KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 16 — The Malaysian Bar has urged the government to ensure that any investigation into the controversy surrounding MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki is handled with “principled transparency and lawful accountability,” saying the issue “touches directly on public confidence in institutional integrity.”
In a statement today, Bar president Mohamad Ezri b Abdul Wahab said that while the statutory professional body is not commenting on the merits of any allegation, the response from the government must be intentional.
“In circumstances where allegations have generated sustained public debate, the response of the government must be measured against a single critical standard, whether it strengthens or weakens that trust,” he said.
He argued that the MACC’s legitimacy depends not only on its statutory powers but also on “public trust that its leadership is beyond reproach.”
The Bar stressed that for any investigation into the matter to be effective, it must be demonstrably independent and free from political influence.
“Public confidence cannot rest on assurances alone. It must rest on process,” the Bar president said.
Transparency was also highlighted as a key requirement, Mohamad Ezri added.
“The scope of inquiry, applicable legal standards and findings should be communicated clearly and coherently. A conclusion without sufficient explanation will not quell doubt,” he said.
The Bar also warned that “prolonged uncertainty erodes institutional credibility” and that the matter must be resolved without unnecessary delay.
It further stated that the appearance of differential treatment is “as damaging as actual impropriety,” as all public officials must be subject to the same legal and ethical standards.
“Accountability cannot be superficial, and a credible response requires thorough scrutiny, even where such scrutiny may be uncomfortable,” Mohamad Ezri said.
He added that the episode highlights the long-standing need for structural safeguards for anti-corruption institutions, including enhanced parliamentary oversight and clearer conflict-of-interest frameworks.
“Sustainable confidence cannot depend on personalities; it must be anchored in systemic integrity,” the statement concluded.
