Over Administered State More Departments More Graft Experts

---

 


The case of a low-ranking Immigration officer in Johor - arrested twice for corruption within just five months - continues to expose weaknesses in the government’s administrative system, said analysts.
According to P Sundramoorthy, a criminologist from Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), such cases are reflective of structural problems within Malaysia’s public administration system and institutional oversight.
“When a government officer previously arrested for corruption is able to return to the same position and repeat the offence, it indicates a serious failure in administrative control.
“This phenomenon illustrates what is known as ‘organisational deviance’, a state where weak governance and loose oversight allow misconduct to become normalised within an institution.
P Sundramoorthy.“This is not just an individual case. It reflects a systemic weakness where safeguards like integrity screening, staff rotation, and disciplinary reviews are either not effectively enforced or are simply ignored,” he told Malaysiakini.
Detained twice, stays on duty
On Nov 18, Malaysiakini reported how the individual - known as Officer A - was detained twice by the MACC within five months, yet was still able to remain on duty without facing prosecution.
The officer was allegedly involved in a counter-setting syndicate, which involves system manipulation at border checkpoints to allow illegal entry of foreign nationals into Malaysia.
READ MORE: Corruption crackdown: Arrests galore, prosecutions scarce?
The officer’s first arrest allegedly occurred last April, when the Immigration Department’s integrity unit detained him at the Pasir Gudang Ferry Terminal in Johor. He was then handed over to Johor MACC for further investigation.
On Sept 24, he was arrested again alongside six immigration officers and several others in three simultaneous operations at ferry terminals in Pasir Gudang, Muar, and Malacca.
Malaysiakini is withholding the suspect’s identity until he is charged in court.
Sundramoorthy reiterated how the matter was a broader reflection of existing fractures within institutional ethics and weaknesses in administrative oversight.
“This is a mirror reflecting the actual condition of our enforcement agencies.
“If this problem is not addressed through comprehensive reforms, it will not only erode the integrity of the institutions, but also public trust in the country’s justice and law enforcement systems,” he stressed.
Corruption flows upwards
Political analyst James Chin from the University of Tasmania also shared similar views - arguing that Officer A’s case was a reflection of systemic failures, instead of individual shortcomings.
Political analyst James Chin“This issue is not just about one officer. It is about how our system is built: a system with too many approvals, political protection, and a culture where people fear acting.
“As long as we do not attempt to reduce bureaucracy and separate politics from administration, corruption will only remain entrenched.
“Everyone knows that the existing system allows corruption, but no one dares to push for change, because many benefit from it,” he said.
According to Chin, Officer A’s case also illustrates the possible existence of political protection and structural bureaucratic weaknesses, allowing civil servants to engage in criminal activities without fear of legal repercussions.
“Usually, a government officer detained by enforcement authorities would be immediately suspended. However, in this case, the officer was not suspended despite being arrested twice by the MACC.
“The way the civil service system operates is very clear. If an officer is detained, the department will immediately suspend them,” he said.
Chin also explained that in such cases, the corruption trail does not usually stop at only one individual.
“If he (Officer A) is just a front-line officer, then a portion of that (corruption) money would certainly have been ‘channelled upwards’,” he said, explaining why the officer was able to retain his position.
Multi-layered bureaucracy
Chin said such matters were linked to multi-layered bureaucracy, which often required various stages of approvals and administrative work.
Malaysia, he described, is a country where matters are often “over-administered”.
“Malaysia is an over-administered state. Almost everything requires a licence or official permission. The more people involved in the approval process, the more opportunities there are for corruption. This is proven in many studies worldwide,” he stressed.
He also explained that the existence of cartels in various sectors, including border enforcement, was not a coincidence, but a result of such a “system which allows organised corruption to thrive”.
“Cartels in Malaysia are not as sophisticated as in other countries. But they stem from the approval system. You pay a civil servant to get permission. If such approvals were no longer needed, then the room for corruption would also disappear,” he said.
Moreover, Chin highlighted that immigration fraud could also be classified as a form of human trafficking, which is now “more profitable than drug trafficking”.
“This is because drugs can only be sold once, while human trafficking victims can be repeatedly extorted,” he said.
‘Syndicate culture’, state-corporate crime
Sundramoorthy also described how the incident reflects a “syndicate culture” within enforcement agencies.
This, he explained, is when corruption occurs no longer on an individual basis but operates as a network involving government officers, private operators, and insiders.
“When public officers collaborate with external parties to manipulate the system, it evolves into a more complex form of crime, which is state-corporate crime, where public power is exploited for private gain.
“This situation is similar to the criminological theory of differential association, where individuals emulate deviant behaviour when they are in an environment which normalises it (corruption),” he said.
While Sundramoorthy applauded MACC’s efforts in uncovering the case of Officer A, he nevertheless described the agency’s actions as “reactive success” instead of effective prevention.
“The fact that a repeat offender can continue to operate in the same location shows how our supervision and preventative control systems are weak.
“It is a sign of a control deficit, where the monitoring system fails to match the efficiency of the corruption network,” he said.
Further, he said punitive measures alone were not sufficient to address long-standing structural problems.
“Recurring corruption shows that deterrence does not depend on the severity of the punishment. Instead, it depends on the certainty that misconduct will be detected and followed by immediate action,” he added.
He urged structural reforms, including establishing an independent review of officers’ redeployment after investigation, and enforcing a mandatory leave of absence for officers under investigation.
Sundramoorthy also suggested information sharing between agencies and the use of digital monitoring systems to reduce human intervention at border checkpoints.
“As long as agencies focus only on symbolic actions, such as arrests without systemic reform, then this cycle of corruption, arrests, and repetition will only continue,” he said.
MACC’s ‘dual role’?
Commenting further on MACC’s role, Chin also described the anti-graft commission as performing two contradictory functions - firstly, as an anti-corruption agency, and secondly, as a “political tool”.
“MACC in Malaysia has two purposes. First, to combat corruption in the civil service and certain sectors, but at the same time, it is also used as a political weapon.
“Because of this politicisation, corruption is also beginning to seep into the MACC itself, causing them to be viewed as selective in taking action,” he said.
He also stressed Malaysia’s “finance-based politics” as a major factor behind the system’s resistance to change.
“Our political system relies on money. This sends a signal that seeking ‘side income’ is acceptable when, in fact, it is corruption.
“As long as our political system requires funding to remain in power, this layered bureaucracy will not be removed, because that is where its ‘unofficial’ financial resources come from,” he said. - Mkini

---