Monday, October 18, 2010

Absence of trust

Trust – noun

- Reliance on the integrity, strength, ability, surety, etc., of a person or thing; confidence.

- Confidence in a person on whom or thing on which one relies

- The obligation or responsibility imposed on a person in whom confidence or authority is placed

- Charge, custody, or care: to leave valuables in someone's trust.

- Something committed or entrusted to one's care for use or safekeeping, as an office, duty, or the like; responsibility; charge.


The trust of most Malaysians in public institutions such as the Judiciary and the Malaysian Civil Service including the police and MACC is at an all time low. In fact one could argue that such a trust no longer exists today.

I read in The Malaysian Insider’s news article
Five shot-dead by Kuantan police that police shot 5 robbers dead in Kuantan. It states:

Pahang CID chief ACP T Narenasagaran said … […] … based on a tip-off a patrol team intercepted the robbers’ car at the Jalan Kuantan By-Pass … the men ignored police’s orders asking the driver to stop and that the car accelerated away … after a high-speed chase the car was cornered near the entrance of the EPF builing in Indera Mahkota … the men also ignored orders to surrender and instead came at the policemen with parangs and sickles … Police had no choice but to shoot the men in self-defence.

But I was more attracted to the comments section, not because it makes for illuminating reading, but by the observation that most commentators didn’t believe the police had opened fire in self defence, so much so one pro police reader virtually cried out in frustration that the public who condemn the police for the high crime rates would also condemn the police for killing robbers.

I won’t bother to debate that killing robbers does not mean the police had been efficient in keeping a lid on crime rates from soaring through the roof or for that matter, will achieve that. The former (killing alleged robbers in scenes such as this as well as suspects in police custody) had happened before but the latter (high crime rates) has been and continues to be a worrying fact.

To compound their suspicions of, and disdain for police, there have also been the troubling allegations that the former IGP had dodgy company.

We may safely conclude that the trust we once had in our mata mata is no longer there. Of course it’s not fair to many of the men in blue because the police in this Kuantan case (mentioned above) could have been forced to take the drastic actions in self defence, but at the same time it’s also not fair to us, the public, when the police have frequently betrayed our expectations of their non-partisan obligation as neutral guardians of the law.

I don’t need to provide examples raging from the sinister deaths in custody to the police shameful partisan conduct in the Perak State Assembly (DUN) imbroglio.

Insofar as relationship between the PDRM and the Malaysian public has fared in the last decade or so, it has been a lamentable lose-lose situation.

The sad absence of trust extends to other public institutions such as the MACC. I won't bother to even explain why the public now believes the MACC to be indeed what Utusan said it is, a Malay an UMNO institute rather than a public one.

But the most wretched of all has been the Judiciary.

This is not say, as in the case of the police or some departments of the Malaysian Civil Service, everyone in the organization/department plays to the political tune. There are/have been very professional civil servants and I'll provide an exceptional example shortly.

But unprofessional civil servants may be likened to a drop of ink in a jar of milk, spoiling the entire content, thus bringing disrepute to the good names of those who have been thoroughly professional and apolitical.

Take for example, the original ruling on the infamous Adorna case. The judicial ruling deserves a place in the Hall of Shame for endorsing duplicitous scams for nine infamous years. Legitimate owners of properties in Malaysia were rendered unprotected and helpless by the unjust nonsense.

I bet Madame Boonsom Boonyanit who unjustly lost her property because of Eusoff Chin’a ruling must have cursed him and the Malaysian courts before she passed away. The poor lady was never ever to know that it took nine long years before a modicum of justice would reassert itself.

And those who had legally endorsed her loss of property through an obvious case of fraud deserved/deserve every curse in her damnation. It just beggars belief that a Malaysian court ruling had not only caused such blatant injustice but perpetuated and abetted the same shameful fraudulent practice.

The injustice of the Adorna case ruling was so flagrant that (now-retired) Justice Gopal Sri Ram, sitting in the Court of Appeals, did what the catchphrase in Star Trek claims (paraphrased): Go where no judge has gone before by boldly ignoring legal precedence.

Though criticised by many, Justice Gopal's amazing defiance of stare decisis (legal precedence) to rule in favour of the Au brothers in 2007 was eventually vindicated when the Federal Court sat early this year to overturn Eusoff Chin’s ruling of infamy.

And that’s not all with our once hallowed and much respected Judiciary. Today it suffers no shame in saying white one day and then black the next, as shown in several cases involving the sorry saga of the Perak State Assembly, in stark contrast to its (actually correct) ruling in favour of Dr Mahathir as PM for sacking Anwar Ibrahim.

To cap all these, the Chief Secretary proved to be no better in demonstrating the once-apolitical nature of the Malaysian Civil Service and their observance of the Civil Service code of conduct have indeed been mortally wounded since more than a decade ago, when he supported the most biadap Penang State Development Officer who had the unprofessional temerity to launch his politically inclined diatribe at an UMNO forum against a people’s representative, the Chief Minister of Penang.

As head of the Malaysian Civil Service, Mohd Sidek should have known better to instead counsel, if not sack, that errant and most unprofessional (so-called) public servant.

When a man assumes a public trust he should consider himself a public property - Thomas Jefferson

14 comments:

  1. ...and to think 75% of the budget goes towards paying imbeciles like Sidek and that biadap PSD moron in Penang!

    ReplyDelete
  2. but polis handle the murder and burn of the datuk very well and swift. we know the details how the killing take place, thanks to our polis efficiency.

    ReplyDelete
  3. nice blog.. have a view of my blog when free.. http://www.lonelyreload.blogspot.com .. do leave me some comment / guide if can.. if interested can follow my blog...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Imagine you are a policeman and a man you have been chasing came rushing at you brandishing a parang/ sickle. What would you do?
    Throw away your gun and run home screaming for mama?
    Act like mahatma gandhi and submit yourself to the tender mercies of the parang?
    Kneel down and beg for your worthless life?

    For me, I would shoot first and ask questions later.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon of 8:38 AM, October 19, 2010. That is not the issue; the issue is that the police has lost the trust of the rakyat, which has been why the publc don't believe what they say, even when it's true.

    And why is that? Because they have betrayed the trust of the rakyat!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well said.
    ------------
    Irrelevant story.

    Wait, one of them is taking something from the pocket, bang. Another 2, bang , bang. Oh wait, last two trying to help... hostile. Bang,bang. that's it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Imagine you are a policeman and a man you have been chasing came rushing at you brandishing a parang/ sickle. What would you do?

    This is what would be best. Unless the criminal is armed with a gun and obviously very proficient as well, it would be best to adequately injure and incapacitate but not kill.

    1) Aim at lower torso - Gluteus Medius

    2) Aim at the Pectoralis towards the shoulder.

    3) Aim at the upper leg.

    Taking in a criminal armed with a hand weapon alive is a sign of SKILL. Killing them shows callousness or a jittery disposition. What was all that fire arm training about? The way police pick targets on a body shows how calm and focused they are. You can't do this properly with a fully automatic SMG though, those rapid fire weapons arn't designed for one-shot accuracy.

    Striving for excellence in enforcement entails such things, even to the extent of trying to keep violent criminals alive to face the law. Civilisation remember? Police arn't supposed to be those mirror tint sunglass freaks you see on TV featuring Redneckville.

    Don't tell me the targeting criteria I mention here is not taught in the firearm's syllabus? Or is every cop too nervous of trigger happy to try to bring criminals in alive?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Everything clear now.

    Malaysia police in patrol vehicle armed with MP5 SUB-MACHINE GUN.
    So it is not simple bang bang bang, but spray of bullets.

    So the street are "safer" now?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Police on the easy way out
    The way they face the robbers
    Only their version not the dead
    Wanted criminals why the crimes?

    They can't allegedly write proper report
    It is best they gone with the easy sparks
    One bullet, two bullets or 3 bullets
    Then this mantra 'armed robbers running towards them”

    The first duty of the law enforcement
    Save lives find the truth about crimes
    It isn't killing spree with legal rights
    There are lives aim to mobilize them

    I once stayed in a flat
    Where once police party shot dead 6 criminals
    I didn't know about it though I saw the dented marks
    Later the owner told me about the incident

    Did the 6 fight back?
    When the grilled and wooden doors silently cut
    Hailed of bullets pumped in....
    The 6 died in their rooms

    I heard that version
    From the locals staying in the flat
    The parents came to offer rituals
    Forgot I was staying inside

    Some may say
    The killers ought to be punished
    In proper court of law
    Then it is only right

    Can we trust our law agencies?
    Can we trust our judiciary?
    It is blowing with the wind
    The disgrace ink into our minds

    ReplyDelete
  10. The police are using the CIA's method of using UAVs to wipe out their opponents in South Asia. On press of the button and kaa-booom they are dead before they knew what hit them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Malaysians hardly even own pistols. This SMG assignment to ordinary cops is overkill in an unarmed populace. US conversely appears to only allow pistols in a fully armed populace. What does this mismatch show? Overbearing power against civilians?

    ReplyDelete
  12. what to do. its all umnonised. judges? dont even want to talk about it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Not everyone will understand this but I'm sure some will.

    In fact police could train to be sufficiently skilled in Silat or whatever art they choose so that any common criminals with just hand weapons alone would even be afraid of the police. They will have a reputation of not needing guns to handle anyone with a hand weapon like a parang.

    An 'elite' though possibly dangerous but courage testing practice among police could even arise if this unarmed vs hand weapons idea is taken further, where the number of *fire arm* armed criminals a police person takes down *WITHOUT* guns becomes a badge of honour and heroism, maybe even a criteria for awards and such.

    How about that for a challenge to paradigm shifts towards excellence for PDRM? Adoption of things like that are a sign true excellence in enforcement, boosts reputation and morale!

    Not killing otherwise salvageable people with bullets! They're a criminal today but if they survive they may be regular citizens. Don't deny them a chance to reform by killing them? God is merciful, so here's your chance to play God . . .

    ReplyDelete
  14. in fact we don't even have to go to the extent of using unarmed combat against weapons, though it'll be useful for police to be so trained - for example, Australian police use a powerful capsicum spray to disable a man running amok with a samurai sword. Maybe Malaysian police are reserving the cxapsicum spray just for people who hold candlelight vigils or Pakatan ADUNs in Perak, as was demonstrated by the Jelapang woman?

    ReplyDelete