Accused of overstepping boundaries, MACC tells Malaysian Bar to stop 'double standards'

KUALA LUMPUR, April 20 — The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has reportedly told off the Malaysian Bar after the latter said it has no authority to oversee the judiciary in its investigation against former High Court judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

New Straits Times quoted its chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki saying that its critics should stop practising double standards.

“Tell these people, the Bar Council or whoever they are, not to practise double standards. I still remember clearly that during my days in the ACA, [the Bar] pushed for us to investigate judges. So why the about-turn now?” he reportedly asked, referring to MACC precursor, the Anti-Corruption Agency.

“We didn't have the power then, either. Yet, we were once called by the judiciary to investigate a superior court judge,” he said, but did not elaborate on which case.

Earlier this month, the Bar said that disgraced former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s SRC International conviction should no longer be disputed as it has completely run its legal course.

Its president Karen Cheah also said that a MACC investigation on Mohd Nazlan, who first decided Najib’s case, had no bearing as the agency was not the authority to oversee the judiciary.

She said any question about a judge’s ethics and conduct should be the purview of the Judicial Ethics Committee under the Judges Ethics Committee Act 2010.

Azam however argued that its investigation into Justice Nazlan's actions was initiated only after the MACC received eight complaints from the public.

“So, if we don't investigate, what should we do? You tell me. Should we throw the reports into the dustbin? Keep quiet?

“The Federal Court had decided that MACC has the power to investigate, that was the conclusion of the judgment,” he said.

According to Azam, it is common to conduct investigations into misconduct by public officials, and the MACC has submitted over 100,000 reports to the relevant department heads for further action.

“Our investigations begin with corruption matters. If we discover other elements of misconduct, it is our duty to report them to the heads of department (HODs),” he said.

He explained that once the MACC submits its reports to the HODs, its obligation is concluded.

“We would just suggest an investigation. But it is up to the HODs whether they want to take any action. Our suggestion is not final,” he said.