KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 10 (Bernama) -- Malaysia’s three-spot rise in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) should not be seen as mere numerical success; rather, it must be translated into systemic reforms that truly reduce the space and opportunity for corruption.
While this achievement is a source of pride, anti-corruption efforts must continue to be intensified and deliver real impact to the people through structural improvements in governance and more effective enforcement.
According to Malaysia Corruption Watch (MCW) President Jais Abdul Karim, the improvement is a positive boost to the national integrity agenda, but should not serve as an excuse for complacency or loss of reform momentum.
He stated that Malaysia's journey towards integrity reforms requires consistent political commitment and institutional courage to implement comprehensive reforms free from interference.
“Bringing several large-scale and high-profile corruption cases to court likely contributed to the improved international perception, especially regarding the nation’s readiness to take legal action regardless of the status of the individuals involved.
“However, prosecution alone is not sufficient. Positive perception will only persist and grow if it is accompanied by fair and consistent convictions, an independent and transparent judicial process, reform of enforcement agencies, and effective corruption prevention at the policy and systemic level,” he told Bernama.
Malaysia's ranking in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) improved from 57th in 2024 to 54th last year, according to the CPI 2025 report released by Transparency International (TI) today.
The report also stated that Malaysia ranks third among ASEAN countries, behind Singapore and Brunei. Additionally, the country’s score for last year rose to 52 points, compared to 50 in the 2024 assessment, showing a moderate but encouraging upward trend.
Commenting further, Jais said that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is a strategic national institution that must be defended, strengthened, and protected from excessive political polemics that could threaten public confidence and effectiveness of enforcement.
In this context, he said MCW believes proposals to set up a new committee to monitor the MACC should be considered objectively and based on the reality of existing structures, not based on the perception that the MACC has failed or is dysfunctional.
“The MACC already has a comprehensive system of checks and balances, including the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Special Committee on Corruption (JKMR), the Complaints Committee (JKA), as well as operations and prevention panels that operate within legal and administrative frameworks.
“Criticism of enforcement agencies should be constructive, evidence-based, and should not be used as a tool to divert attention from investigations or for narrow political agendas,” he said.
Meanwhile, Ilham Centre Research Fellow Mujibu Abd Muis said the rise in Malaysia's CPI 2025 ranking is viewed as a positive early indicator of the country’s governance direction, but it cannot yet be deemed a major success or comprehensive structural change.
“CPI measures perception, not absolute reality; so this improvement reflects the relative confidence of the international community in Malaysia’s governance direction, rather than evidence that corruption has been completely eradicated,” he said.
He added that while the increase signals institutional improvement efforts and clearer political will towards the reform agenda, Malaysia’s position—which remains in the global middle tier—reflects a lingering deficit of trust in the country’s anti-corruption system.
Commenting on whether the CPI boost was driven by bringing high-profile corruption cases to court, Mujibu said the impact is symbolic but does not determine the index rating outright.
“Prosecuting major corruption cases provides a powerful symbolic effect on international perception, as it indicates political will to allow legal processes to proceed even against high-profile individuals.
“However, if prosecutions are viewed as selective, seasonal, or not accompanied by systemic reforms such as separation of prosecutorial and executive powers, the CPI impact is usually temporary.
“Thus, this improvement is better understood as a combination of high-profile prosecutions, a shift in government narrative, and pressure from civil society,” he said.
According to Malaysia Corruption Watch (MCW) President Jais Abdul Karim, the improvement is a positive boost to the national integrity agenda, but should not serve as an excuse for complacency or loss of reform momentum.
He stated that Malaysia's journey towards integrity reforms requires consistent political commitment and institutional courage to implement comprehensive reforms free from interference.
“Bringing several large-scale and high-profile corruption cases to court likely contributed to the improved international perception, especially regarding the nation’s readiness to take legal action regardless of the status of the individuals involved.
“However, prosecution alone is not sufficient. Positive perception will only persist and grow if it is accompanied by fair and consistent convictions, an independent and transparent judicial process, reform of enforcement agencies, and effective corruption prevention at the policy and systemic level,” he told Bernama.
Malaysia's ranking in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) improved from 57th in 2024 to 54th last year, according to the CPI 2025 report released by Transparency International (TI) today.
The report also stated that Malaysia ranks third among ASEAN countries, behind Singapore and Brunei. Additionally, the country’s score for last year rose to 52 points, compared to 50 in the 2024 assessment, showing a moderate but encouraging upward trend.
Commenting further, Jais said that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is a strategic national institution that must be defended, strengthened, and protected from excessive political polemics that could threaten public confidence and effectiveness of enforcement.
In this context, he said MCW believes proposals to set up a new committee to monitor the MACC should be considered objectively and based on the reality of existing structures, not based on the perception that the MACC has failed or is dysfunctional.
“The MACC already has a comprehensive system of checks and balances, including the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Special Committee on Corruption (JKMR), the Complaints Committee (JKA), as well as operations and prevention panels that operate within legal and administrative frameworks.
“Criticism of enforcement agencies should be constructive, evidence-based, and should not be used as a tool to divert attention from investigations or for narrow political agendas,” he said.
Meanwhile, Ilham Centre Research Fellow Mujibu Abd Muis said the rise in Malaysia's CPI 2025 ranking is viewed as a positive early indicator of the country’s governance direction, but it cannot yet be deemed a major success or comprehensive structural change.
“CPI measures perception, not absolute reality; so this improvement reflects the relative confidence of the international community in Malaysia’s governance direction, rather than evidence that corruption has been completely eradicated,” he said.
He added that while the increase signals institutional improvement efforts and clearer political will towards the reform agenda, Malaysia’s position—which remains in the global middle tier—reflects a lingering deficit of trust in the country’s anti-corruption system.
Commenting on whether the CPI boost was driven by bringing high-profile corruption cases to court, Mujibu said the impact is symbolic but does not determine the index rating outright.
“Prosecuting major corruption cases provides a powerful symbolic effect on international perception, as it indicates political will to allow legal processes to proceed even against high-profile individuals.
“However, if prosecutions are viewed as selective, seasonal, or not accompanied by systemic reforms such as separation of prosecutorial and executive powers, the CPI impact is usually temporary.
“Thus, this improvement is better understood as a combination of high-profile prosecutions, a shift in government narrative, and pressure from civil society,” he said.