The public's reluctance to come forward with cogent details on corrupt practices has led to the perception that it's all talk and no action on the part of the government.

The Malaysian Institute of Integrity (MII) claimed that the delay in or absence of prosecution despite thorough investigations was due to the lack of evidence.

MII president Sulaiman Mahbob said those who lodge a complaint on corrupt practices must come forward to support it with detailed or first-hand information.

"Solid evidence is needed before a person can be charged. This is where the public's help becomes crucial," he said at the 'Hot Seat Forum on Building a Corruption-Free Society: The Role of Malaysian Institute of Integrity'.

"The difficulty can be seen from the number of convictions - averaging 50-60 a year - although a total of 1,500 complaints have been filed to date," he added.

Another problem he claimed that compounded the situation was the case backlog in the courts.

Less than 50 people attended the two-hour session in Kuala Lumpur yesterday organised by the Liberal Forum Malaysia under the Friedrich Naumann Foundation (FNS) as part of a dialogue series on current affairs.

Chicken and egg story

Speaking to reporters later, Sulaiman agreed with a journalist who suggested that the lack of prosecution could be attributed to a situation akin to the 'chicken-and-egg problem' where people are reluctant to come forward until they see action.

"Yes, you can say that but at the same time no action is possible if there is insufficient evidence. Bear in mind that the story also applies to both sides, the complainants as well as the investigators," he said.

Referring to a feedback session with foreign investors recently, he said most saw enforcement activities including issuance of permits and licences as affording ample opportunities for bribery.

News about graft choking the construction industry front-paged by major local dailies was also cited as an example of how corruption has become well-entrenched here.

When the floor was opened to questions, most revolved around the lack of transparency and accountability among elected representatives and government officials, and political funding.

"A parliamentary select committee on integrity is being set up soon and MII is helping to formulate the code for all members of parliament.

"As elected representatives, they must regulate themselves," said Sulaiman, adding that both the private and public sectors were equally guilty of being the givers and takers of bribes.

"Most countries have political funding for a particular political party but the point is whether there is transparency. If done properly, such funding via a direct donation should be okay."

Dialogue moderator Ramon Navaratnam felt that the private sector actually enjoyed corruption as part of the business or corporate culture.

"This is my perception. Now that I'm in the corporate sector, I can see certain things."

He also suggested that government promotion be based on the level of integrity in order to have the right head of department to eliminate graft at the lower or operational levels.

In replying to Sulaiman's call for public support, Ramon suggested the idea of rewarding whistleblowers secretly not unlike the current practice in certain enforcement agencies.

"Although the prime minister is sincere about battling corruption, this sentiment may not be shared by the top echelon, which is why MII's efforts need public support. Else, it will fail," he said.

A participant noted that corruption had shifted from under to above table now.

"In the 1960s, government officers retired in relative poverty but that's not the case anymore. Elected representatives are amassing wealth but no one knows how they are doing it. There is no transparency."

Another participant referred to "coffee-shop talk" about government contracts being handed to cronies, citing the National Service uniforms manufactured by an individual allegedly having close links to the deputy prime minister.

Sulaiman replied that he had always pushed for open tender and transparency in the procurement policies and procedures to prevent the enrichment of and abuse of power by elected representatives.

'Price-setting'

FNS Malaysia project director Rainer Heufers said that from a foreigner's perspective, he could see "a lot of price-setting in Malaysia" in the business sector.

"I would suggest that the opportunities for corruption are reduced, particularly by eliminating the need to issue permits such as media licencing, which is unheard of in Germany."

In response, Sulaiman said that the licencing requirement for businesses in Malaysia was more of an instrument of development.

"Foreign investors did tell us that giving or getting approvals or licences was the biggest stumbling block they faced in operating businesses here, where the delay was caused by the government officer concerned.

"But I believe it is the duty of the bosses or heads of department to ensure that the pledge and commitment made in a client's charter that has been agreed to by all department personnel are kept."

He said the MII planned to prepare an annual report and an economic report modelled on the international perception of corruption index.

Sulaiman said the MII was only able to collate feedback from all quarters and make representation to the cabinet committee chaired by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

"It is up to the government to make the necessary changes based on our recommendations because we don't have any powers, but we are independent."

On this, Ramon suggested that perhaps the MII should be given powers to table the recommendations in Parliament, similar to the statute that governs the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam).

But he expressed his long-standing frustration that none of Suhakam's recommendations had been tabled to date.