Police

The IGP should resign

By Kit

May 06, 2010

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!