KUALA LUMPUR 17 Dec – The Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center) has issued a sharp rebuke of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s latest proposal to amend the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) 2010, arguing that denying protection to "unclean" whistleblowers will effectively cripple Malaysia’s fight against graft.
The critique follows the Prime Minister’s remarks in the Dewan Negara on December 16, 2025, where he suggested that upcoming amendments would distinguish between "genuine whistleblowers" and "hardened criminals" who allegedly use the law to hide their own wrongdoing.
A "Misguided" Moral Judgment
C4 Center strongly questioned the Prime Minister’s logic, asserting that excluding individuals who participated in the alleged corruption from legal protection would deter insiders from coming forward.
"This approach will only hamper anti-corruption efforts moving forward, as individuals implicated in wrongful conduct will have no reason to come forward with valuable information that may only be available to them," the C4 Center stated in a press release.
The watchdog emphasized that corruption is often secretive and sophisticated, making insider information essential for successful prosecutions.
"No one is closer to that information than individuals who may themselves be implicated in wrongdoing... Anwar’s approach of pre-emptively categorising whistleblowers based on moral judgment or alleged culpability fundamentally misunderstands how corruption is exposed in practice."
Contradictions and International Standards
The Center also pointed out a glaring inconsistency within the current administration’s policies. Earlier this year, amendments to the WPA 2010 introduced Section 11(1A), which specifically allows enforcement agencies to maintain protection for whistleblowers who participated in the alleged wrongdoing if their testimony is deemed necessary.
"Anwar’s statement here seems to have disregarded his own administration’s actions," the Center noted, asking whether the government intended to backtrack on these recently passed provisions.
Furthermore, C4 Center argued that the Prime Minister’s stance clashes with international norms, specifically the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC).
Under these standards, "good faith" refers to the reasonable belief that the information provided is true, regardless of the whistleblower’s personal motives or criminal history.
The Sabah Scandal and Selective Justice
The controversy arrives amidst the fallout of the Sabah mining scandal involving whistleblower Albert Tei. While the Prime Minister criticized the public for "glorifying" individuals involved in corruption as heroes, C4 Center argued the focus should remain on the high-level officials exposed by Tei’s information.
"Why is it that the person who came forward with information on corruption gets punished, while so many of those he exposed face zero consequences?" the Center asked, noting that without Tei’s disclosures, the scandal likely would have remained hidden.
Proposed Reforms
To truly strengthen the framework, C4 Center urged the government to move away from moral gatekeeping and instead implement a more robust, tiered protection system.
Their recommendations include:
Tiered Protection Policies: Clearer guidelines on how complicit informants can qualify for protection under Section 11(1A).
Expanded Channels: Allowing protection for disclosures made beyond just enforcement agencies.
Enhanced Physical Safety: Moving beyond legal immunity to provide anticipatory physical protection from reprisals.
Support Services: Mandating access to legal and psychological support for whistleblowers.
Legislative Review: Repealing or amending laws that inhibit disclosure, such as the Official Secrets Act 1972 and Section 203A of the Penal Code.
"The purpose of whistleblower protection laws is to encourage people to come forward with information, regardless of intent or involvement," the C4 Center concluded. - DagangNews.com


