Integrity Issues In The Public Service
Integrity issues that are not handled wisely could tarnish the image of public service in the eyes of local and international communities. Various efforts had been implemented by the government to ensure the integrity of public servants were at the highest level. Malaysian Institute of Integrity (IIM) established in 2004 is responsible for promoting integrity in public service and to monitor the effort that has been undertaken by stipulated agencies. The purpose of this paper is to look at the current scenario based on information and statistic given by IIM and to discuss the efforts and strategies carried out by the government. This paper is based on secondary data gathered through reliable resources and literature review as being mentioned. Then in-depth interviews with The Director of Public Sector in Malaysian Institute of Integrity, Mohammad Diah bin Haji Wahari were conducted on the 19th December 2011. Keywords – Integrity, Malaysian Institute of Integrity, Public Service, Ethics, Corruption
The Government of Malaysia has made continuous efforts and put in place an elaborate set of strategies and institutions aimed at combating corruption and promoting integrity in the society. The nation’s anti-corruption drive has lately received a major boost. Former Prime Minister, Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi’s government that came to power in 2003, declared combating corruption as its main priority, which was followed by a series of concrete measures. Since this study is focusing on integrity issues in the public service, we identified Malaysian Institute of Integrity (IIM) as our main reference due to its role as a coordinating body that oversees the functions or programs relating the matters of integrity. IIM has been established as a coordinating agency and monitors the implementation of the National Integrity Plan (PIN). IIM main objective is to develop integrity of Malaysia, resilient and embrace universal values. IIM is the idea of Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi that has been declared on 5th November 2003. IIM is the coordinating organization for the implementation of the PIN. The vision of IIM is aligned to the fourth Challenge of Vision 2020, which is to shape Malaysia into a society that is firms rooted in moral principles and ethics that is exemplified through good conduct. Its mission is to implement objectives, strategies and programmes that will enhance the level of integrity among all Malaysians. Functions of IIM are divided into seven key roles. The first key role is to conduct research related to the integrity of institutions and that of the community, the second is to organize conferences, seminars, and forums, the third is to elicit opinions from various sectors on the progress made or on the obstacles faced in implementing integrity, the fourth is to publish and circulate printed materials as well as formulating and implementing training and educational programs, the fifth is to recommend new policies for the enhancement of integrity and ethics, the sixth key role is to advice the government on strategies and programs in enhancing integrity and the final is to establish networking with international organizations. IIM has its integrity targets. It has five priority targets, which are: (1) to effectively reduce the scourges of corruption, malpractices and abuse of power; (2) to increase the efficiency of the public service delivery system and overcoming bureaucratic red tape; (3) to enhance corporate governance and business ethics; (4) to strengthen the family institution and community; and (5) to improve the quality of life and the well-being of society. For the purpose of this study, the discussion on the paper will be only focusing on the first two phases of PIN that are target 1 and 2.
The fourth challenge of Vision 2020 is to “establish a fully moral and ethical society whose citizens are strong in religious...
References: A, Arawati, S. Baker and J. Kandampully. (2007) “An exploratory study of service quality in the Malaysian public service sector.” International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 24 (2): 177-190.
Audi, R., & Murphy, P. E. (2006). The many faces of integrity. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16, 3−21.
Bardhan, Pranab. 1997. “Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues,” Journal of Economic Literature 35: 1320-1346.
Carino, L.V. 1986. Tonic or toxic: The effects of graft and corruption. In Carino, L.V.
Gupta, S., Davoodi, H. & Alonso-Terme, R. 1998. Does corruption affect inequality and poverty? IMF Working Paper W/P98/76.Gray, C.W. & Kaufmann, D. 1988. Corruption and development, Finance and Development, 35(1), pp 7-10.
Ismail, A. (2005). Public Sector Service Delivery Excellence. Research & Planning Division, Public Service Department, Malaysia.
Jabatan Perdana Menteri (2010). Program Transformasi Kerajaan - Pelan Hala Tuju GTP: Bab 6. Unit Pengurusan Prestasi dan Pelaksanaan (PEMANDU), Jabatan Perdana Menteri.
Kaufmann, D, & Shang, J.W. 1999. Does grease money’ speed up the wheels of
commerce, Working Paper7093, National Bureau of Economic Research.
MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue, (2nd ed.) Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
MAMPU (Januari 2010). Pelan Integriti MAMPU 2010 – 2012. Seksyen Pembangunan Nilai dan Etika, Bahagian Transformasi Sektor Awam, MAMPU, Jabatan Perdana Menteri.
Palanski, M. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (2007). Integrity and leadership: Clearing the conceptual confusion. European Management Journal, 25, 171−184.
Pelan Integriti Nasional (2010). Kuala Lumpur : Institut Integriti Malaysia (Wahari, M.D. Personal Interview, December 19,2011).
Rachels, J. (2003). The elements of moral philosophy, 4th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.
Rose-Ackerman, Susan. 1999. Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences and Reform. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tanzi, V. & Davoodi, H. 1998. Roads to nowhere: How corruption in public investment hurts growth, The Economic Issues Series, Washington D.C International Monetary Fund.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document