Just giving the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief security of tenure will not make any significant impact on an independent commission if other concrete measures are not taken, Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo said today.

The DAP parliamentarian said the bipartisan committe e on corruption was “picking at the wrong end of the stick” in making the recommendation for a constitutional amendment to safeguard the MACC chief’s tenure.

NONE Gobind ( right ) said firstly, the argument that the MACC chief could be transferred to stifle investigations was “misplaced” as investigations were carried out not by the chief but by the investigating officers.

Secondly, he pointed out, the MACC head does not possess prosecutorial powers like those of the attorney-general (AG).

“It is because of this, presumably, that he is put (by the committee) into the same category as a judge, which means he can only be removed from office by a tribunal specifically constituted for that purpose.

“From the above, it will be seen that elevating the MACC chief to a similar position would really serve no useful purpose,” Gobind added in a statement.

While he recognised that the committee should be “commended for recognising that there indeed exists interference in investigations today and the need for it to stop”, he said it had to “go one step further” to set up a proper system to ensure the independence of the MACC.

azlan Gobind said giving the MACC chief prosecutorial powers independent of the AG was crucial to the exercise.

“If the committee wants to see real effect in affording the MACC chief such security of tenure, it should first propose that he be given the power to prosecute as well.

“He should have powers independent of the AG and he should have full control over all investigations in the MACC without interference from anyone, be it the police, the AG, political or otherwise,” he said.

He added that laws should be amended to ensure that the MACC chief is “beholden to nobody except the constitution”.

Gobind, however warned that empowering the head of the commission has its risks.

Safeguard against absolute powers

“There are always risks in giving absolute powers to one single person who cannot be removed unless tribunalised

“Experience has shown that the safeguard which such security of tenure seeks to provide could well be used not just as a sword alone but also as a shield.

“It is because of this that the committee should go one step further to set up a system where the discretion to prosecute given to the MACC chief is made subject to review,” he said.

Gobind said this could be achieved in many ways, for example through an advisory commission of suitable persons such as retired judges, who upon receipt of any complaint that meets set criteria can call for a judicial review on the MACC chief’s decisions.

“If we are going to move Parliament for a constitutional amendment, let's make sure it is in respect of something worth our while, something with great impact which would yield real results,” he said.

““In this regard, giving the MACC head security of tenure alone, would certainly not be enough.”