All eyes are on the Cabinet this morning – will the Cabinet decide or dilly-dally on the issue of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC)?
The issue of IPCMC was first proposed by the Dzaiddin Royal Royal Police Commission eight years ago in 2005 as the most important of its 125 recommendations to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional and world-class police force, with even the Prime Minister at the time, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi publicly pledging to implement the IPCMC recommendation.
It was the then UMNO Youth leader, Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Hussein, who later became Home Minister, who led the opposition to the establishment of the IPCMC, teaming up with the then police leadership to force Abdullah to backtrack and finally scuttle the IPCMC proposal. Instead an ineffective Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) was substituted.
Did the new Home Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi, who was a Deputy Minister in the first Abdullah administration 2004-2008, support or oppose the IPCMC at the time.
The IPCMC was one effective proposal to address the high rate of deaths in police custody, with 80 cases from January 2000 to December 2004, or an annual average of 16 deaths in police custody in those five years – which was regarded as unacceptably high.
Unfortunately, the scandal of deaths in police custody have worsened after the Dzaiddin Report. The rate of deaths in police custody has increased albeit slightly in the eight and a half years since the IPCMC Report – with 141 deaths from January 2005 to May 2013 (with three deaths in just 11 days in the first month after the 13th general elections on May 5) or a higher annual average of 16.6 deaths since the Dzaiddin RCI report.
Zahid is now playing “Tai Chi” by stating that his ministry is “open” to the setting up of IPCMC but asks for time to study public feedback to such a proposal.
There is no need for any more study as I do not believe there is any subject which had been more studied, whether by the Cabinet or the police force in the past eight years than the IPCMC proposal. Or is the intention to study the IPCMC proposal “to death”?
Let the Cabinet set up a Cabinet committee which is given two weeks to submit final recommendations to the Cabinet on June 19 for the acceptance and implementation of the IPCMC proposal – so that the Cabinet policy decision could be announced as part of the spate of new government policies and proposals in the Royal Address in Parliament on June 25.
Alternatively, the Cabinet should agree today to allow MPs to have a free vote on the IPCMC proposal in the first meeting of the 13th Parliament which is to meet for 16 days from June 24 to July 18.
This is why the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council at its meeting on Monday has set up a six-member IPCMC Parliamentary Task Force to spearhead the establishment of the IPCMC in the 13th Parliament.
The establishment of the IPCMC can become a reality if there are 23 Barisan Nasional MPs who are prepared to join the 89 Pakatan Rakyat MPs to support the establishment of the IPCMC when the 13th Parliament starts its meeting on June 24.
MIC, which has four MPs, has declared its support for IPCMC. MCA Vice President, Gan Peng Sieu has said that MCA supports IPCMC. Can we expect the seven MCA MPs to support the IPCMC proposal in Parliament?
With the support of 4 MIC MPs and 7 MCA MPs, all that is needed for IPCMC to become law and for an end to the scandalous deaths in police custody in Malaysia is another 12 votes from the other Barisan Nasional MPs. Is this an impossible dream?
The six MPs in the Pakatan Rakyat IPCMC Parliamentary Task Force are:
M. Kulasegaran (DAP – Ipoh Barat)
Gobind Singh Deo (DAP – Puchong)
N. Surendran – (PKR – Padang Serai)
Shamsul Iskandar – (PKR – Bukit Katil)
Mohamed Hanifa Maidin – (PAS – Sepang)
Siti Mariah Mahmud – (PAS – Kota Raja)
We welcome the 133 Barisan Nasional MPs forming a similar IPCMC Parliamentary Task Force to work in tandem with the PR IPCMC Parliamentary Task Force to see the establishment of IPCMC.
I have asked Kulasegaran as the most senior MP to convene the first meeting of the PR IPCMC Task Force as immediately as possible.
#1 by Bigjoe on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 7:25 am
Why continue asking these question when even the most casual observer know the answer is no way there will ever be a full IPCMC so long as UMNO/BN is in power..There are perfectly valid reasons why Paul Low is not even given a chance of credibility..
The fact is a real IPCMC means it won’t take long before cases involving Mahathir and his cronies will be asked to be reviewed and it will not only dominate national news, it will dominate national life..
#2 by yhsiew on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 8:18 am
The dilemma here is that those in government are keen in protecting the police rather than the rakyat so as to save the government’s reputation. Shouldn’t the interest of the rakyat come first?
#3 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 8:33 am
We have a situation that the public wants IPCMC but the police resist it and the Govt. has to decide who to please. Logic dictates that Govt. should implement the IPCMC. After all it is for the creation of an efficient, incorruptible, professional and world-class police force. The public pay their salaries. Even the police should wish it. After a spate of custodial deaths it will weed out the black sheep, improve or redeem their image and resisting it implies that it cannot improve itself. But for the govt to push IPCMC down the throat it must have the moral authority. Has it?
#4 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 8:33 am
Detractors of IPCMC within the force can counter their political bosses– if you want accountability can you, the leader, do first by example? The issue of IPCMC is the issue of whether there is here at all levels a culture of accountability and restraint to arbitrary exercise of power subject to equal application of rule of law. If I were a cop used to and want to preserve the old ways, I’d ask my boss, “are you showing example by playing by accountable in your exercise of power? If you can’t stop moralizing from your high horse! ” For the govt to force this down it will lose the support from security enforcement agencies. This, it is not willing to compromise. It depends on their support as prop to political power.
#5 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 8:43 am
That is why the govt’s first response (by almost reflex) is to try to pacify both sides by something “in-between” such as 2 weeks to study existing provisions for disciplinary cases within the police force before reviewing to whether to implement the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) – see M’Kini (Aidila Razak’s report, 1:03PM Jun 4). This trying to balance positions of public versus detractors against IPCMC by intermediate ‘neither here nor there’ compromise steps is not grounded on principle of what is right to do: it is pussy footing and skirting around the dilemma not grappling with the real problem, and hence will satisfy no sides in the end.
#6 by lee tai king (previously dagen) on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 9:11 am
Checking on the police is as good as checking on umno and that clearly will not do. Dont expect umno to set up such a body.
So it may not be a bad idea for pakatan to go alone with a task force on policing the police. However, since this is something umno is against, umno would perversely see it as yet another opposition plot to topple umno.
#7 by lee tai king (previously dagen) on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 9:19 am
And oh sorry for going off topic.
About umno’s cheating in GE13 and the ongoing challenge, for those interested pls check this out:
Opitz v. Wrzesnewskyj, 2012 SCC 55, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 76
#8 by sheriff singh on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 10:14 am
Why did the country waste so much time and resources to then shelve the findings and recommendations ?
Did they not give any respect to the king who set up the Commission ?
Maybe Mahathir and Pak Lah are vehemently against implementing the recommendations.
That ‘social activist’, that frustrated, distant, distant ex-politician member of a royal family and the OKU man are noticeably very silent about the implementation of the IPCMC.
#9 by sheriff singh on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 10:24 am
” ……. if there are 23 Barisan Nasional MPs who are prepared to join the 89 Pakatan Rakyat MPs… ‘.
You do your part to ensure all 89 PR MPs turn up to vote for the establishment of the IPCMC.
Then maybe some right thinking BN MPs with conscience might join you in the vote. Maybe some of them might abstain or even absent themselves and then the motion is carried.
But wait. The resolution, if carried, might be voted out in the Senate of unelected people. Karpal will then blow his top and a very ‘distant prince, ten times removed’ will rubba-rubba his stomach with glee.
#10 by sotong on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 11:47 am
Even one death in custody is totally unacceptable.
There is no urgency baecuse it only affects ordinary people…..life is cheap.
#11 by buylower2003 on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 12:13 pm
Ah, Z*hid, our very own “Hidden Coward, Crawling Snake” wants to “study” the thing? That most outspoken zealot? F*rk him!
#12 by buylower2003 on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 12:15 pm
Or maybe they want 2 weeks to kill all the prisoners? Just like the Nazis did when they knew they were doomed?
#13 by worldpress on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 12:18 pm
We are insane
cos EC protect a system allow those monkeys in the Jungle dominate the Election with less vote ..keep vote brainlessly protect those supplying them banana (bribe)
We human knew it would be insane continue let those monkey dominate our system
EC were the protector of this insane
#14 by buylower2003 on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 12:21 pm
Well they were faster than a speeding bullet in swearing themselves in after GE13 :)
How about deciding to approve it equally quickly? :)))
#15 by worldpress on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 1:46 pm
We must not get distract
EC was the main factor leaded a monkey system allowing cheats, fault, bribe, protected tempted the monkey with banana (bribe) to vote brainless in the jungle dominate the election with much less vote
Chair and deputy may consider criminals of protecting corruption, cheats and unfair election
#16 by john on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 3:32 pm
These idiots once got ‘elected ? – cheats ‘ forgotten totally they are there for the TOTAL interests of THE RAKYAT and that’s IT !
But because these are CROOKS and CHEATS they assumed, acted otherwise – ALL about their own-self interest instead !
#17 by good coolie on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 - 7:32 pm
Deaths in police custody? or MACC custody? Well, I don’t care- it does not concern me. I will only care when I or any of my family, or of my friends, die in police custody.
The Greek Chorus answers: “Well my friend, that time is near.”