Clarify legal violations, liability in Public Servants’ Code of Conduct

By:

Fiqah Roslan

Affiliations:

The Tiada.Guru Campaign

Policy Code:

3d Anti corruption

Problem Statement:

A major failure today is that even well-intentioned and well-meaning public servants are often illiterate in the law, particularly regarding misconduct and disciplinary violations.

Public servant administrators must prepare investigations and submit any disciplinary violations of their subordinates to the Public Services Commission, where a quasi-judicial proceeding is conducted. Think of administrators as the police and the Public Services Commission as the Court.

Shockingly and disturbingly, many administrators likely do not understand the critical requirements for these quasi-judicial proceedings, i.e., the principles of natural justice (“prinsip keadilan tabii”), documentation, witnesses, jurisdiction, time barred / statutory limits, etc.

Unfortunately, this negligence leads to many failed investigations and continued injustices. While we primarily advocate for a Public Ombudsman, until then, the Code of Conduct must be re-written in clear language and relevant examples clarified to serve as an understandable, accessible, and always-updated manual for all public servants (and the people).

Value(s) and Belief(s):

Until we empower our current public servant investigators—notably, the few honest that remain—many, if not most, of the disciplinary proceedings at the Public Service Commission (and/or unique commissions such as the Education Services Commission) will fail due to legal, evidentiary, and/or procedural grounds.

Proposal of Solution:

While we primarily advocate for a Public Ombudsman, this measure is a stopgap for the predominantly failing internal investigations.

To fix this glaring hole in today’s failed procedures, we must:

1. Create a single manual for all public servant administrators on the minimum requirements in misconduct investigations, including a thorough explanation of the legal principles, evidence, jurisdiction, time limits, witnesses, and other aspects of “natural justice”

2. This manual must be clearly explained so that even the lowest-level, most junior of administrators can easily understand the enormous responsibilities of their oversight position. It must include examples and references.

3. This manual must be justiciable in that obvious violations of the Code of Conduct can be taken to Court by ordinary citizens.

4. This manual must include the contact information of a centralized public service department whose only role is to guide and teach this manual to officers.

5. All public servants with any oversight (i.e., subordinate officers) must learn the manual and take a competency exam over its provisions; only passing marks may be promoted to oversight positions, with possible renewals.

6. This manual must be made public and easily accessible to any individual; the latest version must always be available online for free.

Additional Information:

-

Translation

Isu dan Polisi Semasa:

Kegagalan besar hari ini adalah pegawai awam yang berniat dan berakhlak baik sekalipun biasanya jahil dalam undang-undang, terutamanya mengenai salah laku dan pelanggaran tatatertib.

Pentadbir penjawat awam mesti melengkapkan siasatan dan mengemukakan sebarang pelanggaran tatatertib pekerja bawahan mereka kepada Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam, di mana prosiding kuasi-kehakiman akan dijalankan. Anggap pentadbir sebagai polis dan Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam sebagai Mahkamah.

Perkara yang mengejutkan dan membimbangkan adalah ramai pentadbir barangkali tidak memahami syarat-syarat kritikal untuk prosiding kuasi-kehakiman ini, yakni prinsip-prinsip keadilan asasi (“principles of natural justice”), dokumentasi, saksi, bidang kuasa, had masa / had berkanun, dll.

Malangnya, kecuaian ini menyebabkan banyak siasatan yang gagal dan ketidakadilan berterusan. Walaupun kami terutamanya menyokong Ombudsman Awam, sementara itu, Tatakelakuan mestilah ditulis semula dalam bahasa yang jelas serta contoh-contoh yang relevan dijelaskan supaya berfungsi sebagai satu manual yang dapat difahami, diakses dan sentiasa dikemas kini untuk semua penjawat awam (dan rakyat).

Nilai-nilai dan Kepercayaan:

Sehingga kita memberi kuasa kepada penyiasat penjawat awam kita—tidak ramai yang jujur masih ada—banyak, jika tidak sebahagian besar, prosiding tatatertib di Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam (dan/atau suruhanjaya unik seperti Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Pendidikan) akan gagal kerana alasan undang-undang, bukti dan/atau prosedur.

Penyelesaian:

Walaupun kami terutamanya menyokong Ombudsman Awam, langkah ini adalah langkah sementara untuk siasatan dalaman yang sememangnya gagal.

Untuk membaiki masalah ini dalam prosedur yang gagal hari ini, kita mesti:

1. Cipta satu manual untuk semua pentadbir penjawat awam mengenai syarat-syarat minimum dalam penyiasatan salah laku, termasuk penjelasan menyeluruh mengenai prinsip undang-undang, bukti, bidang kuasa, had masa, saksi dan aspek lain mengenai “keadilan asasi”.

2. Manual ini mesti menerangkan dengan jelas supaya pentadbir bawahan sekalipun dapat memahami dengan mudah tanggungjawab besar jawatan pengawasan mereka. Ia mesti merangkumi contoh-contoh dan sumber rujukan.

3. Manual ini mesti boleh diadili kerana pelanggaran yang jelas terhadap Tatakelakuan dan boleh dibawa ke Mahkamah oleh rakyat biasa.

4. Manual ini mesti merangkumi maklumat hubungan jabatan perkhidmatan awam pusat yang hanya berperanan untuk membimbing dan mengajar manual ini kepada para pegawai.

5. Semua penjawat awam yang mempunyai tanggungjawab pengawasan (iaitu pegawai bawahan) mesti mempelajari manual ini dan mengambil ujian kecekapan atas peruntukannya; hanya markah lulus boleh dinaikkan pangkat kepada posisi pengawasan, dengan kemungkinan penyambungan posisi.

6. Manual ini mesti disiarkan kepada orang awam dan boleh diakses oleh mana-mana individu; versi terkini mesti sentiasa disediakan dalam talian secara percuma.

Informasi Tambahan: