This article first appeared in Forum, The Edge Malaysia Weekly on February 23, 2026 - March 1, 2026

So far, the coalition partners of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) have been quiet on the controversy surrounding the head of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the alleged involvement of the enforcement agency in a ring of corporate raiders.

In response to a Bloomberg report that MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki has large blocks of shares in Velocity Capital Bhd (KL:VELOCITY), a committee has been formed to investigate if Azam had violated any laws under the Public Service Act.

Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar is heading the committee whose scope of investigation is Azam’s share purchase.

However, the MACC chief commissioner has denied any wrongdoing.

What’s perplexing is that the scope of investigation has left out the allegations that the MACC is being used by certain groups to fight their corporate battles. These groups are said to be using the MACC by getting it to probe certain companies that are in the midst of a boardroom tussle that would result in the eventual ouster of the incumbent shareholders.

If it were true that the committee will not investigate claims that the MACC has been compromised by corporate raiders, then its scope is “half-baked”. It does not resolve the credibility issue that the MACC faces in the eyes of Corporate Malaysia.

The prime minister has kept mum about the contentions with regard to the MACC’s integrity and that it has been used as a tool to take over companies.

It is also disturbing that PKR’s coalition partners — the DAP and Parti Amanah — have been maintaining an elegant silence on the matter.

The DAP will hold a special congress in July to decide whether or not it wants to remain in the current government or ask its elected representatives to resign from all positions while it continues to remain with the PH government.

July is five months away. By then, the committee would have completed its work. It would probably be too late for the DAP to do anything by then.

As for Parti Amanah, there has not been any response from it about the MACC controversy.

This stance of Parti Amanah and the DAP, in particular, is markedly different from when the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) fiasco exploded. Both parties were loud in demanding an independent investigation into 1MDB.

There was intense pressure on the then prime minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who was the head of Barisan Nasional (BN), to step down and for an independent committee to look into the affairs of 1MDB.

Everyone within the government knew that something was wrong with 1MDB but only three leaders from Umno spoke out. Two of them were sacked and another quit the government in 2016.

The MCA, the MIC and other BN coalition partners stayed out of the 1MDB controversy, although it was an issue that was affecting the nation’s governance standards as well as its financial situation. Until today, taxpayers are still paying for the 1MDB debacle.

And tellingly, both the MCA and the MIC are paying a heavy price for being subservient to Umno’s hegemony in BN.

It is different for the DAP and Parti Amanah as they are pillars of strength in the PH government. They have the political clout to push through the reform of institutions such as the MACC.

Both the parties have very capable politicians who understand Corporate Malaysia well.

If they could unravel and debate a case as complicated as 1MDB, the issues surrounding the MACC and its image in the eyes of Corporate Malaysia should be so much easier for them to sort out. The controversy surrounding the MACC is very much a localised problem unlike the 1MDB saga that involved a complex money trail overseas.

Murmurs of the MACC being an “agency for hire” have been circulating in Corporate Malaysia for some years now. This is on account of the MACC knocking on the doors of companies that were in the midst of shareholding tussles.

This started in 2022 with small listed entities and it has now gone on to bigger companies.

The playbook is almost always the same. The MACC comes into the picture in the middle of a boardroom tussle or takeover. Subsequently, the accounts are frozen. After a few months, the boardroom tussle ends with the incumbents disposing of their ownership. The accounts are unfrozen and in most cases, no one is charged.

In the case of one company — GIIB Holdings Bhd (KL:GIIB) — the MACC withdrew all charges against one Tai Boon Wee in 2024. By then, he had already lost control of his company.

GIIB is not the only company where charges were filed but nothing came of them.

In January 2023, the principal executives of Pestec International Bhd (KL:PESTEC) were charged with several offences by the MACC. In July, all three executives were discharged and acquitted without the case even going to a full trial.

By then, Pestec, which was a leading urban rail electrical contractor that had swept up most of the jobs in Malaysia, needed to be rescued because of its overstretched finances. The founders eventually sold off their interest in the company.

In Corporate Malaysia today, the MACC is feared for its power to suspend bank accounts that would cripple a firm’s operations. Without access to lines of financing, companies lack cash flow and cannot function efficiently.

And banks generally will not give out further lines of credit until the company gets a letter from the MACC stating that all is clear. This process can take months.

By then, the damage is already done. In most instances, the company loses its value, making it an easy takeover target.

In this respect, the MACC’s investigation into the top two executives of IJM Corp Bhd (KL:IJM) is said to have cost the construction giant a big job to build a data centre for an international client.

IJM is now in the midst of a takeover by Sunway Group Bhd (KL:SUNWAY). The MACC’s involvement in the corporate takeover has put IJM in a weak position.

In the case of IJM, its chairman Tan Sri Krishnan Tan is being investigated for alleged money laundering.

Tan was the non-executive chairman of HSBC Malaysia until 2022. Wouldn’t he have been thoroughly screened internationally and locally before he was appointed to the chairmanship?

In the past, the MACC has said several times that every one of its investigations is backed by actual reports. But the timing of its investigations when companies are undergoing a corporate takeover or caught in a boardroom fight raises questions.

Also, its power to freeze the accounts of companies needs a review. Having another entity, such as the judiciary, to vet the process before the accounts are frozen will help affirm the MACC’s independence.

This is because freezing the accounts of listed companies affects thousands of shareholders.

The MACC is an important institution and preserving its integrity is crucial to Corporate Malaysia. It has done some good to reduce corruption and there is no denying that politicians and corporations fear the MACC.

To preserve its credibility, the MACC cannot afford to be viewed as an enforcement agency for hire. This perception is something that only politicians in the ruling party can alter because the MACC is accountable to the prime minister, not the parliament.

And it is the coalition partners of PH that have sway over the prime minister, which is why they cannot afford to not state their stance on the matter.

M Shanmugam ([email protected]) is a contributing editor at The Edge

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's App Store and Android's Google Play.