When Hudud is just a law. Malaysia needs ANCAM.

And laws do not a just country make. People make a just country.

Similarly, guns don’t kill people. People kill people. That’s the point that RPK was making in his latest article. There is hardly a word there which i disagree with. Excellent read.

You mean to say that every single PAS leader and member is above corruption? Come on! Some PAS people are also corrupt. As what Ibrahim Ali said: the only difference between PAS and Umno is that the PAS people utter ‘Bismillah’ before they take a bribe whilst Umno people do not.

The only way PR will eradicate corruption when the time comes for them to rule the nation will be to ensure that proper mechanisms to fight corruption are in place. It really doesn’t take much; all it’ll take is a strong, empowered anti-corruption agency.

Where the MACC is just another tool to get rid of “inconvenient obstacles” (chasing corrupt flag purchases in Selangor is a priority, apparently), the new anti-corruption agency needs to be a new breed of animal altogether. Let’s call it ANCAM.

The Anti-Corruption Commission & Agency of Malaysia (ANCAM). It will not only be headed by a person who is approved by the Parliament, but the contract must be renewed every 3 years for a maximum term of 9 years. ANCAM will have its own Charter; a key principle of its Charter will be its ability to prosecute suspects. It will have its own lawyers, and will not depend on the approval or the pool of lawyers in the Attorney General’s office. 

Lastly, ANCAM will be the model of transparency. It will publish, annually, its accounts, which includes all the personal accounts of its senior personnel and their family members. To compensate for this necessary intrusion of privacy, ANCAM senior officers will be well compensated, on par with what cabinet ministers receive. It will also publish, annually, its prosecution records for cases successfully and unsuccessfully pursued. This will let the people know who, what, where and why cases were pursued over the year. Transparency will protect the integrity of the organization, and also keep it free of accusations of bias or ill-treatment. 

If PR is right, then the country needs an organization like ANCAM patrolling the halls of government and big business. If indeed, all this nation needs is a cleaner society to allow for all the other things to fall into place, then there isn’t any other option.

While i’ve always believed that this analysis of the country’s problems is overly simplistic, i won’t argue that this would certainly be a hell of good place to start.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “When Hudud is just a law. Malaysia needs ANCAM.

  1. Ainzuddin said:
    Hudud is just a law.And laws do not a just country make. People make a just country.
    Similarly, guns don’t kill people. People kill people.
    Encore,!Encore.! Bravo.! . I couldent have said it better.!
    Now if you can only convince the “pimpinan Ulama of PAS” about it.Why cant PAS Ulamas think like this.???
    Do PAS ulama have brains.???
    I hear Ulamas all fail ther science and maths exams.!!!
    No wonder PAS is not progressing,being bogged down with “Unity Government” and Hudud Law.!!!
    Read more ‘The ying(hard) and yang(soft) of Islamic Law” at….
    http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com
    .

    Like

  2. My biggest problem with RPKs article is the sweeping presumption/statement that all muslim politicians, lawyers, shariah judges, prosecutors, MACC officers and etc are all corrupt. Isn’t it OVERKILL? So the only good muslim is RPK? Nothing against him but the statement is such a massive generalization.
    Assuming that his generalization is true then proposing another commission or agency just won’t work. We already have the ACA so let’s add an N and an M and hopefully things will change. Not likely.
    Aiz, all the things proposed can be done with changes to the existing ACA. The idea of transparency isn’t very difficult to understand but very difficult to implement. In order for there to be transparency the politicians proposing such a bold move would have to have no skeletons in their closets. Tough if you make the presumption that politicians whether BN or PAS are all corrupt and under the take.
    Firstly to set up an anti corruption agency that is transparent and EFFECTIVE we must assume that there are influential people out there who are CLEAN. (Come on let’s cut the Malaysian race some slack). Usually people who become heads of such Agencies are very influential and have links to the government in power. The question will always arise as to whether the appointment of such person has no political affliation and is indeed independent. TOUGH right?
    Even in the US the appointment of a Supreme Court is highly influenced by the party in power. A Republican president would most like appoint a judge with Republican perspectives on certain issues and this has an impact on the decision that the judge will make in deciding certain cases. Hardly independent.
    Second the government in power must have the intention to clean up. Hold on, everyone is corrupt so how to clean because then everyone gets into trouble and incriminates themselves. So let’s scrub the ANCAM proposal cause its not possible since everyone is just so corrupt. BACK to square one.
    Lastly on RPK’s article, its really sad that he refers and compares Western Secularism to Islamic Law. Whilst its true that Europe achieved the Renaissance through secularizing politics and religion, Islam achieved its Golden Age through having Islam as a Complete Way of Life, politics and all.
    The laws of GOD as he puts can be twisted but it is written in black and white in the Quran unlike the Westminster system which is uncodified and unwritten. I say there is so much more space for confusion if you are basing laws on unwritten codes.
    If the laws of GOD has been written and is clear cut in the Quran why not implement it? The Shariah is there to be followed. Comparing it with the Church of yester years is shameful since there are no real biblical laws to abide by from the Bible apart from maybe the 10 Commandments.
    I would prefer to have corrupt people implementing HUDUD rather than corrupt people administering human laws which can just be easily twisted and changed. At least its only half bad just need to work on the corruption.

    Like

  3. Sabre,
    I don’t think anyone is saying that everyone is corrupt. RPK said (and i agree) that some people are corrupt, and some are not. You’ve got good people in BN just as you have good people in PR. You’ve got bad people in both places too.
    The point with a replacement for ACA and MACC is a matter of branding. The ACA and MACC have got terrible reputations, and probably well deserved. There isn’t much transparency in how it runs and operates, despite claims of neutrality by its leaders (who are appointed by the ruling government without consultation with anyone else).
    While its possible to reform the MACC, i think re-branding it under a new name will help inspire some confidence in the people. I mean, ANCAM is just a name. You can call it MACHA, or CRAP, for all i care. That’s not the point.
    Just like how Darkie the toothpaste rebranded themselves as Darlie.
    If there was a way to ensure that the anti-corruption agency for malaysia is neutral, and a powerful tiger (not a toothless one beholden on the AG for prosecutable cases), then the argument is that it’ll go a long way to stamping out corruption in this country. Some of the ideas i proposed should help in that regard, to give it some teeth, and also to immunize it against the very thing its meant to defeat, namely corrupt practices in government and big business.
    As far as Hudud or other areas of islamic law (such as taxation, jurispudence, etc.), i think the point that RPK was trying to make is that unless you can apply islamic law on ALL citizens (not just Muslims), then it doesn’t really help anyone. This begs 2 questions:
    1. Can you apply islamic law to everyone? It would require a constitutional ammendment. With the demographic of Malaysia, i don’t see a 2/3 majority agreeing with that.
    2. Can you apply islamic law just to Muslims? yes, but laws such as hudud will not deter non-muslim criminals such as the alleged Sosilawati murderers.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s