I wish to refer to the letter Let Khairy be ACA chief . I had to re-read the heading and the letter as my initial reaction was it must be a joke, though it is a bit early for April Fool's.

The writer was fundamentally wrong to say that Pak Lah needs someone he trusts to head the ACA in his declared objective to wipe out corruption in the country.

What is most important is the trust of the people in the person to be appointed in terms of integrity, forcefulness and respect earned over the years. Surely someone young and in a hurry, does not command that kind of respect, regardless of his Oxford education.

Pak Lah himself has shown to be ineffective in dealing with town councillors and MPs just because they are Umno strongmen in their divisions so what more can we expect of someone who is related to him? Surely to combat corruption, the person should be and seen to be independent of the source of power.

The public has this perception that if the ex-chief of Sabah ACA can spill the beans on his ex-boss, so can his ex-boss spill the beans on his political masters. Imagine the files on certain VVIPs which the latter has, which could be used as bargaining tools if necessary.

Before we argue over who should be heading ACA, the body itself should be empowered to be answerable to Parliament and not be beholden to the executive. Unless and until this is done, the ACA will continue to be perceived as 'toothless' and used by politicians accused of corruption to 'clear' themselves - much to the bewilderment of the public.

Our political system is so different from the US that the examples of President Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Rudolf Giuliani just do not hold water. In the US, transparency and accountability are both expected and enforced and can bring down even the president. Over here, even town councillors can flout the laws with impunity.