Transparency International Malaysia (TI-Malaysia) expresses serious concern over the growing practice of resolving high-profile corruption and corruption-linked cases through asset recovery and compounding, instead of pursuing criminal prosecution. TI-Malaysia strongly rejects the normalisation of financial settlements in lieu of charges under anti-corruption laws, warning that this approach undermines public trust, weakens deterrence, and erodes the integrity of Malaysia’s enforcement and justice institutions.
Recent disclosures by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) that it quietly recovered RM900 million in unpaid taxes from an unnamed company — through a RM600 million penalty and RM300 million compound, without any prosecution under the MACC Act — exemplify this deeply troubling trend. While TI-Malaysia acknowledges that asset recovery returns funds to the public purse, it is not, and must never be treated as, a substitute for accountability.
Justifying such outcomes on grounds of “pragmatism” or evidentiary difficulty risks sending a dangerous signal: that the wealthy or well-connected can effectively pay their way out of criminal liability. If left unchecked, this mindset will institutionalise a pay-to-settle culture that corrodes the rule of law.
Equally alarming is the continued silence of the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) on several high-profile cases involving former senior public officials, including a former Prime Minister. Despite the seizure of RM177 million in cash, gold, and assets linked to Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob in a corruption and money-laundering probe, no charges have been filed to date. The AGC has provided no substantive explanation for this prolonged inaction, despite earlier assurances that the investigation papers were under review.
This lack of transparency is unacceptable. While the MACC investigates and recommends charges, the power to prosecute lies solely with the AGC. Prolonged silence and inaction in cases of such public importance fuel legitimate public concern that decisions may be influenced by considerations other than evidence and public interest. When record-breaking recoveries are publicised but no one is brought before a court of law, it creates the perception of a two-tier justice system — one for the powerful and another for ordinary Malaysians. Such perceptions gravely undermine the rule of law.
TI-Malaysia reiterates that asset recovery and compounding must not become the default response to corruption. Without prosecution, there is no formal determination of guilt, no judicial accountability, and no meaningful deterrent. Normalising “pay-and-walk” outcomes encourages impunity, demoralises investigators and prosecutors, and reduces corruption to a mere financial calculation. Corruption is not a civil dispute — it is a serious crime and a betrayal of public trust.
To restore confidence in Malaysia’s anti-corruption framework, TI-Malaysia calls for urgent and concrete reforms:
- Transparency in decisions not to prosecute
Authorities must publicly disclose clear and credible legal reasons whenever a decision is made not to prosecute high-value or high-profile corruption cases. Silence is not accountability. - Disclosure of offenders in asset recovery cases
Once investigations are concluded, the identities of individuals or entities involved in major asset recovery cases must be made public. There is no reason whatsoever for the protection of selected individuals’ identities or privacy. Anonymity shields wrongdoing and undermines deterrence. - Clear national guidelines on compounding and forfeiture
The government must develop and publish strict guidelines governing when compounding or non-conviction-based forfeiture may be used, and when prosecution is mandatory. Compounding must remain the exception — not the norm — and should never replace prosecution for core corruption offences without compelling, transparent justification. - Separation of the Attorney General and Public Prosecutor roles
TI-Malaysia urges the immediate implementation of long-promised reforms to separate the Attorney General’s advisory role from the Public Prosecutor’s prosecutorial function. An independent Director of Public Prosecutions is essential to safeguard prosecutorial independence and restore public confidence. - Reform the appointment and removal of heads of law enforcement agencies
In line with TI-Malaysia’s long-standing reform recommendations, the appointment and removal of the heads of key law enforcement and integrity agencies — including the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) — must no longer rest on unilateral executive discretion. While the Prime Minister currently advises and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong appoints the Chief Commissioner of MACC, such appointments and any subsequent removal should only proceed upon the recommendation of a bipartisan Parliamentary Select Committee, based on transparent, merit-based criteria, with security of tenure and removal limited to proven misconduct or incapacity. This reform is critical to safeguarding institutional independence and restoring public confidence.
In conclusion, financial settlements must not become the endpoint of corruption cases in Malaysia. Every serious wrongdoing resolved through payment without prosecution sets a dangerous precedent and reinforces the perception that justice can be negotiated. This trajectory is unacceptable.
TI-Malaysia affirms that no individual, regardless of position or influence, is above the law. We will continue to advocate for robust institutional reforms and demand accountability to ensure that Malaysia’s commitment to fighting corruption is real, credible, and worthy of public trust.
No impunity for corruption.
