Skip to content

Azam Must Learn from Past Controversies to Protect Public Trust

Earlier today, we were alarmed by breaking news from Bloomberg reporting that Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki was found to own 17.7 million shares in Velocity Capital Partner Bhd.

According to an annual filing submitted by Velocity Capital to the Companies Commission of Malaysia on Feb 3 last year, the stake was valued at approximately RM800,000.

Under the 2024 government circular, a public servant is only allowed to purchase shares in a company incorporated in Malaysia up to a maximum of 5% of its paid-up capital or RM100,000 in value, whichever is lower.

This latest development comes as a major surprise, as Azam was previously involved in a similar case in late 2021 involving different stockholdings which led to a public protest in January 2022.

During that time, he explained that one of his brothers had used his trading account to buy shares before the Securities Commission Malaysia declared that Azam didn’t breach securities law.

After four years, a similar issue happened which raises an important question, how could a similar incident occur once again involving a senior government official, despite his previous cases having been heavily scrutinised by various parties and receiving significant public attention?

As a highly reputable civil servant, Azam should have learned from the past incident, especially given that the public closely scrutinises any anti-graft issues involving not only politicians but also top government officers.

Therefore, a proper and comprehensive explanation is vital to ensure that public confidence in the MACC remains intact, particularly as the agency is currently handling numerous anti-corruption cases in line with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s continued efforts to combat corruption nationwide.

As the Prime Minister himself remains committed to ensuring that the country is free from corruption, this latest development risks jeopardising his government’s efforts to realise that mission.

From my end, I would suggest that the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on Human Rights, Election and Institutional Reform summon Azam to provide an explanation regarding the matter, as he should be given the opportunity to offer a reasonable and transparent explanation in defending himself against this controversy.