Introduction

“Don’t worry… everyone does it, right?”

This is a typical saying one might come across when questioning the practice of corruption in the Malaysian civil service. While it does not entail that Malaysians in general approve the practice, it does indicate that it has become somewhat a social norm that occurs naturally within the system.

It becomes dangerous if the public start to tolerate or normalise it in daily life.

As reported, corruption in Malaysia is deeply rooted, with the country’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) increasing from 47 in 2018 to 50 in 2024. These figures indicate Malaysia’s substandard performance due to the constant presence of corruption to the point of becoming systemic.

Although institutional and legislative loopholes are cited as reasons, one particularly important and often overlooked factor perpetuating this problem is deep-seated cultural norms that normalise and encourage corruption.

Ranging from unquestioning obedience to the use of discretionary powers (budi bicara), cultural norms in the Malaysian civil workforce could subconsciously nourish and fuel corrupt behaviours.

Empirical evidence suggests that Malaysia ranks high in terms of power distance, collectivism and indulgence, which produce habits that become customary routines, influencing civil servants to be susceptible to corrupt practices. Furthermore, the factor of indulgence has also led civil servants to justify certain actions and behaviours, as they follow their impulses and desires to enjoy life.

Cultural Norms Feeding Corruption

Blind Obedience and Compliance

In a number of Malaysian civil departments, there is one culture that is quite clear: do not question the directives from above. This norm breeds a culture where subordinates are reluctant to resist dubious orders even when it is clearly wrong. Thereby, practices such as public procurement fraud, misuse of project allocations or embezzlement schemes often go unnoticed and thrive because no one dares to come forward to report suspicious activities and transactions.

Abdul Rahman Nordin, the secretary-general of the country’s largest trade union, stated that civil servan

Patronage and Nepotism

The tradition of patronage – whereby influential people favour family members, friends or political allies for jobs or contracts – erodes meritocracy and accountability. Ideally, the civil service should hire and appoint people based on merit rather than connection or relationship.

A recent case illustrates this debate quite well.

Last year, Penang Deputy Chief Minister II Jagdeep Singh Deo expressed his views that it is unreasonable to deny any role to his father-in-law – who is a prominent and respected lawyer in his profession – simply because of the nature of their relationship and Jadgeep’s own position as a leader in the society.

Professor James Chin from the University of Tasmania highlighted the frequent occurrence in Asian countries, including Malaysia, where only a few businessmen allied to politicians are allowed to bid and work on large projects. This is a simple example of how discretionary power has been employed in political and business engagements to play favourites. While this might be the reality, it nonetheless erodes meritocracy and creates an institutionalised cycle of corruption that will extend to the future.

Gift-Giving or Duit Kopi

In Malaysia, giving gifts such as duit raya (celebratory money) or duit kopi (coffee money) are a common practice to show appreciation and respect. But when a civil servant receives gifts in the form of duit raya, hampers or lavish dinners, it could open doors to the practice of returning favours (budi dibalas budi) to the “patron”. Indeed, the practice of bribing has often been camouflaged as gift-giving in the country.

A PwC report in 2020 revealed that 30% of Malaysian businesses lost opportunities because competitors offered bribes. This is a sharp increase from 11% in 2018, reflecting the widespread nature of bribing in the Malaysian context. The report also pointed out that this corrupt practice is common in everyday routine and thus has an impact on the survival of the people. If civil servants receive gifts from those who seek special treatment, this indirectly encourages a culture of courtesy that affects integrity in governance.

Collectivism

The collectivist nature of Malaysian society places immense importance on loyalty and group harmony. Therefore, the act of reporting wrong behaviour and misconduct is often considered as “exposing our people” or “betrayal”.

The C4 Center wrote that whistleblowers of cases of corruption or power abuse often become targets of harassment. This sentiment is supported by Director-General of the Public Service Department Tan Sri Mohd Khairul Adib wh

The lack of whistleblower protection mechanisms has resulted in many staying silent rather than facing risks of being terminated, displaced or threatened. Fortunately, the government has recently presented amendments and improvements to the Whistle

Indeed, according to Hamilye Sham Harun of the Malaysian Institute of Integrity, the identity of informers must not be revealed, and their safety must be assured.

Chain Effects

Failure to eradicate corruption from our culture would lead to the practice being tolerated by the society. Such an outcome would result in adverse consequences not only for the welfare of the people but also for Malaysia’s economy and governance.

Indeed, corruption causes heavy financial losses. A World Bank report in 2024 estimated that corruption costs Malaysia up to 4% of the annual GDP. Corruption becomes another barrier to doing business, rendering Malaysia’s bureaucracy slow and complicated. Former trade minister Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz has expressed frustration over the increase in public sector costs, unreasonable operating conditions and investments that have made investors wary and reluctant to operate in the country. She stated that this happened because some individuals took advantage and created unfair competition.

A consequence to this would be slower economic growth and less FDI coming into the country.  These diminish public confidence in government institutions and reduce civic engagement as well as cooperation. Worse, when the public can openly discern that their welfare has been directly affected by corrupt practices, such as substandard public service, any discontent experienced could easily evolve to open opposition.

These would also lead to bigger problems such as unemployment, food security and housing crisis. When these occur, the public’s confidence in the government would plummet, setting a stage for a political crisis. In fact, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has emphasised Malaysia’s main problems are poor governance and systemic corruption.

What Works

Scandinavian countries

Scandinavian countries are well known for their culture of cooperation and coordination, which become the benchmark for effectiveness of anti-corruption measures. Education in these countries is centered on public values, aimed at nurturing individuals to give back to the community and empowering them to tackle communal challenges independently. Hence, the values of transparency and honesty are instilled in Scandinavian people from early age.

Consequently, these values are on display in the way Scandinavians conduct governance. Policies and anti-corruption measures are formulated and exercised with intensive strategic planning and risk management, all which are financially and legally sound.

Singapore

Singapore’s successes in transforming itself from an island with many governance challenges to a gold standard civil service. The city-state’s achievements, arguably, could be owed to the unwavering political will and support demonstrated by its first leader Lee Kuan Yew. Strategic planning such as long-term policy plans, resource allocations and localised adaptation of international best practices are some of the exemplary steps that contributed to the success of the nation.

Furthermore, leadership, the rule of law and a culture of upholding reputation are tools that facilitated Singapore’s achievement in attaining a good governance model, one that emphasises on pragmatism and local integration of standards that produced effective anti-corruption measures.

What Does Not Work

Indonesia and China

Several case studies highly discredit localised integration of best practices and adaptation of effective international policies. Evidence from Indonesia and China show that these techniques cannot be translated into a successful counteractive measure for corruption in nations that have varying traditions and ethnic cultures.

As a matter of fact, Pei (2016) found the integration of traditional culture into governance practice has further facilitated corruption and caused even more issues. For example, the centuries-old Chinese traditions of 关系 (guanxi – beneficial mutual benefit) and 礼貌 (limao – politeness) have been intellectually manipulated over the course of history to justify corrupt practices.

The same can be said about Indonesia’s “bapakism” and “gotong-royong”. Hence, institutionalised laws and enforcement of rules are suggested as the most reliable techniques to counteract corruption in these countries.

However, there are challenges to these, including the stringency of laws (particularly to the people and not to officials), unfair and unjust systems, as well as misappropriation of resources. These occur due to a lack of competency and transparency on the part of the government, as officials struggling with low salary while meritocracy in hiring is not adhered to.

India

India also faces similar issues with China and Indonesia, with its problems rooted in legal mechanisms weakened by cultural-political resistance. India’s bureaucracy has been deeply influenced by the colonial cultural routines that persist until today—this was purposefully set up as a leeway for manipulation and exploitation of resources. Overtime, Indian administrators and politicians facilitated the democratisation of crimes that play throughout every election cycle.

The Philippines

Meanwhile, cultural-political resistance in the Philippines is supported by patronage and selective enforcement of laws. The country is facing the challenge of purposeful inefficiency that is strategised by administrators and politicians, manifesting in such problems as the continuous shortage of staff, resource immobilisation and budget limits. These have led to incompetent governance, resulting in the poor reputation of the civil service.

Wha Is in It for Us in Malaysia?

Fortunately, these case studies above could help us in Malaysia to distinguish possible pathways and situations that could unfold in Malaysia. Utilising short-term strategic analysis techniques, several possible scenarios for the next five years in Malaysia could be derived.

Malaysia has an impressive advancement in the power index in Southeast Asia, ranking fourth behind Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand. Among its greatest strengths are Malaysia’s rich cultural influences and diplomacy outreach. These two points towards how political motivations under the Prime Minister enhanced diversity of various Malaysian cultures which appealed and interacted with the international public to shape opinions.

Plus, Malaysian cultural and diplomatic charms paved the way for international strengths and leadership roles which assist local development. Meanwhile, in

However, political analyst Welsh (2024) noted that Malaysia has begun to show signs of divided perspectives. Beginning from issues of political legitimacy in 2021 and 2022, Welsh (2024) noted that Malaysians have become separated in ideology and community commitments affected by citizen visions. Hence, these stark differences blurred the spectrum of power and rights which inevitably allowed elite entitlement. Media reports also showed that disillusionment in the Malaysian political arena through gamification of cultural cohesion, compromise and justice had led to weak governance and low levels of public confidence.

Opportunities

If Malaysia addressed culturally-embedded corruption and improved efficiency and effectives in implementation, then, the next five years could see an incremental rise of effective anti-corruption measures. This will lead to enhanced institutional credibility, heightened trust and investor confidence towards the government.

Threats

If these underlying issues are left unaddressed, then the next five years might see further erosion of public trust in the government. As inefficiency and ineffectiveness run rampant, the government might encounter a paralysis and further suffer a hit to its global reputation, therefore reducing chances and opportunities for Malaysians to improve their lives as talents will leave the country and life quality plummets.

Forward Pathways

Our cultural identity is both a strength and a challenge. One thing is for sure: cultural norms stem from our national pride and identity that separate us from the rest of the world. Some cultural norms are shared based on geographical landscapes, which provide every individual a sense of belongingness.

Directly discarding cultural norms is difficult, what more adjusting tradition to fit modern professional needs. Hence, few challenges and solutions are highlighted based on recommendations by researchers like Nurfarizan & Intan (2023), Quah (2022) as well as Siddiquee & Zafarullah (2020) to help understand how culture can be integrated to improve anti-corruption measures in Malaysia.

1. De-normalization

Silence on cultural integration of corruption is the main culprit that breeds misunderstanding of how dire the consequences of cultural corruption. There is a need to raise awareness about the harmful effects of corruption disguised as tradition, hence, advocacy and education to de-normalize corrupt behavior masked as traditions should be a norm.

2. Realignment

Localisation of regulations and rules ought to prevent recurring corruption incidents. Therefore, the intentional realignment of national planning and policy implementation should rethink and reform the civil service not only through law but also through culture.

3. Intensive action

De-normalization and realignment should not only be done on paper but also followed through actions that involve all levels of society. Positive implementation of cultural actions, as exemplified by Singaporean adherence to rules and leadership instead of the leader, and empowerment of righteous acts should be encouraged and exemplified, by individual leaders and also through group support.

4. Consistent routines

Walk the talk is easier said than done, hence, consistent routines should be placed as guidance. These routines should lessen discretionary powers in favor of crony by leveraging guided decisions in favor of community benefit and development. Establishing ongoing practices indirectly promotes transparency and accountability.

Reform of cultural norms embedded in the civil service must be done immediately if we really want to change the system. In addition to acknowledgement, research and understanding the issue of corruption and its relationship with cultural norms, follow-up actions need to be taken. Among the key strategies are:

1. Anti-Corruption Education and Awareness

MACC public awareness campaigns and education initiatives must be extended to schools and universities. Plus, culturally appropriate ethics and integrity training needs to be integrated in civil service induction programs.

This increased awareness helps to change mindsets, induce individual cultural reformation and promote a culture of accountability from an early stage. For example, MACC’s educational initiatives through public activities, co-curricular classes for school and university students as well as the use of social media to spread knowledge about corruption and cultural habits. With this initiative, the trick to take advantage of bribery and the fear of reporting corruption can be prevented.

2. Strengthening Whistleblower Protection

The Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 must be revised to ensure stricter protections. Strengthening laws and mechanisms to protect whistleblowers will encourage more individuals to report corrupt activities without fear of retaliation. Additional legal safeguards under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 such as anonymous reporting, ensuring confidentiality and immunity from retaliation. Recently, the MACC provided the ‘MACC Mobile’ application as an accessible platform to report corruption anonymously. Hence, this initiative provides various opportunities to prevent and control corruption.

3. Institutionalizing Meritocracy

The conditions for promotion in the public sector should be based on merit assessed from the individual’s ability to perform tasks and duties. In addition, government-owned companies (GLCs) and government agencies should be depoliticized to ensure fair hiring practices. Public sector leaders should be role models for integrity and accountability.

Conclusion: Dare to fight or remain silent forever?

The fight against corruption is not merely about laws, regulations and policies. It is about reshaping mindsets, breaking toxic cultural norms and the dismantling of the relationship between corruption and entrenched cultural norms. Without an immediate change and a meaningful reform, Malaysia is at risk of further deepening systemic inefficiencies and continuing to lose public trust. If we don’t start acting now, are we prepared to face the consequences for decades to come?