Ethics and integrity are the cornerstones of good governance. Catchy phraseology, eerie video clips or elaborate convocation ceremonies have limited merit when ethics and integrity are compromised or redefined to serve self-interests, be it political or otherwise.

The government spokesman’s recent statement — that the Cabinet has not been briefed by the chief secretary on the select committee’s findings regarding a senior civil servant — is both perturbing and saddening.

As an ex-auditor and fraud investigator, who also served on two of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) oversight panels in its early years, I have written in this space on the ease at which claims made on reporting on shareholdings by civil servants could be speedily investigated.

One either declared or not, one either has been truthful or not. Then again, it could be attributable to the failure of the IT systems to capture such input.

If the IT system is at fault, other heads need to roll! Possibly there is a virus and a need for system maintenance.

Then again, the policies and procedures for reporting may be outdated or unfit for purpose. The auditor-general should examine this.

Alternatively, the Standing Orders may only call for a slap on the wrist, if revealed, as there is no criminal element. Only ethical behaviour that is found wanting.

The crux of the matter is whether truth was told when reports both in foreign and local press emerged on questionable shareholdings. This impinges on integrity, both data integrity and human integrity.

Many, including those in power and those heading enforcement and other agencies, have conveniently forgotten the background against which the MACC Act 2009 came into force. It was to eliminate selective investigations and prosecutions.

It should not be perceived, rightly or wrongly, by the masses, that select agencies are being used to settle old scores with political foes of yesteryears.

Increasingly if one follows trends of behaviour, including orders on declaration of assets targeted to a select few, even in the absence of an offence predicate, in some instances, one cannot be faulted for harbouring thoughts on selective enforcement.

Hiding behind the tenet that such powers to investigate are within the law is unethical.

Waiting out the duration of the contract as well as inordinate unexplained delays risks the chief secretary being perceived as either impotent or incompetent to take the required actions to brief the Cabinet, and by default the general public.

This is irresponsible behaviour bordering on criminal intent.

For the Cabinet to say, “we haven’t heard anything yet” is even more beguiling and reflects sheer irresponsibility. Where are those federal ministers who are now in the Cabinet, once vocal critics, when one needs them the most.

Is it “don’t rock the boat” or “rock a bye baby”?

“Why are we waiting” is an apt chant here.

Possibly those who turned up with placards at a recent event and were hauled up by the authorities in abuse of their democratic rights, should adopt these words as a suitable narrative on the placard and sing their hearts out.

Then perhaps they will not be manhandled at functions which, surprisingly and contradictorily speaking, are harping on and trying to deliver a message on integrity and corruption.

Following on that, then there is tight security at another event so that rabble rousers will not throw cold water on the auspiciousness and sanctity of the event.

Ironically the tight security is at a convocation, a grandiose event celebrating integrity.

What are chief integrity officers expected to take away from their graduation? Is it all nothing but shadow play condoned by those in the corridors of power?

As memory serves, there has not been such fervour shown to bring disrepute on any event attended by a senior enforcement agency officer. It is telling and reflects a morbid breakdown in good governance starting from the top.

It puts corporate mafia insinuations to shame.

When the dust settles, with possibly a new appointment and this episode being swept under the carpet, what is the message being sent to the youth of the nation on good governance and accountability.

These virtues were shouted from the highest rooftops when the current cohort was not holding the reins of power. Now that they are in power, the reality of human behaviour is up for all to see.

No wonder, day by day, we continue to hear of cases of bribery and corruption, the latest being unclean funds purportedly in the accounts of a branch of a political party, currently a part of the government.

Let’s not pour good money after bad by hosting grand convocation events purportedly to improve the environment of ethical behaviour while key players continue to have a degree of opaqueness surrounding their demeanour, both professional and personal.

Restoring trust is an uphill battle, instilling good ethics is an even greater challenge.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.