Auditor-General’s Report and the G.R.E.A.T. Civil Service: Who Is Accountable?

By Saleh Mohammed

In 2023, the Chief Secretary to the Government outlined a noble aspiration for Malaysia’s civil service: to be G.R.E.A.T. anchored in Good Governance, Responsibility, Empathy, Accountability, and Tenacity of Purpose. In line with the Madani framework, he emphasised aligning KPIs for secretaries-general and department directors-general with strategic thrusts and values that would renew trust and efficiency in public administration.

This effort was formalised through the Performance Acceleration and Coordination Unit (formerly Shared Prosperity Delivery Unit) created in 2021. Its mission? To coordinate reforms and monitor delivery with integrity, professionalism, and public-centric goals.

But the second Auditor-General’s Report for 2025 paints a troubling picture. It reveals that this dream is far from realization. Billions have been lost due to persistent weaknesses in project implementation, contract management, procurement procedures, and enforcement across seven federal ministries. And once again, familiar themes emerge: systemic flaws, policy gaps, lack of coordination, and a worrying absence of accountability.

Failures Despite Reform Aspirations

In one alarming instance, the pre-qualification procurement process meant to streamline fair selection was found to be open to manipulation. Companies with no proper credentials were still shortlisted. Out of 71 projects worth RM20.1 billion reviewed across three ministries, the audit revealed that none had achieved their intended objectives. Notably, none of the three ministries involved had a centralized contractor database a basic requirement in transparent vendor management.

Worse still, Felcra Berhad, a wholly-owned MOF Inc. entity, was flagged for serious governance lapses. These included poor procurement practices, unverified valuations, and underwhelming yield performances suggesting either incompetence or collusion.

Cooking Oil Subsidy: Poor Policy, Poorer Execution

Take the example of the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Cost of Living (KPDN). It was found that its cooking oil subsidy policy lacked clarity, comprehensiveness, and effective enforcement mechanisms. The 60,000 metric tonnes monthly quota was based on a 2016 Cabinet decision, not updated, not validated with recent consumption data. Even the 1.5kg/person/month quota lacks scientific basis. And what’s worse, retailers profiting beyond the RM2.50/kg ceiling price while still benefiting from subsidies underscores a loophole-laden system ripe for abuse.

Recurring Concerns in Defence and Education

At the Ministry of Defence, the audit uncovered contract mismanagement and circumvention of procurement rules. Meanwhile, at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, procurement irregularities were blatant contract awards were made to bidders not endorsed by the technical or financial evaluation committees. This represents not just administrative oversight but a disregard for internal control systems.

SWCorp’s Financial Woes: A Sign of Deeper Issues

Perhaps one of the most telling signs of systemic failure lies in SWCorp (Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing Corporation). In the first Auditor-General’s Report for 2025, it was revealed that SWCorp may struggle to continue its operations due to its weak financial position. The audit found it to be financially unsustainable, with RM140.15 million in net debt, and liabilities exceeding long-term assets. This raises serious questions about the governance and oversight by its parent ministry, the Ministry of Housing and Local Government. It reflects a deeper, more pervasive issue: public agencies operating without financial discipline or long-term sustainability plans.

Same Mistakes, Every Year: A Culture of Impunity?

For decades, the Auditor-General’s Reports have detailed similar failings, procurement, contracts, implementation, monitoring. Yet, few if any, have been held accountable. This recurring pattern of failures reflects deep-rooted structural problems, not just isolated errors. It begs the question: Are internal audits still functional? Do Integrity Units, established to address misconduct, still carry weight, or have they become ceremonial offices?

Where Are the KPIs? Where Is the MACC?

We must ask how these ministries’ KPIs were formulated and evaluated. If “serious irregularities” are recurring, did their key officers meet their KPIs? If so, on what basis? Also, is the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) paying attention? These are not minor administrative issues, they are red flags pointing toward potential misuse of public funds.

The Chief Secretary’s 146-page vision for a reformed civil service deserves commendation. But as the Auditor-General’s findings show, what we need is structural reform, not just another booklet or workshop. Administrative reforms must be backed by enforcement, cultural change, and institutional courage.

Policies Must Be Clear, Long-Term, and Aligned

Ministries must stop issuing policies without proper grounding. The KPDN case is a perfect example, decisions based on outdated figures, without any updated study or practical enforcement design. Public policies must consider long-term viability, implementation constraints, and alignment with national development goals. Officers need clarity and guidance; otherwise, ambiguity becomes a breeding ground for mistakes, or worse, manipulation.

Resistance to Change Is No Excuse

Of course, change won’t come easy. Organizational resistance is a real barrier. But it is the responsibility of those in power ministers, secretaries-general, directors-general to lead through it. Public service is a trust, not a shield. Ignorance, complacency, or inertia cannot be an excuse for failure.

The words of John Maynard Keynes echo sharply here:

“No matter how powerful the economic engine is, it will not perform well as long as one crucial part is malfunctioning.”

Malaysia may now rank 23rd in the IMD World Competitiveness Rankings 2025 a commendable achievement but we still have skeletons in our closet. Will we address them or simply sweep them under the carpet?

Time to Hold Someone Accountable

The Prime Minister has consistently championed good governance and anti-corruption. But this vision cannot materialize without full buy-in from the civil service and political leadership. If the people at the top don’t act on clear cases of mismanagement, then the dream of a G.R.E.A.T. civil service will remain just that a dream.

It’s time we stop asking “what went wrong” and start asking “who will take responsibility?”

What say you?