AUG 3 — The spate of recent high profile crimes calls for tough police action. But we must not resort to a quick fix by re-introducing extra judicial police powers such as the Emergency Ordinance (EO) 1969 which was repealed two years ago.
The police are already armed to the teeth and well fed. We do not need to throw more money at them to tackle serious and organised crime. What we need is better policing.
Prominent Arab businessman Hussain Ahmad Najadi was shot dead in broad daylight on Tuesday. It is unfortunate that Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi was quick to attribute the recent spate of shootings in the country to the abolition of the EO.
Prime Minister Najib Razak said the government was prepared to consider giving more muscle to the police so long as there is “a guarantee to safeguard against abuse of power and human rights.”
Just two days before Najdi’s cold-blooded murder, Proham, a human rights NGO, released a statement calling on the federal government to address serious crime through effective use of investigative policing and not resort to preventive detention without trial.
“We must strive for world-class standards in policing,” Proham pointed out.
The statement was the outcome of a roundtable discussion together with the University Malaya, Law Faculty on July 25 which was attended by about 35 people including lawyers, academicians, civil society representatives, concerned citizens and media personal.
Proham noted that crime, especially organised crime, was at a serious level. But it pointed out that “there seems to be some conflicting data on the rate of crime released by Pemandu on the NKRA targets that crime was down in 2011 and 2012 but later in recent discussions this year it is being noted that there is a rise in crime due to the release of former EO detainees in 2011/2012.”
“There is no credible evidence in the public dominion on the rise in crime associated with the release of EO detainees,” it concluded.
At the discussion former Chief Justice Zaki Azmi suggested that the police be given more manpower but others disagreed as it already has adequate resources and what was needed was better policing.
Indeed, according to data produced by DAP Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong, Malaysia’s police to population ratio in 2011 was 1:270, close to Interpol’s recommendation of 1:250.
According to Andrew Khoo, co-chair of the Human Rights Committee of Bar Council Malaysia, the EO ceased to be law in June 2012, resulting in the release of nearly 2,000 suspected hardened criminals. If the end of the EO is to be blamed for the increase in the crime rate, why was there no increase in crime in the second half of 2012?
Khoo asked: “Why is it that as at March 20, 2013, the government was still letting it be known that the crime rate had fallen? The government only started talking about the crime rate increasing after the general election was over.”
He also pointed out that the police budget had increased from RM4.57 billion in 2010 to RM6.51 billion in 2013, or a 42 per cent increase over three years. However, only 8 per cent of the total police budget was allocated to criminal investigation in 2013.Out of the police force of 130,051 in 2013, only 9,055 or just 7 per cent are in criminal investigation. The bulk of the police budget is in management (45 per cent) and internal security and public order (27 per cent).
The reason why serious crime is on the rise is not because police do not have enough funds or laws. They have failed to put their money where the mouth is. Asking for more extra judicial powers will not reduce crime but this would probably lead to more human rights abuses.
As pointed out by Proham: “Critical review of the role played by the police does not mean our disrespect or disregard of the police force. Our aspirations, like those highlighted in the Police Commission Report, are for world-class policing.” — mysinchew.com
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malay Mail Online.
