The IGP should resign


By KJ John | Malaysiakini

In Chinese culture, it is said that ‘the fish rots from the head’. Is the 5,000-year-old cultural saying wrong? If not, what is it that makes institutions become corrupt over time?

What has made civilisations themselves corrupt, leading to their extinction, such as that of Babylonia or Egypt? What has made the Christian culture and beliefs of the founding fathers of America become so corrupt that, today, secularism and liberalism drives much of the US agenda?

What will ensure that Malaysia, a nation only 53 years old, does not become corrupt like some noble civilisations of old?

Last week, I reflected on the question of whose authority we live under, on earth? I argued that we need to be accountable to both God and Man; to give each what the other does not deny.

This week, allow me to continue my discourse on all such authority, power, and human corruption. I am sorry but to many people, it would seem like I am giving a sermon. I need to be careful as to what I write, as the Sultan of Selangor has said he does not like the wrong people to “preach” in the state’s mosques and to especially talk about politics.

When OHMSI, the NGO that I run, was launched, we asked the rhetorical question: ‘Was Jesus political?’ Now, as a potential member of the Treasury of Knowledge – a crazy OHMSI idea that I have – Tok Guru (Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat of PAS) has argued that politics is more than partisanship. Corruption and anti-corruption is also anti-partisanship. Therefore, allow me to reflect on whether our police force has become corrupt.

Did the inspector-general of police (IGP) really know what he was saying, when he said “if the people want it”, he could take his men off the streets, because of public anger over the killing of a 14-year old boy? Does the law allow him such freedom in the interpretation and enforcement of the law? Will the home minister allow him such discretion?

As the IGP, he should be well trained in the observance of the principle of rule of law. Doesn’t the police force exist to provide safety and security to all the people, not just lawful drivers or innocent victims of road accidents?

When we read about police officers who kill innocent ones for reasons beyond our comprehension, isn’t it unreasonable of the IGP not to understand the angst of ordinary people? They may fear that it is their turn next to mati katak (to die a pointless death).

For, almost by definition, unless the teenager was armed with a gun and was shooting back, there was no reason whatsoever for any police officer to shoot him in the back of his head. I do not need to watch CSI to know that, when someone is shot in the back of the head, it is when he is fleeing. So, why is there even a need for all this rhetoric about the car being used as an assault weapon?

As a neutral but concerned observer of the behaviour of all ‘idiocracies’ (i.e. bureaucracies which have lost the capacity to reason and answer simple self-knowledge questions to themselves), can I ask a pertinent question? Do they use the power of reason to resolve every issue or concern or do they simply rely on authority and power to resolve their so-called problem?

During the first war on Iraq , the American media machinery created new terminology to describe accidental damage. They called it collateral damage. Is the 14-year-old merely collateral damage to the police force?

Public interest

To me, the more relevant issue is always: what is the truth of the matter? In my language and lexicon of management, the IGP, as leader of the police force, should know much better. Let me argue the case.

The boy was unlawfully driving a car that he had taken without permission. He broke two rules or laws – the parents’ guidelines for appropriate behaviour for borrowing a car which does not belong to him; and the law of the land which says that any driver must be of age and hold a valid driver’s licence.

All this is known and are the facts. The boy has paid with his life for disobeying both laws. There is a very high emotional cost to, and a very expensive lesson for, the parents, siblings, friends and neighbours. Now, what can this developing nation called Malaysia learn from all of this?

No IGP or public servant should speak except always in the public interest. That is what makes him a public servant of the government of Malaysia. He further holds office and the requisite power because of royal sanction and appointment. His is a gazetted appointment that is premised on the agreement of the prime minister, as head of the ruling coalition.

Can the IGP speak without knowledge and the wisdom of his office? Can he speak without favour or fear about the truth of any matter? Does he need to blindly defend wrongdoing in the system, even when he knows his officers were wrong with their behaviour, now made visible to the entire world by the death of the boy? This is now common knowledge to ordinary people of Shah Alam. Do we really need another commission to resolve the issue?

musa hassan police igp forceMr IGP, you are wrong in what you said and were careless in your speech. You should have simply apologised to the parents of the child and promised that truth will be served, even if you have to charge one of your own with second-degree murder.

Your men are not saints; they are ordinary mortals like you and me, and we all lose our cool, sometimes. Let none of us lie! I would go as far as to even say that, if the police officers giving chase were women, this may not have happened. So, let us not be careless with words or feel the need to defend our own.

The people are really upset as to why the police have used the gun on a young person even if he is known to have broken the law. What are the rules of gun use? Are we supposed to shoot on the slightest provocation? Was the situation so much out of control that the driver was on a rampage to kill many innocent others and thus had to be gunned down?

These are the issues that bother ordinary people. So, what would it take for the IGP to understand ordinary parents and friends and the community of victims or simply ordinary citizens who want to live ordinary lives without fear or favour?

I think the IGP must resign now for his careless words. It is unbecoming of a senior government officer who holds office in the name of the Agong to speak as he did.

May God truly begin to bless our nation to rid Malaysia of incompetent and arrogant officials who do not see their ‘stewardship role’ without the abuse of power and force!

  1. #1 by Bigjoe on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 7:26 am

    Again Resign? I want him thrown out on his butt and that arrogant entitlement wiped off his face. The man shows no respect for children and the dead, nevermind his job and the institution he serves What modicum of respect does he deserve?

  2. #2 by chengho on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 7:31 am

    No need to resign just retire just like any other golden age ,live happily with grand children , there are so many politician in their golden age refuse to retire and still thinking they can perform better than the Y and U generation…OR they want want to groom their grand children to take over their position..sound like dynasty?

  3. #3 by HJ Angus on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 9:46 am

    I suggest that this blog should carry a poll on such matters like “Should the IGP Resign or Be Sacked?”
    It will generate more feed-back than the usual people who take the trouble to write in. Get Malaysians used to giving feed-back via polls and that will encourage them to develop more courage to write in.
    For example the poll on the IGP can include the following choices but each IP address has only one vote:

    1.I support the government’s handling of the matter.
    2.The IGP should resign.
    3.Both the IGP and the Home Minister should resign.
    4.The IGP should be sacked.
    5.A Royal Commission should be set up to uncover the events of the night and to rectify defects in police operations.
    6.We already had a RCI recommend the IPCMC. We must implement this or vote to change the government.

  4. #4 by Jamesy on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 10:38 am

    As a neutral but concerned observer of the behaviour of all ‘idiocracies’ (i.e. bureaucracies which have lost the capacity to reason and answer simple self-knowledge questions to themselves), can I ask a pertinent question? Do they use the power of reason to resolve every issue or concern or do they simply rely on authority and power to resolve their so-called problem? – KJ John

    —————————————

    You talked so much about the power to reason, yet you missed the most important issue of all? – WHY WAS A 14-YEAR OLD BOY ON THE WHEEL WITH ANOTHER PASSENGER MINOR AFTER MIDNIGHT?

    Further questions arise.

    Firstly, how does Aminulrasyid managed to grabbed hold of the family car so easily? In other words, did the family granted the boy the permission to drive? Does this mean the boy had learn to drive a car for some time? Or else, how does the boy managed to drive a car so well, by maneuvering the car to avoid the motorcyclists and the police car prior to the shooting?

    This means the boy must have grabbed hold of the family car to learn how to drive for a quite some time. For that certain period of time, the family did not know this? The family did not know the boy is breaking the law for driving without a license under the minimum age of driving? The fact that the boy could easily obtained the car keys must have meant the family had granted the boy the blessing to drive the car!

    Secondly, what was the boy doing at 2am in the morning? Didn’t the family and the boy know a lot of violence crimes happened during this time? Didn’t they know crime rates are increasing? The fact that the speeding car drove by the boy which is pursued by a group of motorcyclists in the wee hours of the morning speaks for themselves!

    Thirdly, if violent crime is expected during this time of the night, what do you expect the policemen to respond in this type of situation where they do not know what they will be up against? If the usual procedure is to pull over a suspicious car over, shine a torchlight inside and ask questions, why did the boy had to run away from the policemen? If usual suspicious hardcore criminals do not normally stop and pull over when ask by the policemen, what do you expect the policemen to respond?

    Lastly, did the policemen shoot to kill? How would the policemen aim straight at the boy head when it is dark, with a moving vehicle? In my view, it is likely that a stray bullet hit the boy.

  5. #5 by HJ Angus on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 11:04 am

    Jamesy
    whatever the “crime” of the juvenile, the police did not have adequate justification to shoot as the victim was not armed and did not shoot first at the police.
    The basic reason why this incident occurred is that the government backed down from imposing the IPCMC which would have been the proper authority to investigate this incident and not the “meet once a week over coffee” half-baked panel with little powers except those imagined by the Home Minister.
    Readers who want to give a feedback via a polls can do so on my blog.

  6. #6 by boh-liao on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 12:10 pm

    IGP = I Got Power!! Faham tak?

  7. #7 by limkamput on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 12:43 pm

    Jamesy, you are typical ignorant Malaysian who probably have been subjected to years of indoctrination. Your views are archaic. I wish not someday one of your young relatives is also the victim of the same circumstances. We all make mistakes with some probably more disturbing than others. But not all mistakes in life deserve the ultimate punishment.

    The issue we face today is not about a disobedient/wayward boy making a silly mistake and deserve to get shot mistakenly. The issue is the whole conduct of our police force. Are they trigger-happy, not respecting human life and human rights and cannot maintain cool under duress or in an emergency situation. May be our police were never trained this way. They are trained to only uphold their right to enforce the law irrespective of those I mention above.

    See the psychological warfare being stage today in a farting MSM. I read the view of a farting psychologist that the minor was at fault. Who really do not know that the minor and probably his parents were at fault? I want to puke after reading his farting views – police do not know who and what they will be up against, it is likely that one of the stray bullet could have hit him, police are overworked etc. See the moronic psychologist (who is probably also a “prostitute in three piece suit” in action). It is the job of the police to face the unknown each day. It is duty of the police to act judicially when to discharge and not to discharge a firearm, and contrary to general views, I don’t think the police in Malaysia are overworked or underpaid. Make no mistake, farting psychologist. No one is politicising this tragic episode. It is citizens’ right to see an honest and an accountable police force. The police statements so far have included: (i) there was a machete in car and (ii) the car was reversing to try to ram the policemen. We shall get to the bottom of this and see for ourselves who is telling the truth. I think Sunway University needs a new Head for its School of Natural Health and Sciences and the MSM carrying that piece of sh!t should be shut down.

    It is the job of the police to face risk. If police love their own life too much and do not have the stomach for risk, they should consider other professions. Having said that, I am not suggesting that police should not or cannot take steps to protect themselves. By the way, how many of our policemen get shot at each year and how many of them actually died?

    The issue here is whether or not the discharge of firearms is necessary. Yes, a car was speeding away from the police at 2 a.m., but did it ipso facto constitute a major crime requiring the ultimate measure. It is dark, the life of the police is not in imminent danger, so why the extreme measure?

  8. #8 by tak tahan on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 12:52 pm

    The worst of all is the IGP gave false or one-sided media report immediately without proper investigation.That alone has been encouraging the police forces to act in any circumstances without consideration and reasoning till this day.The leaders of our goverment agents have corructed the entire malaysia’s system.

  9. #9 by limkamput on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 1:37 pm

    Lastly, did the policemen shoot to kill? How would the policemen aim straight at the boy head when it is dark, with a moving vehicle? In my view, it is likely that a stray bullet hit the boy.// Jamesy

    I don’t know Jamesy is copying from this farting psychologist from Sunway University (surely the reputable of this dept will go down the drain after today) or the other way round. Look, if you take a gun and fire at the recreation park without aiming at anybody in particular but in process you kill someone, can you be charged for murder? My answer to you is yes yes yes. A normal person under circumstance would know that it is likely to kill someone, it does not matter the killer have taken an aim at someone particularly.

    So are you saying that the police have the right to shoot in the dark? Can’t imagine some of you are so moronic. What happen when that stray bullet has hit you instead, while you are having your the-tarik nearby.

  10. #10 by limkamput on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 1:42 pm

    …surely the reputation of this dept……………

  11. #11 by Jamesy on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 4:25 pm

    Hello limkamput,

    Probably this is the first time you have responded to my posting when you disagreed with my view. Friend, I decided to respond to you further, knowing fully well the risk I’m facing of being insulted by you because you have a reputation here of indiscriminately insulting the readers here who do not agreed with your views.

    “..you are typical ignorant Malaysian who probably have been subjected to years of indoctrination. Your views are archaic.” – limkamput.

    What makes you think so? Indoctrination by what? I can also say you are indoctrinated by the oppositions views especially the Malaysiankini website. Indoctrinated because you cannot accept the other side of the story, and insulted others as a result, typical hardcore opposition supporters, just like some of the typical hardcore BN supporters.

    “I wish not someday one of your young relatives is also the victim of the same circumstances. We all make mistakes with some probably more disturbing than others. But not all mistakes in life deserve the ultimate punishment.” – limkamput.

    At least I will do everything I can to make sure my relatives who are underage, do not drive in the middle of the night or any other time for that matter, knowing fully well I do not have to wait just for one costly mistake to say all of us make mistakes. Would risk you relatives the same manner?

    The issue is the whole conduct of our police force. Are they trigger-happy, not respecting human life and human rights and cannot maintain cool under duress or in an emergency situation…The issue here is whether or not the discharge of firearms is necessary. Yes, a car was speeding away from the police at 2 a.m., but did it ipso facto constitute a major crime requiring the ultimate measure. It is dark, the life of the police is not in imminent danger, so why the extreme measure? .” – limkamput.

    It is easy to accuse the policemen of being trigger-happy. What about the fact that the police were saying the boy was trying to ram the car against them? How do you know the life of the police is not in imminent danger? Were you there at the scene of the crime to suggest otherwise? Both parties have conflicting stories, that’s why I’m all for the Royal Commission of Inquiry to find out the truth of the matter and the Cabinet’s special panel is all but crap.

    “I don’t know Jamesy is copying from this farting psychologist from Sunway University (surely the reputable of this dept will go down the drain after today) or the other way round….” – limkamput.

    If you agreed totally with Lim Kit Siang’s views and posted here, nobody will say you copy it from Lim Kit Siang. Likewise, I merely agreed with the psychologist.

  12. #12 by Jamesy on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 4:31 pm

    “…the police did not have adequate justification to shoot as the victim was not armed and did not shoot first at the police.” – HJ Angus.

    Likewise, the boy did not have the justification to ram the car against the police, if this is what you mean by self-defence.

  13. #13 by HJ Angus on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 7:35 pm

    Did he ram the police? Really?
    Or was the “ramming” done after they put a bullet in his head?
    What about the “discovered” parang – surely everyone has seen enough cop flicks to understand this is the MO of the police who want to look good.

  14. #14 by Jamesy on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 8:39 pm

    “Did he ram the police? Really?
    Or was the “ramming” done after they put a bullet in his head?
    What about the “discovered” parang – surely everyone has seen enough cop flicks to understand this is the MO of the police who want to look good.” – HJ Angus.

    That’s why I said earlier the Royal Commission of Inquiry would be the best avenue to uncover the whole truth of the matter. No need to accept one side of the story as gospel truth while rejecting the other outright, unless of course you were there to witness the whole incident, which I will rest my case!

  15. #15 by limkamput on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 10:01 pm

    IN most shoot out situations, the “criminals” died and none of police was injured. IN most shooting situations, weapons were found; yes parang, machetes, revolvers, and even submachine guns. Yes, most deaths in police custody were self inflicted, or from natural causes even though most of them were healthy young men.

    Yes, we shall have RCIs, inquests, investigations after each fiasco happened. Yes, Lingam, Kugan, TBH and now Aminulrasiq, just to name a few recent ones.

    Yes, I am indoctrinated by Malaysiakini, by Pakatan, and by universal human rights, transparency and ethical standards. Yes I would prefer to be the nincompoop of the right kind. At least I am not a moronic nincompoop – a nincompoop who buries his/her heads in the sand. Hey, Jamesy, I can wager with you our farting psychologist and that farting MSM is extending a favor to the police. It is a psy war, but I don’t expect nincompoops to see it.

  16. #16 by chengho on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 10:15 pm

    limkamput,

    pause and re boot
    you have too much hatred and prejudice

  17. #17 by limkamput on Thursday, 6 May 2010 - 10:29 pm

    Yes I have lots of prejudices; I hate moronic nincompoops, racists, cronies, opportunists, ball carriers, prostitutes in three-piece suits (not prostitutes), imposters, hypocrites, cheaters, schemers, manipulators, abusers, and of course “farters”. This is my one and only response to you.

  18. #18 by Jamesy on Friday, 7 May 2010 - 1:11 am

    Yo, friend, chill-la a bit.

    Take care, k?

    Bye.

  19. #19 by johnnypok on Friday, 7 May 2010 - 2:09 am

    If I am the P.I.G, I will step down immediately, and offer my humble apology to the whole nation, and then jump from Petronas Twin Tower with the HM.

  20. #20 by monsterball on Friday, 7 May 2010 - 4:46 am

    If you do all that….johnnypok…you are a NUT.
    Who r u talking to…jamesy?
    Expect IGP and any UMNO B ministers ..racists politicians..crooks to have dignity and principles in life..is like wishing..you can grab Chengho like a baby and spank his backside..being such a naughty fella…joining the gang of robbers and thieves…polishing Najib’s balls…all the time.

  21. #21 by undergrad2 on Friday, 7 May 2010 - 5:33 am

    The consensus here is that limkamput and this jamesy should take their problem somewhere else and stuff it.

  22. #22 by limkamput on Friday, 7 May 2010 - 7:54 am

    The consensus of one – sure, only a moronic nincompoop will think and say thing like that!

  23. #23 by Agape Love on Friday, 7 May 2010 - 9:43 am

    I think LKS speak a lot of good sense in above subject matter. Cheers

  24. #24 by Jamesy on Sunday, 23 May 2010 - 5:43 pm

    “Yes, we shall have RCIs, inquests, investigations after each fiasco happened. Yes, Lingam, Kugan, TBH and now Aminulrasiq, just to name a few recent ones…” limkamput.

    Yes, we have the case of Nurin Jazlin. Now who do we blame?

  25. #25 by Jamesy on Sunday, 23 May 2010 - 5:49 pm

    undergrad2 :
    The consensus here is that limkamput and this jamesy should take their problem somewhere else and stuff it.

    The consensus here is that you should also take your study problem somewhere else and don’t waste your precious parents money with your precious time spend on Lim Kit Siang’s blog and stuff it somewhere else.

    No wonder you are still an undergraduate!

  26. #26 by Jamesy on Sunday, 23 May 2010 - 5:54 pm

    limkamput :
    The consensus of one – sure, only a moronic nincompoop will think and say thing like that!

    NIN-COM-POOP sounds like LIM-KAM-PUT to me!

    One of your parents must be a nincompoop for giving you that name. Your mother or your father?

You must be logged in to post a comment.