KUALA LUMPUR (July 23): The government on Wednesday asserted that Datuk Wan Suraya Wan Mohd Radzi's appointment as auditor general (AG) complies with the provisions of the Federal Constitution and relevant laws, after the opposition questioned the legality of the appointment.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) M Kulasegaran told the Dewan Rakyat that the government, upon consultation with relevant officers, is of the view that the AG can be appointed from among serving federal civil servants.
“I have discussed (the legal aspects of the appointment) with the auditor general and the relevant officers. This is indeed a unique case, but we believe the appointment is legal,” Kulasegaran said during the winding-up session of the debate on the AG’s Report 2025 Series 2.
He clarified that Wan Suraya’s appointment is consistent with Article 105(1) of the Federal Constitution, when read together with Paragraph 1(1) of the First Schedule of the Audit Act 1957 (Act 62), which states that the AG may be appointed from among members of the public services.
“The act provides that whether the AG is appointed from the public service or otherwise, the remuneration will be subject to Article 105(5) of the Constitution,” he said, citing the First Schedule, which outlines a pensionable monthly salary of RM27,758 or allowances and privileges specified under the Second Schedule.
Kulasegaran further explained that a serving civil servant who is appointed AG will no longer be eligible for reappointment to the public service once their tenure ends — a safeguard meant to uphold the independence of the post. However, any extension of the AG’s term after completing their duties remains at the discretion of the prime minister, he added.
The debate on Wan Suraya’s appointment witnessed heated exchange among lawmakers earlier on Wednesday, with questions also raised over the validity of the recently tabled AG’s Report 2025 Series 2.
Opposition chief whip Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan (PN-Kota Bharu) insisted that Wan Suraya’s appointment violates Article 105(4) of the Federal Constitution, which pertains to the independence of the AG and the charging of remuneration to the Consolidated Fund.
He further argued that drawing similar comparisons to the late Tan Sri Dr Hadenan Abdul Jalil as suggested by government backbencher Sim Tze Tzin (PH-Bayan Baru) may not be relevant. Hadenan, who upon his appointment as AG in 2000, had resigned from his civil service role as secretary general of the Ministry of Works in 1999 following advice from the Public Service Department and Attorney General's Chambers.
“This means that someone who is still serving should not and cannot be appointed as auditor general,” Takiyuddin reiterated, stressing that Article 105(2) bars a former AG from returning to civil service or assuming any other federal or state appointments.
Adding another dimension to the debate, Syahredzan Johan (PH-Bangi) argued that the legality of Wan Suraya’s appointment is ultimately a matter for judicial interpretation, not parliamentary debate. “Any MP who questions the legality can bring the matter to court. It is not for us [Parliament] to decide on the constitutionality of such an appointment,” he said.
Wan Suraya, who was appointed on June 12, 2023, previously served as CEO of the Malaysian Institute of Integrity. In her more than one-year service as AG so far, four audit reports have been released.
For more Parliament stories, click here.