Understand the position of the police
THE flip-flop decisions on the abolition of preventive laws are not conducive to the fulfilment of the promise to implement the rule of law as envisaged by the Prime Minister soon after taking the reins of government on May 10.
These laws served their purpose well at one time but in today’s political landscape, they are outdated and no longer relevant. Being better informed and very aware of their rights, contemporary society expects nothing less than maximum transparency from the criminal justice system. Thus the bar for accountability and responsibility has been raised to a level that the authorities have a lot to do to catch up with, especially when it relates to the powers of stopping, searching and detention of criminal suspects.
The government of the new Malaysia has to be firm and steadfast in delivering its promises.
At the other end of the spectrum, the police are coming under severe and constant pressure to keep the peace apart from ensuring the swift prosecution of offenders. They are also facing the spectre of public disorder caused by racial tension. This adds to the overall political uneasiness which is obviously worrying the government.
All parties concerned have to be steadfast in keeping their word to make rule of law supreme and ensure its gradual acceptance in all aspects of everyday life. They owe it to the people who voted for change in the 14th General Election.
But they must also understand the position of the police, which have become dependent, if not addicted, to preventive laws. It’s no fault of theirs; it’s just that their tools and procedures of investigation have been weakened over time and through the emphasis on human rights.
This process over the last three decades has eroded the investigators’ natural ability to gather evidence, hence their desperation now in wanting to keep the preventive laws.
Nevertheless, it is imperative that the government of new Malaysia stands firm on its promise to abolish these archaic laws. Yes, there will be collateral damage but I presume the people are ready to face the consequences.
The police must be strengthened by enhancing all their tools of investigation as stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Code. They need more time to, among others, detain, interview, interrogate, raid, recover or discover evidence, and use admissions and confessions without any interference from external parties. Laws can be enacted or amended to give them these powers coupled with the relevant checks and balance.
A perspective on human rights during investigations, especially in detention, must be balanced with the investigators’ right to gather the best available admissible evidence possible. The police need this support if we are to ensure that justice will be served. It will also go a long way in addressing contemporary dissent effectively.
It is crucial that the government study ways to make the investigation and prosecution arms of the criminal justice system watertight in gathering admissible evidence and ensuring that such evidence is presented compactly and thoroughly in court. Tampering with evidence, interfering with witnesses, false police reports, false sworn statements and perjury must be dealt with severely and without undue delay.
All the limbs of the criminal justice system that are found to condone these drawbacks with mala fide intentions must also be dealt with firmly and severely and with the full force of the law. Independent committees can be formed to scrutinise cases of interest that failed to deliver justice. Action then can be taken against those who were negligent, incompetent or criminally liable.
Everyone has a place in new Malaysia, including those who want to voice extreme views, but those who break the law must face the consequences of their actions. This process must be transparent and go through the rigours of judicial process. G. SELVA Ipoh