Better policing needed, not a new law to replace the repealed Emergency Ordinance

7/28/2019 Better policing needed, not a new law to replace the repealed Emergency Ordinance

1/35

The EO has failed, so why the call to revive it? asks

opposition MP

BY RITA JONGJULY 12, 2013

Why revisit the Emergency Ordinance (EO) if it has failed?

This was the question posed by a DAP Member of Parliament who is questioning the

rationale of reviving the preventive law.

Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo said Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi

is not making any sense in calling for the revival of the EO if his statement that"those who were detained under the EO had returned to their criminal ways after

release", is to be believed.

"Does he have evidence to prove this? If he has, why was no action taken against

these criminals?" he asked.

The home minister, in calling for the revival of EO-like laws, had said that 90 per

cent of the rise in crime was committed by former EO detainees.

"And how does his statement support the revival of the EO? If he is right, then clearlythe EO has failed in its objective which is to rehabilitate detainees."

Gobind pointed out that that EO was initially in place to reform and rehabilitate those

suspected of criminal activities.

"It was also to ensure that these suspects did not pose a threat to society once they

were rehabilitated and released.

"Zahid has completely missed the point in supporting the revival of the EO. He

should instead be focusing on ways to boost current laws for better enforcement and

improving facilities which already exist. This will bring about better policing and

gradually deal with the problem of increasing crimes."

Ahmad Zahid had also promised to show the statistics from a recent study on crime

at the next parliament meeting to justify his claim to revive the EO.

1


2/35

DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua said in a statement today that Ahmad

Zahid should not wait until September to prove his case.

"Why wait till September to show statistics that prove the repealed EO accounts for

90 per cent of the rise in crime?" he asked.-- July 12, 2013.

Oxymoronic or moronic, Zahid's claim of EO 'statistics' highly

suspicious - Tony Friday, 12 July 2013

Yesterday, Home Minister Dato' Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi claimed he will

present statistics from a recent study on crime in full at the next

Parliament session to justify the need to revive the Emergency Ordinance

(EO), to allow the Police to place suspects under detention without trial

for 2 years.

He said "I obtained the statistics, which were derived empirically, that in

Selangor, 90% of organised crimes were carried out by ex-detainees who were

released from Simpang Renggam where they were held under the EO. I will

present the statistics and the study in the Dewan Rakyat in the coming

session, the September session, to prove the need for the EO."

The perplexing question for us to ask the Home Minister is, if the study is

already concluded, and he already has in his possession the study, why doeshe need to wait 2 months before the report is presented to the Parliament?

Why not present it next week while the Parliament is still in session? In

fact, even if the report isn't yet presentable next week, he could always

call for a press conference and release the results of the study. There is

absolutely no necessity to wait a whole 2 months "to prove the need for the

EO".

However, if you read into Dato' Seri Zahid's statement, one can only deduce

that it is completely oxymoronic. If the "study" even exists, then surelyfor a shocking 90% of the crime perpetrators to be identified, these

"criminals" would have been identified, arrested, investigated and possibly

even charged already. But if they have been arrested and investigated - and

there have been very few reports of such, then how come crime is still

rampant and the Police still needs the EO?

2


3/35

Is the Minister trying to tell us that they have identified all the suspects

of all the crime incidences over the past year but are unable to arrest and

charge them?

Why not arrest and charge immediately?

In fact if Dato' Seri Zahid's allegation that 90% of these crimes were

committed by former EO detainees were true, it actually doesn't "prove the

need for the EO". On the contrary, it only proved that the police force to

be totally incompetent! The question needs to be asked, that if the Police

is indeed so certain of who committed 90% of these crimes, then why can't

they be charged in court and put in jail? If the Police is unable to charge

all of them, surely the Police is able to garner evidence and charge half or

even a quarter of them?

However, based on the Home Minister's argument, the Police are absolutely

helpless without the EO to put these "criminals" to jail via our criminal

justice system. Hence the need for the Police to take the easy way out, by

becoming the witness, prosecutor and judge to place these "criminals" under

detention without trial.

Unlike Dato' Seri Zahid who seems to have trouble coming up with concrete

statistics, we have shown using past published police statistics have shown

that the EO was completely ineffective in fighting rising crime. For

example, the Malaysian crime index was rising rapidly from 2003 to 2008. At

the peak, with the crime rate rose by 34.0% from 2004 to 2007. During this

period, the EO was readily available at the Police's disposal and yet, crime

was seemingly unstoppable.

However, despite the EO repeal at the end of 2011, the Police and the HomeMinistry were claiming victory in the fight against crime, with the crime

index declining by 7.6% in 2012. Hence, based on the above official crime

statistics presented by the Police themselves, how can the Home Minister,

Dato' Seri Zahid Hamidi, now claim that the cause of rising crime is almost

entirely due to the repeal of the Emergency Ordinance?

3


4/35

Therefore, just like Dato' Seri Zahid's utter nonsense over the "Red Bean

Army" allegedly funded with hundreds of millions of ringgit by the DAP, this

so-called study which shows 90% of organised crimes being committed by ex-EO

detainees is a complete figment of Zahid's imagination. This study does not

exist.

We are seriously concerned that the Home Minister is taking advantage of the

public fear of rising crime to bring back draconian laws for sinister

purposes in Malaysia, instead of focusing on how to improve the

professionalism, efficiency and effectiveness of the Police in fighting

crime.

We call upon both the IGP and the Home Minister to heed Dato' Seri Najib

Razak's advice when he announced the repeal of the EO, that "now police must

train themselves how to look for evidence." Instead of just catching

suspects and chucking them into EO detention, Dato' Seri Najib asked the

police to now "provide evidence to charge them in court".

------------------------------------------------------------

Tony Pua is the MP for PJ Utara

____

DAP: Ahmad Zahid should reveal statistics to show repeal of Emergency

Ordinance caused increase in crime

http://news.abnxcess.com/2013/07/dap-ahmad-zahid-should-reveal-statistics-to-sho\

w-repeal-of-emergency-ordinance-caused-increase-in-crime/

Zahid asked to explain why ex-detainees not charged

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235479

Zahid: Study shows 90% of serious crimes in S'gor committedby ex-EO detainees

http://www.fz.com/content/zahid-study-shows-90-serious-crimes-sgor-committed-ex-\

eo-detainees

'Get this - crime index peaked before EO repeal' - Tony Pua

4
http://news.abnxcess.com/2013/07/dap-ahmad-zahid-should-reveal-statistics-to-show-repeal-of-emergency-ordinance-caused-increase-in-crime/http://news.abnxcess.com/2013/07/dap-ahmad-zahid-should-reveal-statistics-to-show-repeal-of-emergency-ordinance-caused-increase-in-crime/http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235479http://www.fz.com/content/zahid-study-shows-90-serious-crimes-sgor-committed-ex-eo-detaineeshttp://www.fz.com/content/zahid-study-shows-90-serious-crimes-sgor-committed-ex-eo-detaineeshttp://news.abnxcess.com/2013/07/dap-ahmad-zahid-should-reveal-statistics-to-show-repeal-of-emergency-ordinance-caused-increase-in-crime/http://news.abnxcess.com/2013/07/dap-ahmad-zahid-should-reveal-statistics-to-show-repeal-of-emergency-ordinance-caused-increase-in-crime/http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235479http://www.fz.com/content/zahid-study-shows-90-serious-crimes-sgor-committed-ex-eo-detaineeshttp://www.fz.com/content/zahid-study-shows-90-serious-crimes-sgor-committed-ex-eo-detainees


5/35


Crime Index 2003-2012

http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-

cdn.mkini.net/655/43\

5x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webp

Go for better enforcement to curb crime, not EO - Jimmy Puah Wee Tse

http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/235165

EO an excuse for police incompetence?


____

EO an excuse for police incompetence?

Filed under: Politics Hornbill Unleashed @ 12:01 AM

Tags: Anak Sarawak Bangsa Malaysia, Save Malaysia, Save Sabah, Save Sarawak

Nathaniel Tan

The essential question is this is it ever justifiable to detain someone for an extended period of

time without trial?

By way of some background: when you are arrested, you can be held for 24 hours.

Beyond this, the police can remand you for a maximum of seven or 14 days (depending on the

crime for which you are being investigated) by obtaining a remand order from a magistrate.

Thereafter, you must be charged in court or released.

Detention without trial under laws such as the ISA, Emergency Ordinance (EO), and Dangerous

Drugs Act (which is still in effect) allowed the police and/or the home minister to detain individuals

without trial or judicial review for two-year periods, renewable indefinitely.

This means that according to the law, the government could detain you for your entire life, without

you ever seeing the inside of a courtroom.

5
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235120http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/655/435x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webphttp://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/655/435x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webphttp://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/655/435x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webphttp://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/235165http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235473http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235120http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/655/435x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webphttp://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/655/435x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webphttp://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/655/435x263xa33e137035689de76d3292ceb24f0dad.jpg.pagespeed.ic.PvlDG83UAV.webphttp://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/235165http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235473


6/35

Malaysia has taken a few step forwards in eliminating old laws, but with the introduction of the

Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma) and now, talk of a replacement for the

EO, we seem to be faced with old wine in new bottles.

Who determines guilt?

Once again is it ever justifiable to detain someone without trial?

We give the state the only legitimate monopoly on violence, and empower it to punish us when

we break the law. Most people find it reasonable for the state to detain and punish guilty

individuals.

The next obvious question is who determines guilt? Should you ever find yourself accused of a

crime, do you believe in having a right to prove your innocence in a properly functioning court oflaw?

Under any of the detention without trial laws, no such right exists if the police and government

believe you are guilty, but do not have sufficient evidence to prove it, then its just a tough break

for you you will be locked up for as long as they see fit. According to the law, the judiciary has

absolutely no power to intervene whatsoever.

Surely the irony of this is not lost on any thinking citizen.

Only in a terrorist dictatorship would the inability to prove an individuals guilt lead to indefinite

detention, instead of exoneration and freedom.

The burden of proof

At the heart of this debate is the simple concept of innocent until proven guilty.

azlanThe police can say that they know someone is guilty; but how do they know? If they cannot

prove it in a court of law, can they be so sure themselves? Would you put someone in jail just

because someone else said he or she knows you are guilty?

Do you think it is fair for you to be subject to indefinite detention just because someone knows

you are guilty?

6


7/35

One of the worst implications of detention without trial laws is that it makes the police even more

incompetent and lazy.

Why bother gathering evidence when you dont need evidence to lock someone away?

If I were a member of the police force, for the sake of personal and institutional pride, I would

renounce any reliance on detention without trial.

The job of the police is to prevent crime, and to catch criminals. Any competent investigative unit

worth its salt should be able to gather sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of people they detain

(especially without brutally beating a confession out of them).

If they cannot, we can only conclude one of two things either the individual is in fact innocent, or

the police have simply failed to perform their duties competently.

After all, police in developed countries all around the globe can combat crime without having to

rely on the tyrannical ability to simply lock up whoever they please for as long as they like.

Is there something so special and unique about Malaysian crime that makes it more difficult than

usual to prove in a court of law?

Is the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) saying Malaysian police just arent as good as other

police?

I have never, and will never believe that Malaysians are just innately unable to be as good as

anyone else in the world at anything.

Improve police, not eliminate fundamental liberties

MP Tony Pua rightly pointed out that PDRM cannot have their cake and eat it too.

If they insist that crime rates have gone down recently, then they cannot possibly hope to

simultaneously claim that with the EO repealed, crime rates have gone up.

This Mahathiresque application of logic is liable to cause loss of hair.

7


8/35

Minister in the Prime Ministers Department Paul Low employs similar logic when he says that the

police are inefficient, therefore they must have EO powers to fight crime.

Firstly, weve already seen that the EO does nothing to fight the type of crime that by far affects

most of us.

Secondly, how about you fix police efficiency (maybe starting with, I dont know, the fact that 72

percent of PDRM personnel are assigned to non crime-fighting duties?) instead of letting the

authorities lock up whoever they like whenever they like?

NONESome time ago, as deaths in custody cases seemed to be spiralling out of control, deputy

IGP Mohd Bakri Zinin (centre in photo) come off as a crybaby when helamented My men are just

like detainees.

Try telling that to the families of detainees who lost their lives.

I am all for improving the quality of life of the police, and for investing much, much more into the

police force then we do presently (Im sure we can forego a submarine or two towards this end).

I am not, however, for using poor police performance and living conditions as an excuse to give

the authorities full, unchecked power to arbitrarily snatch people away from their lives, beat them

senseless, and rob them of their freedoms.

I know it is demoralising to face criticism, but the leaders of the police should look to removing

any cause for criticism, not just whining.

It is far more beneficial to work at proving the critics wrong beyond a doubt, than it is to worry

about fighting critics in some imaginary war of perception.

Pua: Crime rate reduced, despite EO repeal

First Published: 2:03pm, Jul 09, 2013Last Updated: 2:03pm, Jul 09, 2013

Nationby Nurul Iman Dimyati

8


9/35

PETALING JAYA (July 9): Despite the repeal of the Emergency Ordinance (EO) at the end of

2011, Malaysia has seen a decline in crime in 2012 as according to police statistics, DAP

publicity secretary Tony Pua said.

He said while DAP disputes the accuracy and completeness of the Malaysia Crime Index, the

police themselves have presented that crime levels in 2012 was the lowest in a decade at

145,891 or a decline of 7.6% from 2011.

Most tellingly, the decline of crime, according to the polices own statistics, was achieved despite

the fact that the EO was repealed during the year, Pua said in a statement today.

Earlier, a significant drop in crimes was also recorded from 209,417 in 2009 to 157,891 in 2011

following the launch of the Reducing Crime National Key Result Area (NKRA) in 2009.

This was attributed under the Government Transformation Plan to greater allocation of resources

to patrolling and fighting street crimes.

The achievement if true, was never ever attributed by the police to the increased use of the EO

to detain alleged criminals without trial, he said.

Thus, Pua questioned Inspector General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar and Home

Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi for blaming the cause of rising crime almost entirely

on the repeal of the EO.

The issue at hand is whether the repeal of the EO is indeed the cause of rising crime, or has it

become the convenient whipping body for the police to cover up the lack of professionalism and

competence in solving crime cases as well as prevent crime incidences?

Despite all the sound and fury, the police have yet to present a shred of evidence that the recent

spate of rising crime is due to hardened criminals released from the Simpang Renggam

detention centre, added Pua.

Ahmad Zahid was recently quoted as saying more than 2,600 detainees in Simpang Renggam,

Johor had been released following the abolishment of the EO but a number of them have

returned to crime.

9


10/35

At the same time, the police have reportedly claimed that due to the repeal of the act, they were

denied the power to detain suspects, thus making them unable to put the criminals away and

resulting in the rising crime rate.

Pua also pointed out that according to the crime statistics over the past decade, during the years

when the EO was in place, crime had risen aggressively from 2003 to 2008.

At the peak, the crime rate rose by 34.0% from 2004 to 2007. During this period, the EO was

readily available at the polices disposal and yet, crime was seemingly unstoppable, he stated.

He stressed that Khalid and Ahmad Zahid must heed the prime ministers advice for the police to

train themselves on how to look for evidences and provide them to charge suspects in court,

rather than making up new laws.

The focus of the debate to fight rising crime must be on how to improve the professionalism,

efficiency and effectiveness of the police.

It should not be on how new laws to allow for detention without trial can be drafted to overcome

police incompetence, he said.

Read more: http://www.fz.com/content/pua-crime-rate-reduced-despite-eo-repeal#ixzz2YoS2CnM8

SUNDAY, JUNE 23, 2013

EO Repeal Not An Excuse for Rising Crime TonyPua

In recent weeks, we have heard various police officers at the local level explaining to residents

that one of the key reasons for the increasing rate of crime is because of the repeal of the

Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance in September 2011.

The Malaysian Insider reported yesterday that Senior Federal police officers, speaking on the

condition of anonymity claimed preventive laws such as the Restricted Residence Act (RRA) 1933

had been useful against hardcore criminals and syndicate kingpins.

This isnt the first time the Police are laying the blame on the repeal of the Emergency Ordinance

10
http://tonypua.blogspot.com/2013/06/eo-repeal-not-excuse-for-rising-crime.htmlhttp://tonypua.blogspot.com/2013/06/eo-repeal-not-excuse-for-rising-crime.html


11/35

and the RRA as the causes for rising spate of crime.

In June 2012, Selangors deputy police chief, Datuk A Thaiveegan suggested the repeal of the

Emergency Ordinance (EO) may have caused a hike in the states crime rate due to the number of

suspects who could have returned to a life of felony instead of reforming. He told Malaysiakini

that we see there is a rise in crime (recently) because theyve been in (detention) for too long,

they need exercise, so they come out and immediately they carry out their activities. He did

admit that he was only speculating by providing the caveat that he cant confirm yet (because of

the EO).

However now, the police appear to be pleading helplessness in the fight against crime. The

sources told The Malaysian Insider, "we do not just randomly pick people off the streets and put

them into detention centres. Police also gather information and statements from witnesses and

verify them But now that the government has done away with preventive laws, it is very difficult

to fight these criminals with one hand tied behind our backs."

If the Police are indeed able to gather the necessary information and statements from witnesses

and verify them, then why is it that they are not able to prosecute them in court and send them to

jail?

This is a shocking state of affair because are the Police telling us that if they are unable to jail

suspects without trial, then they are unable to fight crime in the country? Are the police claiming

to be so incompetent that they are unable to investigate with all required evidence to bring these

alleged criminals to court and make them pay for their crimes via the rule of law?

In that case, we might as well dispense with the Court of Law altogether since the Police and the

Attorney-General will find it easier to send these alleged criminals to jail and detention without

trial.

In the safe cities of Hong Kong, Tokyo, London or even Singapore, none of these countries utilise

detention without trial to keep crime low or negligible. Their criminal investigation

departments are able to detain and prosecute these criminals for the crimes they have committed

with the necessary investigation and evidence. Why is it that the Malaysian police are unable to

do the same? Are the police claiming that Malaysian criminals are more intelligent and more

organised in their activities to avoid detection and prosecution?

The Malaysian Police has failed to concede that the real reason behind the weaknesses in fighting

crime is the sheer misallocation of resources within the force. Over the past 8 years, the criminal

11


12/35

investigation department (CID) comprises barely 9% of the police force. In stark contrast, 41% of

uniformed police perform management functions, while 31% are tasked with internal security and

public order such as the Federal Reserve Unit (FRU), the Light Strike Force as well as the General

Operations Force.

Even the Special Branch of the police has nearly the same number of personnel as the CID. In

fact the Budget figures in 2010 showed that the police produced 733,237 reports and security

checks by the Special Branch, but only 211,645 criminal investigation papers. So Special Branch

produced more than three times as many reports as the CID.

The 2005 Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) Report has recommended about 20,000 uniformed

personnel or 22% of the force could be reassigned to go back to active core policing work.

Unfortunately this recommendation was never taken seriously by the Home Ministry.

The Home Ministry and the Malaysian police must stop giving excuses to the rising spate of

crime. It must accept the findings of the Royal Commission of Inquiry carried out 8 years ago,

and implement all the necessary measures to improve the effectiveness and professionalism of the

police force. The failure to do so will only see crime persist at high and increasing levels, making

Malaysia unsafe not only for its citizens, but also as a conducive country of business and

investment.

Zahid to furnish crime stats to prove EO needed

Posted on July 11, 2013bymocsarawak

12
http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/zahid-to-furnish-crime-stats-to-prove-eo-needed/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/zahid-to-furnish-crime-stats-to-prove-eo-needed/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/zahid-to-furnish-crime-stats-to-prove-eo-needed/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/11/zahid-to-furnish-crime-stats-to-prove-eo-needed/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/


13/35

By Ahmad Fadli KC

Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi will present statistics from a

recent study on crime in full at the next Parliament session to justify the

need to revive the Emergency Ordinance (EO).

According to Zahid (left), a study found that the bulk of criminal

activities in the country were masterminded by former detainees who

were released following the repeal of the EO in 2012.

I obtained the statistics, which were derived empirically, that in

Selangor, 90 percent of organised crimes were carried out by ex-

detainees who were released from Simpang Renggam where they were

held under the EO.

I will present the statistics and the study in the Dewan Rakyat in the

coming session, the September session, to prove the need for the EO,

he said during a press conference in Selayang this morning.

He was commenting on the rationale behind the proposal to revive a law

akin to the EO although police statistics have recorded a drop in crime

rates since the implementation of the Government Tranformation

Programme (GTP).

The debate on whether the EO, or a similar law, should be revived has

been raging following claims by certain quarters, including several

senior police officers and the Performance Management and Delivery

Unit (Pemandu), that the abolition of the ordinance contributed to the

spike in crime.

Bersih 3.0 report to be presented to cabinet

Last week, it was revealed that a law to replace the EO, which had

allowed for detention without trail, has been drafted.

13
https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/234998https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/234998


14/35

Yesterday, Deputy Home Minister Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar gave an

assurance that the new law being mooted willguarantee the

fundamental freedom of the people.

However, other parties, including the Human Rights

Commission(Suhakam) and opposition politicians, including Petaling

Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua (right), claimed the crime rate actually

peakedbefore the repeal of the EO.

On another matter, Zahid said that the investigation panel report on

Bersih 3.0 submitted to him yesterday will be presented to cabinet for

further action.

The report was submitted by an independent panel, led by former

inspector-general of police Hanif Omar, tasked with probing violent

incidents during the Bersih 3.0 rally in April last year.

We will present the report to the cabinet (to determine) if the report

can be distributed to the public so that they will know the report

findings, he explained. Malaysiakini

Did government lie about crime statistics, asksKit Siang

Posted on July 10, 2013bymocsarawak

By Rita Jong

Going by Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidis recent

statement on the crime upsurge, Malaysians have been right all along

14
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235260http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235221http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235221http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235120http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/did-government-lie-about-crime-statistics-asks-kit-siang/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/did-government-lie-about-crime-statistics-asks-kit-siang/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/did-government-lie-about-crime-statistics-asks-kit-siang/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=4EcKPwAYlO5_jM&tbnid=R1S-22hi7qd-SM:&ved=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thestar.com.my%2Fnews%2Fstory.asp%3Fsec%3Dnation%26file%3D%2F2013%2F4%2F6%2Fnation%2F20130406004233&ei%20http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235260http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235221http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235221http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/235120http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/did-government-lie-about-crime-statistics-asks-kit-siang/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/did-government-lie-about-crime-statistics-asks-kit-siang/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/did-government-lie-about-crime-statistics-asks-kit-siang/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/


15/35

about the breakdown in law and order and that the Barisan Nasional

government and police have been shading the truth.

DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang today said the home ministers admission

that there has been an increase in organised and petty crimes goes

against what the prime minister and the police have been saying, that

the crime index has dropped.

Is Ahmad Zahid now confirming that the prime minister, police and

previous home minister had been wrong and the public right in past

four years about the worsening crime situation? said Kit Siang.

Is he prepared to be frank and forthright and state whether Malaysians

had been fed false and wrong crime statistics in the past four years?

The Gelang Patah MP said that if that was so, then the home minister

should reveal the correct statistics.

Ahmad Zahid said that the cabinet was pressured to abolish the

Internal Security Act and the Emergency Ordinance and, as a result, the

crime rate increased and organised and petty criminals came out of the

woodwork, he said.

Just before Parliament was dissolved for the 13th general election,

Malaysians were told that the countrys crime index had decreased by

26.8 per cent since the first phase of the GTP began in 2009 and that

Malaysia had been ranked the safest and most peaceful country in

Southeast Asia according to the Global Peace Index.

He said Malaysians were told that the country recorded around 550.1

criminal incidents per 100,000 people, placing Malaysia lower than

Singapore, Hong Kong, Britain and the United States.

15


16/35

So what is Malaysias problem?

If Malaysians were all that safe, he said, then why was RM272.5 million

allocated in the 2013 Budget to ensure that the rakyat feel safe?

In fact, this claim of a relentless fall in crime rate in the past four years

continued to be the official stance after the 13th General Election with

the prime minister reiterating his War Against Crime speech on June

8.

He said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had said the crime rate

has been falling since the GTP programme against crime, stating that

since April this year, the crime rate dropped by 3.1% compared to thesame period last year.

However, just recently, the home minister and the Inspector-General of

Police appear to have decided to ditch all the claims about the success of

the GTP programme. Instead, they have taken the opposite tack, saying

that the country has a rising crime rate to justify the restoration of EO-

like preventive laws.

But where are the new crime statistics? I put this question to Ahmad

Zahid during his winding up of the debate in the Royal address in

Parliament yesterday, but he did not give a satisfactory answer, Kit

Siang added. Malaysian Insider

The return of EO? No way, says Suhakam

Posted on June 28, 2013bymocsarawak

16
http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/06/28/the-return-of-eo-no-way-says-suhakam/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/06/28/the-return-of-eo-no-way-says-suhakam/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/06/28/the-return-of-eo-no-way-says-suhakam/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/06/28/the-return-of-eo-no-way-says-suhakam/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/


17/35

Suhakam has expressed reservation against suggestions to reinstate the

Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention) Ordinance 1969 or the

enactment of a similar law as an instrument for preventive detention.

In a statement yesterday, Suhakam chairperson Hasmy Agam (below)

said while the Human Rights Commission recognises the need to

preserve social order, the reinstatement of the Emergency Ordinance

was retrogressive.

He explained that the law allowed for detention without trial and was

against Article 8 (1) of the federal constitution and Article 7 of the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(UDHR).

The increase in crime rates occurs in many other countries and is not

unique to Malaysia. This, however, does not justify the use ofretrogressive measures which would only move the country backwards

in terms of its human rights record, he said.

Hasmy, a former representative to the United Nations, said Suhakam

was of the view that existing laws, which requires a fair trial, were

sufficient in handling crime.

17


18/35

Suhakam also sees the need for the authority to enhance the

effectiveness of its crime investigation, prevention and monitoring

mechanism, as well as rehabilitation programme for former detainees,

he said.

Check and balance

Hasmy was responding to an ongoing debate in some newspapers on

whether the Emergency Ordinance be reinstated, or a similar law

created, to address claims that many former EO detainees are returning

to a life of crime.

Among others, the claim was made by the police and supported by aUniversiti Sains Malaysia research team, led by associate professor P

Sundramoorthy.

In a letter to The Sun, Sundramoorthy had proposed that a preventive

law similar to the EO, with a stringent check and balance system which

cannot be abused, be formulated.

This law is not meant to be a shortcut for investigating criminal cases.

It is meant to keep away violent gang members, recidivists and

organised crime members who are adept at beating the criminal justice

system, he wrote.

The Emergency Ordinance was repealed last year by the Najib

administration as part of a reform effort, resulting in the release of some

2,000 detainees.

Although the move was hailed by human rights activists, there weresuggestionsit had contributed to an increase in crime, such as the recent

spate of robberies at eateries in the Klang Valley. Malaysiakini

Updated: Thursday July 4, 2013 MYT 2:27:26 PM

18
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/233575http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/233575


19/35

IGP: Police supports calls to introduce newpreventive laws similar to Emergency Ordinance

BY FARIK ZOLKEPLI

Khalid Abu Bakar.

KUALA LUMPUR: The police force fully supports the calls to introduce new special preventive

laws similar to the Emergency Ordinance (EO), said Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid

Abu Bakar.

Describing such calls as timely, Khalid said a study and subsequent calls for such similar laws

to be introduced are welcomed by the police.

I am confident violent crimes can be curb if laws similar to the EO is introduced.

The police will be able to put hardened criminals away if such calls are a reality, he told a

press conference after the handing over of 10 Mitsubishi GT Lancer 2.0 to Bukit Aman Traffic

department, courtesy of PLUS Malaysia Berhad on Thursday.

Khalid said any decision towards enacting laws similar to EO would receive the full backing and

support of the police force.

There have been growing calls for stronger preventive laws to stop the incidence of violent

crime.

19
http://www.thestar.com.my/Search.aspx?q=%22farik+zolkepli%22http://www.thestar.com.my/Search.aspx?q=%22farik+zolkepli%22


20/35

Fantasies of the IGP

Posted on July 8, 2013by mocsarawak

A FMT LETTER by Ravinder Singh

For the IGP to tell Malaysians that the repeal of the Emergency

Ordinance (EO) is the cause of the rise in crime and the solution to

contain it is the proposed replacement law, is indeed laughable. One can

fantasise many things but cannot turn fantasies into reality.

One can also invent excuses to cover up ones weaknesses and

inefficiencies. As is said in Malay: Jika hendak, seribu daya; jika tidak,

seribu dalih. (a thousand efforts if you want to do it; a thousand

excuses if you dont want to do it).

Where in the world does the mere passing of a law turn criminals and

law-breakers into good citizens? Who cares if the law provides for a

death sentence, a long prison sentence, or a very costly monetary fine, if

none of these are put into practice consistently and without fear or

favour?

Let us take a couple of simple examples. There is a law or regulation that

says that lorries are not permitted to use re-treaded tires. When you

travel on the highway, how often have you seen the re-treaded layers

peeling off and littering the road?

20
http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/fantasies-of-the-igp/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/fantasies-of-the-igp/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2013/07/04/IGP-preventive-laws.aspxhttp://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/fantasies-of-the-igp/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/fantasies-of-the-igp/http://mocsarawak.wordpress.com/author/mocsarawak/


21/35

These debris has caused accidents, even deaths of innocent road users.

This law is so easy to enforce, yet it is not being done. Who cares for this

law or regulation? Even crashes could have happened with such tires

bursting while the lorries were being driven. Well, IGP, what meaning

has this law or regulation?

You can also see a lot of cars with very dark tinted glasses. This again is

against the law. Enforcement is not difficult if there is a will to do so. But

what happens? When an operasi is carried out, and cars with dark

screens are stopped, they are issued a notice which gives the owner a

date by which to produce the car at the JPJ with the dark tints removed.

What does the owner do? He takes the car to a shop which specialises in

removing the dark tinted glasses and replacing them with clear ones.

The car is taken to the JPJ and passed. Back to the dealer who changes

back the glasses, for a fee. Tell us, dear IGP, whether the law has

reduced the number of cars with dark tinted screens? What kind of

enforcement drama is this that only gives extra income to shops doing

car glass tinting work?

It is history that so many police cases have been thrown out of the courts

over the past decade or two due to serious gaps in police investigations.

Why? Does this not tell us volumes about the efficiency and competency

of the police?

Or are the gaps in the investigations deliberate so as to ensure that there

will be no conviction of certain people, while showing the public thatcases are brought to court, that the police are prosecuting the

lawbreakers?

21


22/35

Have the criminology researchers, Pemandu, Mampu or the police itself

done any research into this to determine why there are so many gaps in

police investigations which result in cases being thrown out?

Has any disciplinary action ever been taken against any police officers

who had not done the investigations properly? How many of the

incompetent Investigating Officers have been promoted to higher ranks?

This is a sure way of carrying incompetency to higher ranks in the force.

The IGP would do well to pull up every IO whose case is thrown out by

the courts, or returned by the AGs office for further investigations and

demand a written explanation. With all the resources at their disposal,why are the police not able to put up watertight cases?

Remember, a bad carpenter always blames his tools. On the other hand,

a good carpenter can make furniture with traditional tools. You can put

the most modern tools in the hands of an incompetent carpenter, but

the end product will depend on the ability of the hands to use those tools

and not on the tools per se.

There is a strong parallel between the manner in which the police has

been run leading to the inefficiency and lack of discipline within its

ranks and the manner schools have been run leading to the breakdown

of discipline in schools and the decline of academic standards.

When will the powers that be become matured enough to admit the

grave shortcomings within the system?

The rot in both the police and the education systems is the legacy of the

administrative/management style based on the premise tell a lie and

repeat it often enough and the people will believe it is the truth that was

introduced by Dr M in the mid 80s.

22


23/35

The lies of the police statistics on crime were finally nailed when a

Ministers home was broken into and he humbly admitted that rising

crime was not the peoples negative perception but a hard truth.

Apa (bukti) lagi polis mahu?

Cops propose guidelines for new law to replace

Emergency Ordinance

JULY 11, 2013

Police have proposed several guidelines to the home ministry concerning the new

law which will replace the repealed Emergency Ordinance (EO) to prevent abuse of

power, said the inspector-general of police.

""We are aware of fears the new law will involve abuse," Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar

said in Kuala Besut yesterday.

The Star reported that Khalid, in a response to critics over the police' dependence on

preventive laws, had promised that his men will be trained well in gathering

evidence.

"My men will work harder as we believe this new law will enable the police to take

action on hardened criminals and kingpins," the top cop said.

Khalid said the new preventive laws will ensure that seasoned criminals are taken off

the streets through several ways, including meticulous evidence collection to ensure

the cases brought to court were air-tight.

"This new law will be beneficial for the people as it will reduce street crimes," he

added.

Khalid said rightsof the public was their utmost concern, adding that the new law

would serve to put their safety as priority, even more compared to the criminals.

"We are confident serious crimes will be reduced significantly when the new law is

introduced," he said. - July 11, 2013.

23


24/35

Cop spars with Suhakam chief over EO revival

A senior police official today got into a heated argument with Suhakam chairperson

Hasmy Agam over the latter's opposition to the reinstatement of the Emergency

Ordinance (EO).

The incident occurred when Suhakam was unveiling its annual report for 2012 at itsheadquarters in Kuala Lumpur where Hasmy had raised his objection to the EO from

a human rights standpoint during the Q&A session.

Hasmy (left) said he was "dismayed" by urgings to reinstate the EO - a law that

allows for detention without trial - and that he was not convinced by the reasons

behind such proposals.

"Immediately after (calls to reinstate the EO), there were (revelations that)

adraft (replacement law had been prepared). It looks as if everything has been

planned.

"Even the most naive person on the street can see this has been planned," he said.

Hasmy, a former diplomat, said that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak should be

commended for abolishing the law and "pushing this country forward".

"However we are very dismayed that instead of moving forward, some quarters want

to move us backwards, just because of this so-called rise in crime rates," he said.

24
http://freemalaysiakini2.blogspot.com/2013/07/cop-spars-with-suhakam-chief-over-eo.htmlhttp://freemalaysiakini2.blogspot.com/2013/07/cop-spars-with-suhakam-chief-over-eo.html


25/35

'Prevention better than cure'

Later, an irate Senior Assistant Commissioner Mohad Nazir, a representative from

Bukit Aman, rose from his seat to address the room and state support for the EO.

Mohad said that the EO allowed preventive detention and that "preventive

is [sic]better than cure".

Without the EO, Mohad (right) said the public were now "suffering" and pleaded to

Suhakam to support the police's effort to reinstate the EO.

Hasmy responded that other countries were capable of responding to crime without

such laws and there were evidence that the EO had been abused in the past.

"So I think it is time for the police to move forward," he said.

He then cited the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Scotland Yard, Interpol, the Los

Angeles Police Department and the Victoria Police as notable examples of good

policing without such laws.

"There are five there. Why can't Malaysia be number six?" he asked.

Mohad retorted that even the United States had the Patriot Act and Guantanamo

Bay for the purpose of homeland security, but Hasmy replied that the former may not

have read the Patriot Act properly.

Mohad:Well, you see, we have a different demography, a different landscape. PDRM

are the most unique police force in the world.

25


26/35

Hasmy:Every police force is unique.

Mohad:No, you cannot compare PDRM with other countries. We are paramilitary, we

are intelligence, we are everything. Everything is in the hands of the police.

Mohad then explained that police in Singapore do not have the same amount of

responsibilities and should not be used as a comparison.

Mohad:We have more responsibility, so we must have these preventive measures.

Hasmy:Yes, I accept that. We will support anything preventive but it has to be within

international norms, it has to respect human rights.

Mohad:There are thousands of criminals released, they have been in there together,

they have networked...

Hasmy:That's the fault of the EO, you let them network.

This prompted laughter from the audience, comprising journalists, NGO and

government representatives, and conciliatory efforts from Hasmy.

"Look we are not against you, we want to improve you, we want to work with you.

We are not against you," said Hasmy, before Mohad grudgingly took his seat.

Mohad told Malaysiakini later that his views were purely his own and do not

represent those of the police. He was accompanied by five other police personnel infull uniform.

Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention)Ordinance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention) Ordinance, commonlyabbreviated as theEmergency Ordinance (EO), is a Malaysian law whose most

well-known provision allows for indefinite detention without trial. The Emergency

Ordinance was enacted by the National Operations Council led byTun Abdul

Razak as part of the state of emergency declared following theMay 13 race riots.

26
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tun_Abdul_Razakhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tun_Abdul_Razakhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tun_Abdul_Razakhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_13_incidenthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_13_incidenthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tun_Abdul_Razakhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tun_Abdul_Razakhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_13_incident


27/35

As the state of emergency has never been revoked to the present day, the

Emergency Ordinance remains in force.

The Ordinance has been regularly used to detain those deemed to be subversive

by the government, and is in fact used far more frequently than the Internal

Security Act. Though figures for those detained under the EO are not released by

the government, Human Rights Watch estimated there to be 712 such detainees

in 2005.[1]

A recent use of the Emergency Ordinance was in June 2011, to detain

indefinitely 6 members ofParti Sosialis Malaysia, including Sungai

SiputMember of Parliament Dr. Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj, due to their

support for the Bersih 2.0 rally for electoral reform. These 6 people have been

collectively called the Emergency Ordinance 6, orEO6. As of July, all 6remained under detention, and looked likely to remain so for another two

years.[2] The first Occupy Dataran was planned to coincided with an EO6 vigil.

When the EO6 were released on 29 July,[3]the first official KL People's

Assembly meeting was postponed until the following Saturday, 6 August.[4]

Updated: Saturday July 6, 2013 MYT 6:15:05 PM

Better policing needed, not a new law to replace the

repealed Emergency Ordinance

BY BARADAN KUPPUSAMY

KUALA LUMPUR: Government ministers have been making a case for a new law similar to

the Emergency Ordinance (EO) that was repealed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun

Razak in 2002 as part of his transformation agenda.

They say incidents of crime are escalating and that preventive detention, a salient feature of

the EO, is necessary to arrest the escalation of crime.

27
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_(Malaysia)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_(Malaysia)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watchhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parti_Sosialis_Malaysiahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sungai_Siputhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sungai_Siputhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_of_Parliamenthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jeyakumar_Devarajhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jeyakumar_Devarajhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bersih_2.0_rallyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Dataranhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-3https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-3https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-4http://www.thestar.com.my/Search.aspx?q=%22baradan+kuppusamy%22https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_(Malaysia)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_(Malaysia)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watchhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parti_Sosialis_Malaysiahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sungai_Siputhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sungai_Siputhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_of_Parliamenthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jeyakumar_Devarajhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bersih_2.0_rallyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Dataranhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-3https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_(Public_Order_and_Crime_Prevention)_Ordinance#cite_note-4http://www.thestar.com.my/Search.aspx?q=%22baradan+kuppusamy%22


28/35

This means that the police will be once again given powers to arrest and detain anyone

suspected of crime or gangsterism at a specific place like the former Simpang Rengam

detention camp, where they would be housed, rehabilitated and released a few years later.

There would be no charge, no decision by a competent court to convict or release and no

sentencing - persons are arrested, kept under forceful detention and released several years

later merely on police suspicion.

While doing this would remove criminal elements - as well as innocents - to protect society

and give everyone peace of mind, it is really a step backwards for society, human rights and

for us as a mature, democratic nation.

Crime has been on a steady rise for about two decades, in tandem with urbanisation - but

all this time, the repealed EO was in operation and actively used to curb criminals, so to

speak.

It did not stop the rise in crime and neither would a new law to replace the EO.

The cause of the steady rise in crime is well known and well documented uprooting of the

rural community into urban squatters, urbanisation of the Malay population into flats and the

marginalisation of Chinese youths into crime.

At the same time, the standards of policing have also dropped.

Politicians also failed to see the problems developing, and failed to allocated resources to

improve policing and to study crime and its causes and ways to prevent it.

The current spike in crime has been in the making for a long time and has nothing to do with

the 2011 repeal of the EO.

What we need, on an urgent basis, is to improve policing - how police are recruited, trained

and methods used as well as their legal education.

28


29/35

To do this, politicians must allocate resources for education and training of the police force -

not for more motorcycles and more guns.

How the police are currently recruited? From which social groups are they come from? Do

they come from all social groups in society? Are they receiving adequate training? Are the

methods employed relevant for the times?

We have to ask these questions and more to make policing come across as dominant and

effective.

Merely enacting another EO is not going to work because police currently have adequate

powers for the job.

It is now the law but the methods used that are ineffective.

It is just that sometimes the police feel overwhelmed by crime and take shortcuts that

eventually get them into problems - i.e. violation of human rights.

According to Bar Council president Christopher Leong, the EO was used against syndicated

criminals but we are now seeing a spike in snatch thefts, house burglaries, stabbings, and

robberies at ATM machines and restaurants.

These crimes are not a result of the repealing of the EO, he said.

The way forward is competent investigation, arrest of culprits and charging them in court.

To do this we need really effective police intelligence and good policing on the ground,

combined with community involvement.

Police patrolling must be effective and proactive, not just speeding through a

neighbourhood on motorcycles to get to the nearest mamak stall.

Beat bases must interact with the local community, unlike now.

29


30/35

Besides, a law similar to the EO is open to abuse and that is something we dont want. We

have left preventive detention behind us.

The fact is that the EO was repealed was because the Government recognised its potential

for abuse, and such a law was not in keeping with the society we want to become.

When the old EO was repealed, about 2,600 detainees were release and a small group did

return to crime, but not the vast majority.

It is rather unfair for anybody to pin the rise in crime on former EO detainees.

It has been spiking for a long time and the reasons are obvious - major social problems like

urban squalor that have become accentuated by an alarming drop in the standards of

policing.

Let us improve our policing and our outreach programmes for vulnerable

communities, and not enact another form of the EO in a knee-jerk reaction and

return to the bad old days.

Friday, 05 July 2013 09:38am

Free Malaysia Today(Used by permission)

FMT LETTER: From KC Vohrah, via e-mail

There is no doubt that there has been an increase in violent crimes involving snatch thefts,

robbery and house breaking. It appears these crimes are random in nature as against criminal

activities run by syndicates or organisations. It is another matter, however, whether the

increase in these crimes can be attributed to the release of detainees under the repealed

Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention) Ordinance (the EO) in 2011 which was

enacted by the National Operations Council in 1969 under the fourth Emergency Proclamation

declared on May 15, 1969.

Even before the repeal of the EO, there was a high number of such violent crimes and other

crimes but to make a leap to say that the present high crime rate of violent crimes involving

snatch thefts, robbery and house breaking is due to the release of these detainees is simply

not borne out by credible evidence save for unverifiable anecdotes linking then to criminal

syndicates or organisations.

30
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/07/04/lets-not-go-back-to-the-old-bad-days/http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/07/04/lets-not-go-back-to-the-old-bad-days/


31/35

If the authorities in fact know that these crimes have increased because they are committed

by these former detainees then why are the authorities not increasing surveillance and

footwork to nab these peoples for them to be prosecuted in court with evidence including

circumstantial evidence what is allowed in law.

There appears to be a study done by Dr Sundramoorthy (as reported in the papers) on the

matter but it is short on statistics before and after the EO and there is no evidence that has

been made public to show that the increase is directly related to the release of the detainees

after the repeal of the EO.

Unfortunately, apart from the call for a new law with elements of the EO in such law, nothing

more is known about the study. Who commissioned it? Who were the members in the team

that made the study? What crimes did they study? What were the ground rules they took for

the study? What material did they rely on? What studies did they look at? Until we have an

informed study that is made available to the public it is difficult for the public to come to any

credible conclusion as to whether the release of these detainees indeed caused a marked rise

in the random violent crimes as against organised or syndicated crimes.

It is a worrisome issue that there are well intentioned statements by many calling for an

introduction of elements of the EO which allow for preventive detention without trial. The

strong Bar rendering its yeoman service, Suhakam with its far reaching studies and consistent

call, the tireless efforts of social activist have all contributed over so many years to the repeal

of all laws which allowed detention without trial.

And the 2005 the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal

Malaysia Police Report (the Dzaiddin Report) carries many areas of study and made several

recommendations. One of the recommendation of the Dzaiddin Report was for the repeal of

the EO which the Commission said was a lazy way for the police to lock up suspects without

conducting proper investigations.

There cannot be detention without trial, a human rights norm under the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights 1948, and this is accepted by the Constitution. True there are certain

provisions, very special provisions, with special procedure where laws were once made, the EO

being one of them. But the laws were made under these provisions saw many cases of abuse

by the authorities where the detainees were held incommunicado; there was no charge, no

trial, no conviction on evidence providing for the process leading to conviction and sentence of

imprisonment; persons were arrested and kept under detention on criteria that could not be

reviewed objectively by the courts.

31


32/35

It cannot be gainsaid that Najib Tun Razak as Prime Minister walked the talk and was

responsible for the repeal or annulment of several laws like the Restricted Residence Act, the

Internal Security Act, the EO and the Emergency Proclamations. Let us not roll back all the

good work done for the country in getting rid of repressive laws. We cannot ask for the return

of the EO or any law allowing detention without trial.

Another fact in relation to the commission of crimes has to be noted; violent crimes have to be

tackled, no doubt, and Denison Jayasooria in his thoughtful article published in the media has

highlighted what Hasmy Agam, Suhakam chairman, has stated, that the Human Rights

approach is not soft on crime or criminals but called on the policeto enhance the effectiveness

of its crime investigation, prevention and monitoring mechanism, as well as rehabilitation

programme for former detainees.

Denison pointed out, Even in the case of snatch thieves are these people not known, do they

not leave a trial, where do they sell the items they steal? They all leave a trial of crime. What

we need is serious police work, the investigators, non-uniformed police in the community

more like undercover operations, better informer system, more processionals in the

investigative team and better witness protection programmes.

At the moment we are concerned with violent crimes connected with theft, robbery and

burglary, not the sort of organised crimes of criminal syndicates or organisations. If it is an

issue of syndicated or organised crime, Malaysia could study the RICO (the 1970 US Racketeer

Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act) and SOCA (the UK Serious Crime Act 2005).

These are far reaching laws which do not rely on preventive detention but on a proactive

operation by a national agency against serious and organised crime through collaboration with

the police and other enforcement and intelligence agencies to carry investigation with

disruptive powers of interventions including resorting to the power of courts for seizure of

assets.

Let us not by knee jerk reaction go to the old bad days by bringing back repressive laws of

detention without trial with its attendant abuses. Let us work together not only to tackle

random violent crimes but organised crimes and take note as Denison has noted that a

stronger socio-economic intervention programme in the high risk communities is essential to

prevent the outflow of people in high risk social-economic conditions into gangs, and that that

being a national problem, all relevant agencies must work in an inter-agency approach

together with civil society to address the root causes of serious crime.

32


33/35

No doubt as Denison has pointed out this is a long term approach, but in the meantime,

there can be established a special panel comprising senior criminal lawyers, former

policeCommissioners, the Bar Council, Suhakam and EAIC to review the area of serious

crime and assist the policeto strengthen the investigative and evidence based policing in

Malaysia. And many well agree with that.

EO not the answer, say civil liberty groups

Thursday, 11 July 2013 09:26am

ImageThe Sun Daily (Used by permission)

by TAN YI LIANG

PETALING JAYA: Reinstating detention without trial in the statute books is not the answer to

reducing street crime, said legal and human rights groups.

The Bar Council, in asserting its stand against any legislation replacing the Emergency

Ordinance, questioned the need to give the police more powers.

Addressing the increase in street crime requires diligence, intelligence, abilities and the

dedicated resolve of the police. It is not about giving them more powers, council president

Christopher Leong told theSun yesterday.

He was commenting on the possibility of preventive detention making a comeback in any Act

drafted to replace the Emergency Ordinance.

Meanwhile, Lawyers for Liberty founder Eric Paulsen urged the government to recognise the

impact of such laws on human rights, such as the right to fair trial and due process.

He said the absence of the EO was not the reason for the spike in crime, as there was no

evidence linking the two.

The government should strengthen the police force and provide them with adequate resources,support and training to be a modern and civilised first world police force, he added.

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) executive director Nalini Elumalai said the EO was too broad in

its scope and left too much room for corruption.

33


34/35

The main problem with the EO is that it allows indefinite detention without trial and is too all

encompassing, even allowing arrests for motorcycle theft, she said.

Better policing needed, not a new lawLeven Woon

| July 4, 2013

PKR leader R Sivarasa says the authorities should not attribute the spike in

crimes to the abolition of the EO.

KUALA LUMPUR: PKR leader and Subang MP R Sivarasa is against the governments

move to enact a new law to replace the abolished Emergency Ordinance, saying what

the country needs is better policing.

He said PKR which once rallied behind the abolition of EO in 2011 would not allow anysimilar law that grants the power of detention without trial to the police.

The police already have plenty of power, it is just that they themselves are not capable

of executing the power, he told reporters at Parliament today.

His comment came after Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidis announcement today a

new law to replace the EO is already with the Attorney-Generals Chamber.

Zahid said the abolition of EO has resulted in a lot of criminals to escape prosecution,

thus contributing to a spike in crimes.

These criminals who are backed by big crime organisations could hire good lawyers

and get away from serving jail time, he was quoted of saying.

Charge them in court

34
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/author/leven/http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2013/07/04/better-policing-needed-not-a-new-law/attachment/r-sivarasa-4/http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/author/leven/


35/35

In response, Sivarasa said the police should not blame the spike in crimes to the

abolition of the EO because they had been given 18 months to prepare for such

abolition.

The question is, you are able to arrest so many people last time, if you have evidence to

show they are involved in crime, why dont you charge them in court?

But you released everybody at the last minute (after the EO was repealed) and now

blame the rise in crime to the repeal of EO.

If these guys were truly involved in crime, you can charge them, you can deny them

bail. But that was never done, he said.

The Subang MP claimed that when the EO was still in effect, the police had frequently

cited the law to detain people, and did nothing thereafter.

There is a lot of corruption involved, people get locked up, they pay money, and they

were released. And nobody knows anything because there is no case in court, he said.

Last week, the Bar Council has also raised objection against a EO-like law, saying the

current crime situation had nothing to do with the abolition of the EO.

The EO was used to detain syndicated criminals, said the Bars president Christopher

Leong.

What we have now is an increase in snatch thefts, house burglaries, stabbings, and

robberies at ATM machines and restaurants. These crimes are not as a result of the

repealing of EO, he said

- See more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2013/07/04/better-

policing-needed-not-a-new-law/#sthash.njkOQRaM.dpuf

Documents

Better policing needed, not a new law to replace the repealed Emergency Ordinance