Truth be told: Not another royal omission!

What were the last two royal commissions called? One was about Police Misconduct and another about the VK Lingam Tapes. What has been the outcome of these commissions and their reports which were presented to the King, after being conducted in the name of royalty?

Can we be honest and truthful? Would I be wrong to say: ‘Nothing?\’ Ok, maybe it is not fair to say nothing, but maybe did we get to know more than what the rumour mills had already told us? Mostly we confirmed the rumours through evidence gathered by the commission.

Maybe also, as a result, we (more than 51%) voted against the federal government and changed them in five states. Was that enough? No, not to me at least! I expect more from a Royal Commission set up for such an explicit purpose, and if \”royal-ness is invoked\”; and if it seeks to represent all Malaysians, and not just the Malays, or maybe Umno worldviews and interests!

Both former commissions had hundreds of pages of notes and recommendations; so what happened to all these? Someone wrote recently and said that the infamous Mr Lingam ( left ) is still flying all over the world with the same Judge-friend.

And, I assume his legal business is doing as well too, and more damage. For that matter, do either the police or the judicial officers, like the AG, even respect such royal commission reports? Does even the Bar Council for that matter?

Frankly, I do not yet see any clear evidence against my skepticism.

On the contrary, having read retired Judge NH Chan\’s views on the recent legal issues and judgments, I\’m even more concerned why the BN-appointed AG, the IGP, and the Chief Judge still continue colluding with the BN government vide their public offices.

They have now become merely an extension of federal political expediency. Therefore, can someone tell me what has really changed as result of both royal commissions and alter my skepticism? People still die in police-lock-ups. Judges still hand down questionable decisions.

And now, it is even more obvious that this expediency culture is not limited to merely the Police but equally to other agencies staffed by ex-police types. In fact, if we bother to read the Tenganita book, Revolving Doors, it becomes obvious that \”all relevant enforcement authorities\” seem to assume that people are guilty when they are arrested.

Flawed education

It does not matter whether one is a citizen or a non-citizen. No one suspected of an offence is anymore innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, am I wrong to be rather skeptical about another Royal Commission which is set to become an omission?

Do we really need to use the name of the King to further abuse this nation? We are already being abused enough by ordinary citizens who behave like Little Emperors and Rulers within their fiefdoms.

\”Author\” is the root word for authority. The Ultimate Author of life and death is GOD. Human beings cannot become enforcement authorities for right and wrong until someone is proven \”guilty\”; for a criminal offence against the State, under our governance system of civil laws.

So, why are these innocent suspects and even witnesses being abused without impunity? Who is the \”so-called authority\” that empowers lower mortals to abuse the dignity of another without respect and due regard to the fact that we are all created in His Image? Is it merely wrong intentions or totally really wrong assumptions and flawed education?

My great fear is that it is based on completely wrong assumptions, brainwashed into the public services by 52 years of Umno\’s hegemony of the federal system of governance. And, the Biro Tata Negara is currently the worst form of the amplification of such a corruption of public truth.

If Beng Hock was only a witness to an incident, when even the crime had not yet been identified, how or why would he be interrogated into the wee hours until death? Again, is not the root word for such an interrogative process, \”terror?\”

What this really means is that we apply \”terror techniques\” to get the witness to ‘confess.\’ Confess to what? A witness can only say what they have seen or heard, felt or tasted, or experienced, but nothing else.

So, what is there to apply terror to \”force answers which are not forthcoming?\” Charge them in court; that is the civil way to find truth. But, again the root words connote using ‘terror and force\’ to get answers.

In this day and age, when terrorism is not really as widespread as during the days of militant communism in Malaya, is there really a need to use force at all by any so-called \”enforcement authority?\”

Do we really have to apply any force today? Did not Police ‘force\’ versus Hindraf ‘force\’ breed trouble? Yes, maybe sometimes we teach our children to do what is right and need to apply threats of various forms, but that is almost always done within the context of love.

I\’m not sure that within any \”authority structure\” we have today, that such love is their context! Unfortunately, all authority structures, inevitably regard it as their divine right to \”lord it over the others.\”

Why all the hog-wash?

Frankly, the only God-given right they do have is: To honour and respect the other humans made and created in God\’s image. The man-ordained divine right, of even Kings, is no more in most places in the world!

Therefore, my fundamental question to all Malaysians is: Do we still need really need another commission that becomes more of an omission?

Or, an even more important question is \”why was such selective persecution being carried out by the Malaysian Commission on Anti-Corruption (MACC), to the point of an unintended death, in the first place?\”

After all, who does the MACC report to, ultimately? If it is to the parliament, or to the King, or to the full commission of members/advisors, why then all this hog-wash and lack about political neutrality? Why even pretend that our MACC is like the ICAC of Hong Kong?

Why even pretend to have the representative political wills being expressed \”by even bigger crooks within the government,\” who say \”No\” to the Royal Commission ‘without forethought and then create an \”Omission\” as an afterthought?

As I have argued before, if we do not frame the problem well the solution will always be half-baked. What is the core issue or problem facing the nation over the Teoh Beng Hock death?

Simple, the people want to know why he died when he was \”only taken in for questioning as a witness?\” Do we need a Royal Commission to answer this question? Again, simple; the people want a Royal Commission because they lost respect and trust in the existing institutions!

Instead of protecting public interest they appear to harm public interest. Who are these? They are both the police and the MACC. Both were negligent in allowing and causing harm to Beng Hock.

The now infamous and discredited AG has argued that an \”inquest\” is needed for criminal assertions. My counter argument: Have the inquest within the framework of the Royal Commission.

Therefore, the members of the Royal Commission can be representatives (much like a jury) of the people to finally decide why Beng Hock had to die. I\’m sorry to say this but the people do not trust the police nor individual judges anymore after the Lingam case and when corrupted judges as still having a free rein.

Therefore my conclusion: The Royal Commission is going to be another Royal Omission as the definition is weak and there appears a divide and rule being orchestrated by someone higher up!

But, have no fear because Truth will prevail because all truth belongs to God!