Rule of law must prevail over mob rule
WHEN I was growing up between the late 1970s and 1980s, the social environment in Malaysia was indeed a harmonious one. It has changed since then, and not for the better.
While our nation has progressed in leaps and bounds in economic terms, it appears that this has been at the expense of the harmony which we enjoyed as children.
Apart from the May 13, 1969 incident (which, I believe rightly or wrongly, had a political motive at its core), Malaysians have been living in peace and harmony since independence in 1957.
But our nation was plunged into a collective state of shock and disbelief at the sudden violence that erupted after midnight on Monday, Nov 26 at the Sri Maha Mariamman Temple in Subang Jaya.
Notwithstanding that things have somewhat calmed down since then, it is to be noted that no person has yet been charged for the various criminal acts which were committed on Nov 26 itself and on the subsequent day in the vicinity of the developer’s office. Given the efficiency our police force is rightly known for, it is likely that after four days of investigation into such a high profile matter, which includes causing grievous injury on a public servant, investigations have at the very least identified those responsible for:
1) The initial instigation which resulted in the riot on Nov 26 and the chronology of events that night;
2) The acts of public vandalism on Nov 26 and Nov 27; and/or
3) Engaging and further authorising and/or making the alleged payment of RM150,000 to the alleged Malay group gathered outside the temple compound and what the exact instructions were to these people.
Of course, knowing the facts and collaborating them sufficiently to stand scrutiny in a court of law are two very separate matters. In no way is the above a negative critique against our police but I would hope that once there is sufficient evidence to charge anyone in a court of law, such charges should be brought in court without fear or favour and with the rule of law as the only relevant consideration.
In addition, as no person has yet been charged, it is highly prejudicial for any person to make any pronouncements on the party(ies) responsible for the fracas, more so when such statements are made by persons in high office who wield not insignificant influence. Under the rule of law in Malaysia, and save for a very few objections in certain statutes, one is innocent until proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Actually, no one but the police should be making statements as they are the only persons capable of ascertaining the actual events that took place on the early morning of Nov 26. Perhaps the only exception to this, in line with the basic freedom of free speech, are the parties who are the lawful parties involved in the planned relocation – and even then, such statements should be tempered so that they are of an explanatory and not accusatory nature.
Any statements should also be carefully worded to reflect facts which will not be interpreted as sub judice even before the matter goes before the courts.
It is my fervent hope that the matter will be resolved by determining the substantiated and collaborated facts and not via conjecture or, worse still, through speculation. The rule of law must prevail over mob rule or other populist but misguided agendas, whether individual or political in nature. To deny this is to subvert democracy and the freedoms we have persistently sought for so long. It will be a step back in a year when we have made long strides forward and would be an ominous omen for Malaysia Baru.
The present government, which has always championed the rule of law and equality for all, now faces the unenviable task of realising these concepts and ideals while also maintaining peace in our multiracial, multireligious and multicultural nation.
AHMAD ZAKI ISMAIL Petaling Jaya