When integrity gets twisted into accusation — Mohd Said Bani CM Din
To suggest that her appointment is 'tainted' simply because she is a civil servant is both legally unfounded and ethically disingenuous. Article 105 of the Federal Constitution clearly provides for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to appoint the Auditor-General on the advice of the Prime Minister — after consultation with the Conference of Rulers. This process was duly followed. The idea that a civil servant, by default, lacks independence is an insult not only to her professionalism but to the integrity of the Malaysian Civil Service as a whole.
In fact, the suggestion that only retirees are 'independent' is laughable. Since when did age or retirement status become the gold standard for objectivity? Is independence defined by being out of service — or by having the strength to serve without fear or favour?
Wan Suraya brings with her 29 years of administrative service, deep knowledge of government operations, and a track record unmarred by scandal. If anything, this positions her to understand — and scrutinise — government mechanisms with greater precision than someone parachuted in from outside with no institutional insight.
Auditor-General Wan Suraya Wan Radzi at a recent official function. Her appointment has sparked political debate, despite constitutional backing and a track record of public service spanning nearly three decades. — Bernama pic
As a communications professional, I must also highlight that this debate reflects a larger challenge — the erosion of ethics and integrity in public discourse. True communication isn't just about broadcasting opinions; it is about educating the public with context, accuracy, and respect for institutions. When we distort narratives for political mileage, we not only mislead the public but undermine trust in democratic processes. Ethical communication, especially in public service, must be upheld — not attacked — if we are to strengthen national confidence and civic understanding.
And let's talk about this so-called 'cheerleading' for Madani. If public servants attending a national event or sharing an official Facebook post constitutes propaganda, then we might as well shut down every government event since Merdeka. By that logic, any participation in public discourse becomes a conflict of interest. Perhaps next we'll be told that liking a post on workplace safety makes you unfit to investigate construction sites.
Let us be clear: auditors are not monks, nor are they mute. Their duty is not to hide in a cave until summoned — it is to engage with governance, communicate transparently, and uphold public trust.
Selective outrage over a social media post, or over a conflict of interest exemption that is both legitimate and previously exercised under certain contexts, reeks more of political theatre than constitutional concern.
Instead of applauding the fact that the National Audit Department continues to produce thorough, timely reports, certain quarters would rather question the messenger — simply because the message is inconvenient.
To the critics: if your goal is to discredit institutional integrity, do so with facts — not conjecture laced with sarcasm and double standards. And please, let's not pretend this is about transparency when it is clearly about politics.
Malaysia doesn't need a silent Auditor-General. It needs a courageous, competent, and constitutionally appointed one. And, fortunately, it has one.
*Prof. Mohd Said Bani CM Din is president of the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA) Malaysia.
**This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malay Mail
19 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
‘Turun Anwar' protestors left 20-tonne rubbish in KL? Nga defends claim, says numbers come from SWCorp
KUALA LUMPUR, July 28 — Housing and Local Government Minister Nga Kor Ming stood by his statement that 20 tonnes of rubbish were left scattered following Saturday's 'Turun Anwar' rally, organised by the opposition coalition Perikatan Nasional. He said the data was provided by the Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing Corporation (SWCorp), which carried out the clean-up after the rally ended. 'The claim that 20 tonnes of rubbish were left behind did not come from me, it was a report by SWCorp, which I received from the ground. 'Hundreds of our workers were deployed to clean up the waste after the black shirt rally. I do not deny that a group from the Unit Amal helped clean up, and I thank them for that. But it also cannot be denied that 20 tonnes of rubbish were strewn across Sogo, Dataran Merdeka, and Jalan Petaling,' he said during Question Time in the Dewan Rakyat today. Nga was responding to a supplementary question from Pendang MP Datuk Awang Hashim, who questioned the 20-tonne figure and accused him of lying. Nga criticised the unhygienic behaviour of rally-goers, stressing that such gatherings must be conducted peacefully and in an orderly manner, including maintaining cleanliness. Yesterday, Nga blasted the rally organisers for their lack of environmental responsibility, after nearly 20 metric tonnes of rubbish were left scattered. He described the situation as 'deeply regrettable' and 'truly shameful', condemning the 'filthy attitude' shown at the event.
Malay Mail
19 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
When maps can lead to serious conflict: Another thorn in the Thai-Cambodian border dispute — Phar Kim Beng
JULY 28 — In South-east Asia, borders are not just lines — they are living legacies of colonial cartography, shifting sovereignties, and unresolved nation-building. The latest escalation in the Thai-Cambodian conflict reveals how something as seemingly technical as a map scale can become a powder keg of geopolitical tension. At the centre of this intensifying dispute lies a bitter disagreement: Thailand insists on the use of a 1:50,000 map; Cambodia refuses anything but the 1:200,000 version. To the untrained eye, these figures may seem inconsequential. But for seasoned observers of regional politics, this divergence underscores a broader battle over historical legitimacy, territorial sovereignty, and competing national narratives. To understand the friction, we must start with the scales themselves. Thailand's preferred map, at a scale of 1:50,000, is a product of meticulous cartography developed by its Royal Survey Department with technical input from the United States. It is based on the Mercator projection, which privileges accurate distance and direction — critical for military, civil, and administrative functions. This map presents a high-resolution portrait of the Thai-Cambodian border: every ridge, river, road, and village finely rendered, leaving little to interpretation. In contrast, Cambodia clings to a 1:200,000 scale map, originally produced by France during its colonial rule. This map, though far less detailed — 1 centimetre equating to 2 kilometres — is deeply embedded in Cambodia's legal and historical identity. Anchored in the Franco-Siamese treaties of 1904 and 1907, the map is not only a symbolic relic but the very foundation of Cambodia's official border claims. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) famously drew upon this map when awarding Cambodia control of the Preah Vihear Temple in 1962. While the ICJ did not endorse the map's precision, its citation in such a landmark case fortified Cambodia's reliance on it. At the heart of the controversy is not just scale, but projection. Thailand's Mercator-based map distorts area but preserves direction and shape — ideal for navigation but problematic for representing equatorial landmasses. Cambodia's Sinusoidal projection, meanwhile, preserves area but distorts distances, especially at the edges. These divergent projections cannot be reconciled through simple overlay or conversion. The same stretch of land will appear in different locations depending on the map used. In areas like the Dangrek Mountains — home to contested temples, scam-infested outposts, and mine-laden terrain — the consequences of such discrepancies are not abstract. They are dangerous. An aerial view shows displaced people seeking shelter near a pagoda in Oddar Meanchey province, after fleeing their homes near the Cambodia-Thailand border July 26, 2025. — AFP pic Cambodia's rejection of Thailand's map stems from both technical incompatibility and principled opposition. Phnom Penh views Thailand's 1:50,000 map as a unilateral product — one not mutually agreed upon nor recognised in the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding that was supposed to guide border demarcation. By contrast, Cambodia sees its French-produced map as a jointly recognised baseline, affirmed through decades of diplomacy and legal proceedings. Cambodia further argues that Thailand's insistence on its newer map amounts to an ex post facto revision of territorial claims. Thailand, for its part, sees the Cambodian map as outdated, imprecise, and ill-suited to modern boundary work. Bangkok contends that the colonial-era map does not meet contemporary geospatial standards and was never intended for granular demarcation. Thai officials assert that sticking to such an antiquated artifact is neither practical nor fair in a world where satellite imagery, GPS, and GIS tools offer pinpoint accuracy. Yet, what may appear fair in technical terms may be perceived as threatening in historical and emotional terms. Indeed, behind the disagreement over maps lies a deeper asymmetry of perception. For Cambodia, maps are instruments of justice — evidence of colonial wounds and international validation. For Thailand, they are tools of utility — meant to reflect ground realities, not memorialise imperial cartography. When these worldviews collide, diplomacy becomes cartographically constrained, and escalation becomes dangerously probable. This is not the first time borders drawn on paper have spilled into bloodshed. The 2008 clashes over the Preah Vihear temple led to military confrontations, international mediation, and UN involvement. The scars from that episode linger. And now, in 2025, we see history repeat itself — this time not just over temples, but over how to measure the land they sit upon. Therein lies a sobering truth: when two sovereign nations cannot agree on the very tools to define their borders, the prospect of peaceful resolution grows dim. Without consensus on the instruments of demarcation — whether satellite-generated or colonial-derived — negotiations are reduced to parallel monologues. Dialogue becomes doubly difficult when the conceptual foundations are misaligned. What then is the path forward? It is time Asean steps up — not to impose — but to facilitate a technological and diplomatic compromise. Third-party cartographic mediation, perhaps involving neutral institutions like the United Nations or regional geospatial experts, could help develop an integrated digital mapping framework that overlays both scales and projections. A hybrid platform could account for historical maps while reconciling them with modern data. What matters is not to erase history or override sovereignty, but to find common ground in shared facts. The Thai-Cambodian border dispute is not merely a technical disagreement. It is a geopolitical and psychological struggle over history, power, and identity. Until both sides can agree on the most basic of instruments — a map — their path to peace will remain dangerously convoluted. Because in South-east Asia, as this dispute reminds us, even maps can lead to war. And when they do, it is not the lines that bleed — but the people who live along them. *Phar Kim Beng, PhD, is the Director of the Institute of Internationalisation and Asean Studies (IINTAS) at the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). He served as a former Head Teaching Fellow at Harvard University and is a Cambridge Commonwealth Scholar. **This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Malay Mail
19 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
Four reports filed over ‘Turun Anwar' rally, police to investigate effigy caning and drone use
KUALA LUMPUR, July 28 — Police have received four reports in connection with the rally at Dataran Merdeka on Saturday, including one case involving an effigy resembling Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim being caned near the National Mosque. Acting Kuala Lumpur police chief Datuk Mohamed Usuf Jan Mohamad said the remaining three reports were related to the use of drones. He said that the effigy case has been referred to the Classified Crime Investigation Unit in Bukit Aman for investigation under Section 41 of the Sedition Act 1948, Section 504 of the Penal Code, and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998. 'The three other reports related to drones have been forwarded to the Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia (CAAM) for further action,' he said at a press conference here today. Mohamed Usuf said that although the rally was held peacefully and with approval, police will still investigate any misconduct by rally-goers. — Bernama
