AUG 31 — The president of the NUTP, Hashim Adnan, in standing up to defend the police who questioned (or interrogated?) pupils of the SK Seri Pristana, said police just wanted to know the truth. This simplistic defence of the police was very callous of him as an educationist. By extension, he was also defending the headmaster and the PTA.

He felt there was nothing wrong as no harm was done since the children were not put in a dark room or threatened. "They just wanted to get to the bottom of the issue, and since adults can sometimes not give the real account, the best way was to ask the pupils, who only know how to tell the truth," he said.

I am surprised that as an educationist he is unaware that children as young as five can tell lies, even if they are not similar to lies told by adults. It depends on factors such as how they are questioned, by whom they are questioned, why they are being questioned and about what they are being questioned. Words can also be put into children’s mouths as they can be put into adults’ mouths.

I am also surprised that he does not appreciate that the children involved in the Seri Pristana case are primary schoolchildren and not Form 6 students. 

He appears to be talking in the same vein as the PTA and the headmaster who said there was nothing wrong in the non-Muslim children being ordered to eat in the toilet-canteen, and that it was actually in the interests of the children as otherwise they would have to eat under the blazing sun.

Questioning, or interrogating, children is not the same as interrogating adults. Minors are vulnerable and they are no match for the cops. For this reason when minors are charged with any offence, they are tried in juvenile courts and it is mandatory for child counsellors to be present when children are questioned in these courts.

Is he unaware of the rights of children to be protected from harm in any way? Being traumatised by interrogations by law enforcement officers without the presence of parents/guardians and or child counsellors is an act of cruelty to children. It is an act of child abuse. The damage is not physical, but psychological. He should also be aware of the different kinds of damage that can take place. Psychological damage can do more harm that physical damage.

There is no need to put children in dark rooms or to threaten them like adults are threatened to traumatise them. The very fact that persons unknown to them are questioning them on something that had already affected them earlier is sufficient to frighten and traumatise them. Teachers and other pupils are said to have been harassing and taunting them since the fiasco exploded in the media.

Further, the police officers very likely went in their full uniforms. How many of them were there? Being interrogated by fully uniformed police officers would surely put fear in the children and this alone is very wrong action in dealing with children. The police did not go as “friends” but as unfriendly interrogators. It is unlikely the questioning was ‘friendly’, but more likely confrontational. This would traumatise children. This amounts to child abuse.

What is the “truth” that the police were looking for? That the children were put in the toilet-canteen is proven beyond any doubt as the PTA and the teachers had staged a “sandiwara buka puasa” in that same place to convince the public that if buka puasa could be held there, there was nothing wrong for the children to eat there.

Did the police want to find the truth about the parents’ claims that their children were being harassed and taunted by the teachers and other children? By all means do so, but in the presence of parents and/or child counsellors and by non-uniformed police personnel who are trained to handle child-questioning. The whole “truth-finding operation” should have been carried out with the help of child counsellors or juvenile court advisers.           

The NUTP should stay above race, religion and politics. By defending the police for its method of “getting to the truth” by violating the rights of tender children for protection from harm in any way, it is seen to be toeing the line of the government which is that the government and all its agencies are infallible.

Hashim Adnan could do the public a favour as the public also want to know the truth of the claim by the PTA and the headmaster that the canteen was under renovation since March. By the way, the Deputy Education Minister P. Kamalanathan himself admitted, after visiting the school, that there was no renovation since March. So why did the headmaster and the PTA lie about the renovations? If there was no sinister motive behind hiding those non-fasting children in the toilet or changing room, why the need to invent lies about the renovations and stage a buka puasa sandiwara in the toilet-canteen?

It is a very sad thing that a leading teachers’ union is in support of high-handed actions not in the interests of children. The police interrogation, done without the presence of parents and/or child counsellors was child abuse. And things could have been recorded that were not said by the children, e.g. like the snatch theft case in Kulim that was recorded as “bag tangan saya tercicir” instead of “ragut”, and the Sungai Petani case where the IO wrote “telah cuba pukul saya” when the assault victim clearly told him “telah pukul saya” and blood could be seen on the victim which the IO pretended not to see.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malay Mail Online.