list is endless.

7. Don’t wait for reports before investigating. Whenever there are clear indications of possible corruption taking place, the MACC must swing into action – no need for reports to be made. For instance, is there a need for a report to be made over the PKFZ before the MACC gets the investigations going? A strange thing this – that a report has to be made before investigations start.

And then there is the question of why some reports continue to be ignored even after they are made.

8. Invite public complaints. This is not just about reports of other people engaged in corruption but also about its own officers as well.

This can cover instances of whether they are doing their job in a way beyond reproach and whether they have adhered to policies and procedures during the investigation itself.

9. Be quick to investigate and complete investigations. As the old axiom says, justice delayed is justice denied. Cases need to be investigated quickly and brought to prosecution and conclusion for public confidence in the MACC.

If cases take too long to be completed, then questions begin to be asked.

10. Be expert and efficient. Corruption is not easy to investigate. Crooks can leave a trail which is difficult to follow.

I'm not too concern of the author of this article said because it's hardcore fact.

But,

What I concern would be, will the government accept the fact that MACC actually need a reform?
Will the gov really consider the points given by the P Gunasegaram?

As matter of fact, I believe some MACC officers are decent people (otherwise why they work to kill of corruption for?). While the half bad asses, might need to go for screening test.

Unlike in the USA, the applicants of FBI and CIA have to meet minimum requirement (believe me, I had checked, they are extremely particular about people), to undergo many, many stages of test. They secretly investigate background and so on.

Shouldn't we have a strict test as well?

Bear in mind, there were 50000 applicant each year but those who qualified were less than a thousand. What does it mean?

They strictly chose officers. How about us?

Will Justice prevails?

Can we defend our rights?