LETTER | With reference to the press statement dated Feb 12 from the Public Service Department following the controversy plaguing MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki, let me be very clear on this.

Let us stop pretending this is an ordinary administrative exercise.

The media statement announcing a sweeping review of government rules and circulars cannot be separated from the ongoing controversy surrounding Azam and the public uproar over his shareholding disclosures.

The timing is too convenient, the framing too carefully managed, and the political implications too obvious to ignore.

The public is not confused about what is happening. Serious questions have been raised about whether existing rules on asset ownership, ethical limits, and conflict-of-interest standards were properly observed.

Instead of confronting those questions head-on, the government now announces that rules themselves will be reviewed, modernised, and recalibrated.

Classic bureaucratic manoeuvre

When a controversy arises, the constitutional response should be simple: apply the existing rules transparently and equally.

What we are witnessing instead is the classic bureaucratic manoeuvre - move the focus away from individual responsibility and towards abstract institutional reform.

In plain terms, it creates the impression that the system is being adjusted at the very moment it is being tested.

Let us call a spade a spade. When rule review exercises appear immediately after public scrutiny of senior officials, the inevitable perception is that standards are being softened, reframed, or diluted to protect institutions from embarrassment.

Whether that is the intent or not, the constitutional damage is the same - public trust erodes because accountability appears negotiable.

The government speaks about efficiency, relevance, and adapting to “current realities”. Rules do not change simply because their enforcement becomes politically uncomfortable.

The central question remains unanswered: were the rules in force complied with - yes or no? Until that question is resolved openly and convincingly, launching broad reviews of guidelines risks looking less like reform and more like whitewashing.

Malaysia does not have a shortage of policies. It has a shortage of equal enforcement. The rakyat are not asking for new paperwork; they are demanding assurance that the same rules apply to everyone, including those entrusted to lead anti-corruption efforts.

If the government believes this exercise will restore confidence, it misunderstands the constitutional moment.

Writer is a constitutional lawyer.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.