COMMENT | Despite all the exposure given to deaths in custody and other forms of abuse, there seems to be no political will in addressing the issue of police overstepping their boundaries.

This year, attention was given to the phenomenon when cow’s milk seller A Ganapathy died after alleged maltreatment in lockup.

There were some token reassurances by the Home Ministry and the inspector-general of police (IGP) that cases would be looked into and new SOPs drawn up.

But now we see the problem appears to have been swept under the carpet, and the dirt is beginning to show again and again.

A new low for Malaysian police

I wish to draw attention to a case highlighted during an online press conference held jointly by PSM deputy chairperson S Arutchelvan who was handling the case, human rights organisation Suaram executive director Sevan Doraisamy, and human rights lawyer Sashi Devan.

On Nov 12, an investigating officer (IO) looking into a case that was lodged at a police headquarters in Selangor, allegedly brought with him nine police officers in four police cars to arrest a person with disabilities (PWD) in connection to a case which the PWD had earlier reported as an attack on him.

He was already in a fragile frame of mind, having been discharged from hospital five days before, after receiving treatment for symptoms of self-poisoning.

While some countries have mental health crisis centres for those who attempt suicide, the police proceeded to hold the PWD overnight in police lockup, intending to charge him under Section 309 of the Penal Code, which criminalises attempts to commit suicide punishable with imprisonment for up to one year or a maximum fine of RM1,000 or both.

These inhumane tactics of the police were put into action merely four days after the Attorney-General’s Chamber (AGC) and the Home Ministry were revealed to agree to the decriminalisation of suicide attempts.

Could the reason for such a show of force be that the PWD's suicide attempt was in connection with the alleged bribery of the IO with RM5,000 by his assailant?

At the court hearing, the PWD man was not charged but was released on police bail for his arrest under Section 309 of the Penal Code.

Immediately after, the police arrested him again on-site (chain arrest) under Section 160 of the Penal Code.

At the remand hearing, bail was set at RM1,000, which is the maximum fine for this offence if found guilty.

Why do the police abuse their power?

Complaints against the IO have been filed at Bukit Aman but as in past cases, there is a clear double standard applied when a police officer is investigated, right down to the charges filed.

A recent notorious example was when Bukit Aman's Integrity and Standard Compliance Department (Jips) caught the Bangi police station chief (sub-inspector) and three of his police officers partying in a “special room” at the police station in the company of four civilian women where there were alcoholic beverages and ketum juice.

Our “disco-cops” who were bathed in disco lights and crooning to karaoke numbers in a public building are now facing mere disciplinary action.

The sub-inspector who initially tested positive for marijuana was cleared of that too after a second urine test.

Is this fair?

So many young civilians have had their whole lives ruined with criminal charges brought against them for lighter offences.

Need to police the police is critical

The previous IGP, Abdul Hamid Bador, accused Jips of cover-ups that incapacitated the department from conducting reliable investigations into police misconduct.

The indication that disciplinary action and not criminal charges would be taken against our “disco-cops” so clearly illustrates Jips' incapability to effectively and appropriately investigate police misconduct.

Ex-IGP Abdul Hamid Bador

Meanwhile, the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) also offers an avenue for complaints on police misconduct, but its recommendations are not enforceable.

Enter the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

If adopted as law in its original form, it will take away the responsibility of investigating police misconduct from Jips and EAIC and place it in the hands of 10 learned commissioners appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the prime minister, who are not current or former police officers, not from the civil service, not a serving member of Parliament, not a bankrupt, and not someone convicted of fraud or corruption.

The only contention from the police over the implementation of the IPCMC in its original form was that police officers did not have room to appeal the commission’s decision.

In more recent years, another former police chief Mohamad Fuzi Harun also demanded that a representative from the police force be made a commissioner, but that would severely restrict its independence from the police force.

All Malaysians are vulnerable to police misconduct as Anwar Ibrahim had experienced at the hands of a third former top cop Abdul Rahim Noor in 1998 – hence the IPCMC Bill in its original form must be brought back to be tabled in Parliament.


S VINOTHAA is an independent journalist who writes on women’s and workers’ issues.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.