I was not at the Bar Council forum as I was at another day-long forum. But, from what I have read, it looks like the police have fine-tuned the art and the practice of double standards in the enforcement of laws of this country. Ours is therefore not the rule of law but the rule by law. This means you use the close one eye culture to enforce laws, selectively.
That, to me, is the most serious corruption of the practice of values and ethics by the Royal Malaysian Police today. I do hope they remember what their name stands for. They are Royal because they stand under the appointment and jurisdiction of the King of the country and they are to handle matters without either fear or favour, although they administratively report to the government of the day.
On matters of right and wrong, as applied and enforced based on the Federal Constitution, i.e. on the matter of the enforcement of the laws in this country, there cannot not be \”a close one eye culture.\” Also, unlike the Malay Regiment of the military, these are the Royal Malaysian Police, and not the \”Polis Tanah Melayu.\” Again, this means the police exist to serve the best interests of this nation; and not just those of the Malay states and their proponents.
That is why the King is king of the whole Federation, and not simply the Sultan of one state. When Sabah and Sarawak joined the Persekutuan Tanah Melayu, on Sept 16, 1963, we then became the nation of Malaysia; and therefore the constitutional ruler exists to protect and preserve the entire nation; not just their Malay states as respective Sultans. I hope my point is made.
The Royal Malaysian Police cannot therefore have an unwritten understanding to close one eye on wrongs committed by certain parties; based on legitimate authority or under duress or because of corruption. If it is not appropriate for Hindraf to gather \”as an illegal assembly\” at the Parliament to hand over a rose to the Prime Minister without a permit; it must be equally wrong for the Islamic extremists to demand that a legally organised Bar Council cannot have a meeting in their own premises for a topic of their own choice, with invited guests of their own choice. That is the freedom of association also guaranteed by the same constitution.
Justice is for all
This close one eye culture started with the Article 11 Forum in Penang; when the Islamic extremists, closed their eyes to the laws of this nation, and forced that forum to end early. The same illegal assembly was then repeated in Johor, to the same effect. Today, after March 8th GE, I believe this should no more be the pattern which the police uphold; they should know the findings of the Police Commission; it is time to move one to become again the Royal Malaysian Police of great repute.
A friend of mine who attended the Bar Council meeting told me of the abject fear and confusion which arose because of the \”rowdy behaviour of these uninvited gate-crashers.\” Malaysiakini reported that chaos nearly broke out. Do not all our religions teach order, respect for laws, dialogue and discourse?
I had already written an article on this subject about the nature of discourse based on some universal principles espoused by Dr Syed Farid Alatas at ISIS. Can one only dialogue and discourse with people you fully agree with? Is that the nature of a dialogue? Cannot we all take a deep breath and assume that in these case-studies, these ladies in question are our own sisters? How then can we look out for justice for them? Do we even want the right form of justice for them? How can we help each of them to seek refuge under the laws of our country to address their predicament.
How can we, on the one hand, fight for justice for Anwar Ibrahim based on our constitution and laws of the country but ignore when it comes to ordinary and mortal others? Can PKR and PAS therefore take steps to discipline the MP for Bandar Kulim and that of Kubang Kerian? How is the concept of party discipline within PKR and PAS? These MPs were apparently the ring leaders, even for the Umno crowd?
Is this what the \”secret society meetings were all about?\” I had argued that they could not be a discourse or dialogue because they were done in secret. My other simple question to the Speaker of the Parliament is how can a Member of Parliament break the law? I hope the Speaker of the Parliament will not also close one eye on this matter. For that matter whatever happened to the Committee on Ethics for Parliamentarians which the deputy prime minister is supposed to chair? Or, has one eye been closed to all this rhetoric since it happened in the older Parliament?
To me, it is increasingly becoming obvious that there are some members of both Umno and PAS who are hell bent on making trouble because of their commitment to try and create an Islamic state by force, or by foul means, or by the back-door.
Double standards
To me, the real rot in this country starts when the police, whom we think of as the guardians of the law, start practicing double standards right before all our eyes. It does not take just the Americans to say this or even Al Gore to make this observation. Any ordinary kampung farmer can say that the police today practice double standards in the enforcement of laws; that they will close one eye on any matter for the right motivation.
No wonder police officers are stealing evidences, killing and raping people, and doing all types of things which are unacceptable, even by daily morality, if not by law. These have already been found out to be \”standard operating procedures\” by the Police Commission, but why the reticence now in implementing the findings of the Police Commission? Are all of you then going to exposed soon after? RPK\’s blog-site is still the most popular one for such juicy speculations.
But what is absolutely terrible is that the practice of double or multiple standards of enforcement begs the question, if there is any more standard operating procedure for tackling crime of any sort?
Frankly, I am now losing total confidence in the capacity of the police to serve the nation under the King, and to really remain as the Malaysian Police Force. Do we need the Sarawak Rangers again; as we did during the May 13th incident; or should we consider a Gurkha Police Force, as I hear Singapore is doing?
Can the police be \”neutral public servants in the execution of their duties?\” That is professionalism. Otherwise, they must be Malaysian in acting the same way to every Malaysian without fear or favour. Otherwise we do not have a 2020 vision and may appear to have two sets of rules; one for us, and another \”for them.\”
An actual case I actually experienced is worth repeating. Once, while I was still in the public services, I received an offer from the ex-Police Officers Cooperative to donate a wheel chair and then I would be given a car badge which will \”make me recognized as a friend of the police\” and therefore would be cleared of any wrong doing, if and when I was stopped by the police. Because of that car badge pledge, I wrote a complaint to Tan Sri Jamil Johari, the then Deputy IGP, and I believe he took some appropriate action.
But I mention this case because it appeared to me that this was the institutionalization of the close one eye culture. Today, when you drive around, please notice the number of VIP personal cars which carry this emblem. That is the current state of rot in this country. This close one eye culture calls for selective prosecution; which abuses our system of laws in this country. No wonder then that even lawyers can write their own judgments for the Judges!
Still in denial
March 8th was a brilliant political tsunami because it brought to the surface the many hidden and under the carpet problems within the country. Many people in positions of authority and power, and especially the Umno-types, are still in denial about the reality of how ordinary people actually voted in the last Election. Please do not underestimate the simple and ordinary Malaysians; they are not stupid!
My unsolicited advice to the Umno hierarchy is that they start by repeating, like the members of Alcoholics Anonymous, that \”I am the source of the problem, and therefore only I can become the solution.\” It is no point blaming all and sundry for periods on end, because in the process Umno is actually shooting herself in the foot again and again. What if the MCA-Gerakan-MIC-PPP coalition publicly protested against the PAS-Umno secret society meeting room because it denied the spirit of the Barisan; as equal partners in a membership? Or, are they even one?
It is therefore sad that ever since the Pak Lah administration has been driving the country, although the democratic space has been opened up, what is coming out is a lot of the incapacity of the public service systems to manage the democratic demand for change in their processes and to begin new ways of doing things. Most government systems in the Pakatan states or the federal systems in the police and the judiciary today appear incapable of dealing professionally over the cases without \”the overhang of a ketuanan Melayu-type mentality.\”
As an ex-public services officer, my advice is that we may need some fundamental and radical changes in the administration of the state; if we are ever to transition into a two-party system. Currently we have too many one-eyed public servants who see selective prosecution as a national calling and the calling of racial insults a needed and necessary thing. Since when did the very hospitable simple Malay people lose their culture with such filth?
I fully recognize that one swallow does not make a summer, but it is also obvious that one-eyed creatures are already enjoying and making hay while their sun shines within a framework of selective persecution or what is called the rule by law.
To conclude let me quote Wan Saiful Wan Jan of the Malaysia Think Tank who wrote in Malaysiakini on why he is a liberal: \”Being a liberal to me is about respecting the rule of law, limiting the claws of government, freeing individuals from servitude to another human being, and bringing back market solutions. As a Muslim, is it conceivable for me to be otherwise?\”
I think he argues almost for me on the place of the rule of law. What he says is Islamic, I believe, and I am not sure the protestors of the Bar Council Forum would want to even dialogue or have a discourse with him. That is sadly, the ugly side of Islam which non-Muslims see, and which is portrayed as mainstream Islam, and rather unfortunately too.
