KUALA LUMPUR – Is DAP’s criticism of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and its leadership less about reform and more about shielding its leaders, political allies, and associated business networks?
Speaking to Scoop, Universiti Malaya professor Datuk Awang Azman Awang Pawi suggested that the party’s vocal stance against the MACC is driven less by principle and more by political self-preservation.
He said DAP is going to great lengths, doing as much as it can primarily to protect its top leaders and allies, as well as to shield business networks connected to its political ecosystem.
Azman further highlighted the broader political context, pointing out that DAP’s actions cannot be separated from the intricate web of political, business, and personal interests that influence Malaysian governance.
He noted that while the party frames its criticism as a principled concern for transparency and accountability, much of it serves to defend entrenched power and economic influence.
“Criticism towards the MACC is framed as concern for procedural transparency, but in reality, it is also about managing public perception and shielding vested interests. Political realities and internal party dynamics often dictate a more critical approach, even when principle would suggest support for the institution,” he said.
“DAP’s insistence on being vocal against enforcement actions is less about institutional reform and more about protecting its own leaders and allies.
“This includes defending political allies who are closely tied to key business networks. In practice, what is presented as a defence of integrity often doubles as protection for vested interests and influence.”
In recent weeks, several DAP leaders have called for stronger action following a Bloomberg report and related allegations involving the MACC and calling for the non extension of its Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki.
DAP chairman and Digital Minister Gobind Singh Deo has urged the formation of an RCI to investigate the ‘corporate mafia’ claims and restore public confidence in the MACC.
At the same time, the party’s secretary-general and Transport Minister Anthony Loke, along with other senior figures including Ramkarpal Singh (Bukit Gelugor MP), Syahredzan Johan (Bangi MP), and RSN Rayer (Bukit Jelutong MP), have supported the call, stressing that an independent inquiry is needed to ensure transparency and accountability.
Azman meanwhile further stressed that the broader political environment in Malaysia, where parties’ relationships with business networks are deeply entrenched.
“Any aggressive enforcement that affects these networks inevitably triggers resistance. Funding and economic interests frequently shape reactions to enforcement actions, meaning that public narratives are often more about shielding influence and continuity than ensuring accountability,” he said.
He added that, in practice, protecting influence and ensuring continuity within the political system often take precedence over institutional idealism.
“This is not unusual in Malaysian politics, where enforcement actions against ‘big fish’ inevitably trigger debates over motives and the protection of entrenched interests,” he said.
However, International Islamic University of Malaysia professor Syaza Shukri took a softer approach as she believes that the party’s public stance reflects a careful balancing act between principle and political signalling.
“DAP wants to defend its reformist credentials and maintain its position within the government. If it remains silent, it risks being labelled hypocritical. If it is too aggressive, it may destabilise the administration. Its vocal stance is largely a form of political signalling,” she said when contacted.
Syaza added that criticism of the MACC is not necessarily a rejection of anti-corruption efforts, but rather a call for independent and credible investigations.
“Supporting anti-corruption measures does not mean unconditional endorsement. Ruling parties can argue for scrutiny to safeguard the MACC’s credibility. A Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) may be needed to restore public confidence without weakening the institution,” she said.
She emphasised that the party’s critique centres on procedural integrity and institutional legitimacy.
“What DAP is questioning is who investigates, how the investigation is conducted, and whether the process is sufficiently independent when allegations involve the MACC. It is more about process than opposing enforcement,” she said.
Syaza also highlighted that public perception is a key component of political reality.
“DAP is aware that its supporters demand a firm stance on integrity, while the need to safeguard its leaders and allies adds another layer of complexity to its critique,” she said.
It was reported that DAP’s Lim Guan Eng is under corruption trial for allegedly abusing his position as the then Penang chief minister to receive a bribe of RM3.3 million to assist a company owned by Zarul Ahmad Zulkifli in securing the Major Roads and Undersea Tunnel Construction Project in Penang, valued at RM6,34 billion.
The offence allegedly took place between January 2011 and August 2017 at the Chief Minister’s Office in Penang.
Under the second amended charge, the Bagan MP is accused of soliciting a 10 per cent cut of Zarul’s profits from the project, as payment for helping the businessman’s company secure it.
The solicitation allegedly took place near The Gardens Hotel, Lingkaran Syed Putra, Mid Valley City, between 12.30am and 2.00am in March 2011.
Additionally, Lim faces two charges of disposing of a couple of state-owned lots of land in Penang, valued at RM208.8 million, to a developer linked to the undersea tunnel project.
These offences were allegedly committed at the Penang State Land and Mines Office, Komtar, on February 17, 2015, and March 22, 2017.— March 27, 2026