Yesterday, I handed to the Deputy Internal Security Minister, Datuk Johari Baharun and the Deputy Speaker Datuk Lim Si Cheng a set four blogs on the problem of no police station in Johore willing to accept a police report because of the involvement of a member of the Johore royalty.
When Johari was winding up the debate on behalf of the Internal Security Ministry in the Royal Address debate on Wednesday, he had given assurance that the police would accept reports lodged by the public and act on them.
I pointed out that one of the blemishes of the police performance highlighted by the Royal Police Commission was the refusal of the police to accept reports from the public, often sending them off on a “wild goose chase” from one police station to another.
This problem was supposed to have been resolved once and for all, but it is clearly not the case — as there is not only the problem of police not acting on police reports, there is also the problem of the police refusing to accept reports.
New Straits Times on Monday had one such report: “9 police reports, no action: IGP wants answers”, where the Inspector-General of Police had vowed to ensure a thorough investigation into the allegation of forgery against a Malaysian Everest climber.
The problem of police refusing to accept reports was highlighted in the blogosphere, starting with mSTAR Online. No police station in Johore was prepared to accept the po9lice report because it involved a member of the Johore royalty — and the complainant was forced to lodge a report in Bukit Aman.
Johari had said that he was not aware of the matter, although he had earlier spoken of cybercops appointed to monitor blogs.
When the Deputy Internal Security Minister continued his winding-up yesterday and indicated that he was not yet apprized of the case that I had mentioned, I handed to him and Deputy Speaker chairing the meeting a set of four blogs bearing on the subject, viz:
When can Johari give a report to Parliament not only why no police station was prepared do its duty to accept a police report just because a member of the royalty was involved, but the outcome of police investigations?
#1 by k1980 on Thursday, 5 April 2007 - 5:32 pm
Kahiary Jamaluddin: “I was there and at the same time I heard several opposition members attack on a BN leader” In the BN there is no place for personal attacks. So, there is place for personal attacks on non-BN leaders!?!
#2 by Jong on Thursday, 5 April 2007 - 7:08 pm
Well was there was also a Johore royalty who allegedly hacked to death a caddie boy who laughed at his careless putting at the golf course?
That was during Mahathir’s reign and if Mahathir dared not even arrest and charge the murderer, you think this HP6Gomen dare to take action against this ‘prince’? Or are the royalties above the law?
#3 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 5 April 2007 - 7:59 pm
“…//….Well was there was also a Johore royalty who allegedly hacked to death a caddie boy who laughed at his careless putting at the golf course? That was during Mahathir’s reign and if Mahathir dared not even arrest and charge the murderer, you think this HP6Gomen dare to take action against this ‘prince’? Or are the royalties above the law?…//…†– Jong
Whatever one might say of Tun Dr Mahathir, he is attributed, in spite of the feudal mindset prevailing amongst his constituency, with the daring curtailment of ruler’s absolute immunity (I think in 1988) by a constitutional amendment to Article 182 (2) of the Constitution to read as follows: “any proceedings by or against the Yang Di Pertuan Agong or the Ruler of a State in his personal capacity shall be brought in a Special Court established under Clause (1)â€Â.
This is a Special Court to be presided by the Chief Justice of the Federal Court together with two other Chief Judges of the High Court and two other persons who are Judges of the Federal Court or High Court appointed by the Conference of Rulers.
The jurisdiction of the Special Court is to try all offences allegedly committed in Malaysia and any civil cases against the Yang Dipertuan Agong Sultan or Ruler, wherever the cause of action arose.
Before this Constitutional amendment, no action could be initiated contemplated or taken against the Yang Dipertuan Agong or a Sultan of a State in his personal capacity : in the case of Daeng Baha Ismail v Tunku Mahmood Iskandar Al-Haj & Ors [Page vi 1987 (1) MLJ) the Supreme Court presided by Salleh Abas L.P. then held that the immunity of the Sultans and Yang Di-Pertuan Agong was absolute in both criminal and civil charges!
There was another aspect to this curtailment besides that which is stated above.
It used to be the case that if the King refused to assent and sign a bill passed by Parliament, it could not be made law. There would be an impasse.
TDM at around the same time procured another constitutional amendment the effect of which is that after a bill (passed by the two Houses of Parliament) is presented to the Yang diPertuan Agong, it shall, after a lapse of 30 days, become a law anyway, whether or not the Ruler signifies his consent.
By these constitutional amendments, he changed the monarchy institution from one of absolute monarchy to one nearer to constitutional monarchy, as is practiced in other developed countries.
#4 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 5 April 2007 - 10:09 pm
“It used to be the case that if the King refused to assent and sign a bill passed by Parliament, it could not be made law. There would be an impasse.” Jeffrey QC
Correction.
The Agong cannot in law withhold his assent or consent – but can take off for an unplanned private overseas trip and absent himself, delaying the signing into law of the Bill in the process. This kind of behavior has been stopped by Mahathir through an amendment to the Constitution in the mid 80s.
It now becomes law within 30 days whether the Agong signs or not.
“By these constitutional amendments, he changed the monarchy institution from one of absolute monarchy to one nearer to constitutional monarchy, as is practiced in other developed countries.”
No. The country’s Constitution of 1957 provides for a constitutional monarchy. The Malay rulers were absolute monarchs prior to the arrival of the Europeans – certainly not after independence.
Malaysia is said to follow the Westminster Model of Parliamentary democracy. Whatever that means it is important to know that in England, there is no written constitution like we have and the force of convention is a lot stronger than any written law. In England it is inconceivable that the Queen should want to withhold her consent to any Bill that has been passed by both Houses of Parliament.
#5 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 5 April 2007 - 11:09 pm
Malaysia has a unique system of constitutional monarchy. Nowhere else in the world could you find a constitutional ruler taking turns to be king!
There are not less than nine Malay states with Malay rulers and their large extended families all receiving allowances from the state governments. It is understandable that public attention is brought to focus on the issue of whether it is productive or even appropriate to continue to have such a system whenever transgressions involving members of the extended royal family appear in the media.
To pretend that problems do not exist with our system of constitutional monarchy with that many constitutional rulers who take turns to be king, a system funded by the elected government is to behave like the ostrich which buries its head in the sand.
#6 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 12:50 am
The alleged incident demoonstrates that theory is far divorced from reality.
The police force and the rest of the civil service is timorous before the royalty, almost as if they are demi-gods. I think this mind-set is regrettably cultural…and I don’t think they can break those mental fetters anytime soon especially the less educated classes. They behave in the same servile manner to just about most authorities. See how they kiss each PM’s hand and curtsey so low! It’s fine if it’s merely cultural and respectful…but believe me, it’s an abject form of mental slavery and subservience.
Johore royalty has had to live with a fair bit of reputation. I don’t expect Pak Lah to dare do anything about this at all. For that matter, we see Pak Lah not doing anything about a whole lot of other matters too, so don’t expect him to put a bunsen burner to his bottom on this one.
Most royalty (Raja Nazrin, Perak Royalty and several others excluded) have some difficulty in appreciating that they are just plain lucky that Malaysia still practises this form of monarchy….with privileges all borne by tax-payers. The least they can do is to treat the rakyat with respect too.
#7 by DarkHorse on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 2:12 am
Let’s see if this Prime Minister has the balls to stand up to them royalty and their less than royal behavior.
#8 by undergrad2 on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 2:49 am
“This story, at a glance, seem like a fairytale, but in fact has all the elements of a crime related to violence against women (she was beaten), abuse of power (transferring police officer out of state) and poor police ethics (police not willing to accept the woman’s report because it involved a royalty).†– one Susan Loone writes in her blog.
This is clearly a gross understatement. It involves more than just violence against women, an abusive boyfriend, illicit sex or abuse of power by the IGP in the transfer of one of their own – or, of all things ‘poor police work ethics’ as this blogger says.
It involves the Tengku Mahkota of the state of Johor, the next in line to be Sultan of that state. It involves serious constitutional issues of that state. It involves jurisdictional issues involving the Polis subject not to the state but to the Federal Constitution, and the younger brother of the ruler of a Malay state under the state constitution. If that is not serious enough it involves the alleged commission of a crime by a member of the Johor Royal family who has himself lodged a police report against the party who made the first police report.
This is one minefield the Prime Minister would wish he would never have to walk through to get to the other side.
Good luck to you, Mr. Prime Minister. If this incident does not keep you awake all night and day, I do not know what will.
#9 by Godamn Singh on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 3:20 am
Goddamn it! Not again!
I remember the late Sultan Perak chasing pirates in the 70s, much to the dismay of the Prime Minister and of the Royal Customs whose job is to chase after pirates. Then there was the case of the Johor Sultan who was the reigning Agong then, who hit his caddy with his golf club killing him. The stories about members of the Johor Royal family assaulting customers in pubs and in dance halls, and abusing women are not new.
There are stories about people exiled from the State, never allowed to set foot on Johor soil again or be arrested because they were unfortunate enough to come into contact and unfortunate enough to fall on the wrong side of certain members of the royal family so to speak.
Goddamn it!
#10 by sheriff singh on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 3:45 am
It is very common for Ministers, even the PM and DPM, to say that they are not aware of things when asked for comments or replies but say they will have to check first.
Shouldn’t the leadership be aware of things when the rakyat already know? How can they run the country when they are not aware of what’s going on? Shouldn’t they be the first to know?
The lack of knowledge and the slowness to respond may be detrimental to the wellbeing of the nation and its citizens.
#11 by Count Dracula on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 4:20 am
Of course, they know you dumb ass!
They are pretending not to know so that people like you think they don’t. So you cannot blame them for not doing anything to stop it. So where does that put you? Which category?? Certainly not among the clever ones.
#12 by Bigjoe on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 8:13 am
The issue here is that its clear that every police is highly in tune with the political implication of a police report which should be just a procedural matter. This perverted politicization of police procedure explains several things like why they discourage people from making politce report in the first place so as to make the statistics looks not so bad. We all know how unfriendly the police makes it when making a police report.
#13 by undergrad2 on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 9:02 am
Police report against the successor to the Johor’s throne?? Where will that lead? To his indictment for alleged assault?
I don’t think they could find witnesses to testify on behalf of the prosecution assuming the case goes to court. Where does that leave the prosecution – without an independent witness to corroborate the victim’s testimony? The only witness would be the victim herself. Already she has credibility issues – a headache for the prosecution.
It is likely to be settled out of court.
#14 by undergrad2 on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 9:30 am
Where does this Police Report by the victim’s father lead us to??
“I Mohd Yasin bin Mohd Yusof, father of my daughter Yasmin binti Mohd Yasin did not receive and disappointed with the actions of the Johor Crown Prince assaulting my daughter. According to the case reported and threats received by my daughter, which should not happen. If anything happen to me or my family, the Johor Crown Prince will be fully responsibleâ€Â.
Answer. Nowhere!
This is heresay evidence and is inadmissible in court. We need to look at what the victim has to say for herself. Anyone?
The rest is about corroboration. It could be in the form of a medical report and/or testimony by eye witnesses.
#15 by Jong on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 9:36 am
Why didn’t the alleged victim herself make the police report? Shouldn’t she be the one to do so against the Johor Crown Prince?
Yes, I agree the father’s is mere heresay.
#16 by madmix on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 10:11 am
The prince should just summon the police IO to his palace, give his version of the story and let the law take its course. In the absence of witnesses, he should not worry about anything and he will look good in the eyes of the public.
The palace needs a good PR person to advice them.
#17 by undergrad2 on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 7:24 pm
“The palace needs a good PR person to advice them.”
Members of the Johor royalty have always been loose cannons. They know it. They want it. Johor is unique in many respects. It has its own state military sanctioned by the state constitution – although small their officers are trained in Sandhurst and some are ex-commandos trained by the U.S. green berets. You do not want to mess with them.
I have sat across the table with the Tunku Mahkota before. He made no effort to disguise his fear of his father if rules are broken.
#18 by DarkHorse on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 9:19 pm
“Why didn’t the alleged victim herself make the police report? Shouldn’t she be the one to do so against the Johor Crown Prince?
Yes, I agree the father’s is mere heresay.”
She must have made a report. The father made his report in fear for his life apparently hoping that should anything happens to him, the police would know why and who is responsible. He’s hoping it would serve as a deterrent.
#19 by Jong on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 10:58 pm
“He made no effort to disguise his fear of his father if rules are broken.” – Undergrad2
That explains it! At home he’s terrified, unable to get back at his old man so he does it to others he is able to take advantage of. I won’t be surprised his wife and children are fearful of him too.
#20 by sean on Friday, 6 April 2007 - 11:34 pm
Well our PM and IGP on Friday 6th April The star online pertaining to “wage war on crime”.Hmmm..isn’t this a crime bashing up someone and not taking any reports by the law enforcement personnel ie the POLICE which are suppose to or entrusted to protect the lives of civiliance.These are real threats to civil society if not control and punish within the law.Maybe our PM the great and IGP should comment on this instead of “i don’t know..i need to check first”mentality.
#21 by Godamn Singh on Saturday, 7 April 2007 - 2:22 am
Goddamn it!!
“At home he’s terrified, unable to get back at his old man so he does it to others ..”
It is in the genes. Also once abused you grow up to abuse others.
#22 by DiaperHead on Saturday, 7 April 2007 - 3:39 am
Funny! So far posters who did their posting on this thread have foreign ISP. Comments have been very moderate in tone compared to blogs linked to UMNO.
#23 by dawsheng on Sunday, 8 April 2007 - 3:07 am
If I was a royalty in my own country, there are responsibilties in looking after my rakyat’s wellbeing. I will make my rakyat the most wonderful place this country for them to call their home. I would welcome all visitors to my country and let them enjoys my country until they envy me, I’d be most happy if they are staying because they love my country.
I know is not an easy task to please people, but it is in my interest because I am the royalty and people looks upon me as an example.
But things are the opposite here, I wonder what is the feelings of sitting in a car with special number plate and being escorted everywhere you go and all this while you are just a royalty with a decaying city and soon a broken country? Our royalties are royalties alright, and the rakyat will have to pay royalty to feed them and mantain their lifestyle that is just like fairy tales, the rakyat suffers just to make sure their royalties remains as a symbol of soverignity of their country, but what meaning htere is when such thing happened?
Such actions by a royalties cannot be condoned, especially when one belong to a family that serves to protect Allah’s good name and their ummahs from harm. What most heinous sin can one commited than a angry royalty insulted and hurts his own rakyat for his personal satisfaction? I thought changing the govt was already bad enough, does this mean that we have to chnage the royal family too?
What is wrong
#24 by Godamn Singh on Sunday, 8 April 2007 - 3:51 am
[deleted]
#25 by Godamn Singh on Monday, 9 April 2007 - 1:49 am
“Now that Johari has the four set of reports, it is time he gave, not only Parliament a report, but the tax-paying public an answer, of why no police station was prepared do its duty to accept a police report just because a member of the royalty was involved, but also the outcome of police investigations.” Susan Loonie
If you are a Johorean and have anything to do with a report like that, you’d be well advised to apply for a transfer to another state. Consider yourself exiled.
#26 by toyolbuster on Monday, 9 April 2007 - 9:59 pm
What do you expect from the decendants of Pirates.
If there is gonna be a vote for Bastille, count me in.
#27 by DiaperHead on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 - 4:39 am
The Malays in the southern part of Peninsular Malaysia are not only descendants of pirates who once ruled the seas stretching from South China Sea to Southern Sulawesi, they are modern day pirates who continue to pillage, plunder and rape.
#28 by Count Dracula on Thursday, 12 April 2007 - 2:38 am
Is royal blood any different? If so, I’d like to go suck some royal blood.