Is resume fraud on the rise in Malaysia?

A CELEBRITY allegedly masqueraded as a doctoral graduate. A member of the administration allegedly obtained bogus educational qualifications from a degree mill. These are some examples of eminent members of society who allegedly falsified their academic background.

Resume fraud occurs when a person fabricates information of his or her educational and/or professional qualifications, most probably for the purpose of increasing the prospect of employment and/or promotion in an organisation. Recently, such behaviour has been increasing appears to have been left unaddressed for several years.

Why the rampancy of resume fraud?

In most workplaces, it has been internalised that a more impressive educational background means more money and higher prospects for promotion – even if the qualification is obtained by fraudulent means. The fact that such deceit may only ascertained by thorough – really thorough – background checks is not helping to deter the situation.

Yes, for obvious reason, falsifying one’s resume is gross professional misconduct.

In Utusan Malaysia (M) Sdn Bhd v an employee, the company in this case dismissed its employee on the grounds that she had made a misrepresentation of her true educational qualification, when in reality she did not possess one. During her pre-employment interview with the company, the company had relied on her job application form and resume.

The Industrial Court decided that her dismissal from the company was justifiable. She had knowingly misrepresented her true qualifications to the company, which shows element of dishonesty on her part. As such, the confidence and trust that the company had placed in her no longer existed.

In other instances, such as in Gannon v Canada (Treasury Board), the employee was dismissed from his employment as human resources advisor in the Department of Nasional Defence on the grounds of, among others, falsifying his resume. The objective of the deceit was clear: to secure a higher level position with the federal civil service. The employee’s misconduct in preparing and submitting the falsified resume is so intricately related to his duties as staffing officer that disciplinary action was justifiable.

Such activity not only brings into question his judgment but also his ability to perform his job with integrity. In such circumstances, where trust in the employee is lost, it is not unreasonable for any employer to determine that he is not suited for any position within its organisation.

In the private sector, falsification of one’s educational and/or professional background may not be illegal per se (but it may give rise to tortious liability). Notwithstanding, in the context of criminal law, furnishing false information may in some instances constitute an offence. Section 177 Penal Code imposes criminal liability on a person who owed legal obligation to provide true information to a public servant, but furnishes false information to him.

The Malaysian Employers Federation executive director Datuk Shamsuddin Bardan reportedly said, “If an employee is found guilty of faking a degree to gain employment or promotion, the normal punishment is dismissal, as such an offence is considered serious misconduct”. (“Employees can be fired if they submit fake degrees”, Nation, The Star, Feb 8; online at bit.ly/star_degree.)

It goes without saying that any person who, on his own accord, falsifies his professional credentials warrants any reasonable person to question his ability to perform his duty and mandate with integrity. Similarly, if a member of the administration ignores his sense of integrity to further personal gain, how would the public have confidence that he would not act fraudulently to advance his causes and disregard the public interest?

Hence, the elephant in the room – the alleged bogus educational qualification – has to be addressed forthwith. Malaysians are entitled to expect their elected leaders to execute appropriate action in any episode of any misconduct (if proven). In absence of the truth, speculation will prevail; this in turn diminishes trust, dignity and the appearance of integrity in the government.

At this juncture, the administration holds a pivotal opportunity to address the frustration among one of their biggest and most instrumental political stakeholders – the general public. This is, after all, the raison d’etre of any genuinely democratic country.

In the powerful words by Michelle Obama (in her 2012 speech), “We learned about honesty and integrity – that the truth matters.... That you don’t take shortcuts or play by your own set of rules ... and success doesn’t count unless you earn it fair and square”.

NUR RAFI’UDDIN MASWARI

Lawyer