(April 17): Transparency International Malaysia (TI-M) expresses deep concern over the restrictive implementation of access to beneficial ownership (BO) data in Malaysia. While the enactment of the Companies (Amendment) Act 2024 marked a significant step towards corporate transparency, the subsequent limitations on data accessibility undermine the reform's objectives and contradict global best practices.
Advancements in beneficial ownership transparency
The Companies (Amendment) Act 2024, effective from April 1, 2024, introduced Division 8A into the Companies Act 2016, encompassing Sections 60A to 60E:
- Section 60A: Defines a beneficial owner as a natural person who ultimately owns or controls a company and includes those exercising ultimate effective control.
- Section 60B: Mandates companies to maintain a register of beneficial owners at their registered office.
- Section 60C: Authorises companies to issue notices compelling disclosure and to update the BO register accordingly.
- Section 60D: Places the onus on beneficial owners to proactively notify companies of their status and any changes.
- Section 60E: Allows the minister to exempt certain classes of companies from these provisions under specific conditions.
These provisions aim to enhance transparency and align Malaysia's corporate governance with international standards.
Restrictions on access to beneficial ownership information
Despite these legislative advancements, the Companies (Access to Register and Information Relating to Beneficial Ownership) Regulations 2025, effective from Jan 10, 2025, impose significant restrictions on access to BO data. Under the current framework:
- Access is limited to the beneficial owner concerning their own data, individuals authorised by them, Bank Negara Malaysia, enforcement agencies, select reporting institutions, and the Ministry of Finance.
- Applications must be submitted physically at the Companies Commission of Malaysia (SSM) counter (over the counter) and must include a written authorisation on institutional letterhead.
This process may impede the ability of stakeholders, such as journalists, researchers, and civil society organisations, to obtain necessary information for oversight and accountability purposes.
Alignment with global best practices
Malaysia's approach contrasts with global best practices, such as the Open Ownership Principles for Effective Beneficial Ownership Disclosure, which advocate for:
- Centralised registers: Maintaining a centralised register for BO information.
- Public access: Ensuring that BO data is accessible to stakeholders without undue restrictions.
- Verification: Implementing measures to verify the accuracy of BO information.
- Up-to-date records: Keeping current and historical BO data.
- Enforceable obligations: Ensuring disclosure obligations are legally enforceable.
Restricting access to BO data — despite no such prohibition in Division 8A of the Companies Act, the Companies Commission of Malaysia Act 2001, or the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 — runs counter to these principles. Transparency must be meaningful and accessible, not symbolic and obstructed.
Transparency and accountability at stake
Access to BO registries enables independent scrutiny and helps expose conflicts of interest, illicit enrichment, and abuse of power. Open data empowers stakeholders to monitor who controls companies, especially those linked to public procurement, state contracts, or politically exposed persons.
International experience has shown that accessible BO registers strengthen both investor confidence and public integrity. Countries like the UK, Denmark, and Ukraine — each of which has implemented open registers — demonstrate the role of BO transparency in deterring shell companies and corporate secrecy. Malaysia's deviation from this path raises legitimate concerns about the depth of its anti-corruption resolve.
Call for transparency, civil society engagement, and political will
TI-M urges the government to reaffirm its commitment to transparency by ensuring that reforms are not only enacted but meaningfully implemented. Specifically, we recommend:
- Review access restrictions: Reassess the limitations imposed by the 2025 Regulations to facilitate broader access to BO information, balancing transparency with privacy considerations.
- Implement digital access mechanisms: Develop secure online platforms for BO information retrieval to enhance accessibility and efficiency.
- Empower civil society oversight: Civil society organisations play a pivotal role in scrutinising business and political interests. The government must facilitate — not hinder — access to information. Passing a robust Freedom of Information Act and fostering civil society engagement are key to achieving the whole-of-society approach envisioned in the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS).
Upholding reform commitments
Malaysia has set its sights on being among the top 27 countries in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) by 2028, based on aspirations stated in the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS). Achieving this will not come from rhetoric alone. It requires bold, consistent, and transparent action that inspires public and investor confidence.
Restrictive measures — such as the current limitations on BO data — risk rendering flagship reforms hollow. Every CPI point gained will depend on trust earned through real accountability, not selective disclosure.
Conclusion
TI-M respectfully but firmly urges the Malaysian government and its institutions to restore transparency as a guiding principle — not a conditional privilege. A truly transparent BO regime, aligned with international norms and open access principles, will not only fortify Malaysia's anti-corruption agenda — it will also pave the way for a fairer, safer, and more prosperous Malaysia for all.
Raymon Ram is the president of Transparency International Malaysia.