I would like to congratulate inspector-general of police (IGP) Mohamad Fuzi Harun on being awarded a Meritorious Service Medal by Singapore.

The republic said the award was for reasons of “substantive intelligence exchanges and extensive cooperation in areas of mutual security interest, particularly against the terrorism threat.”

Presumably, these exchanges took place when the IGP was Special Branch head, a post he held before his recent promotion to IGP.

Mohamad Fuzi should excuse me if I say that since becoming IGP, he has been rather puzzling when it comes to sharing information with the Malaysian public about terrorism threats.

Needless to say, protection of the Malaysian public against the dangers of criminal and terrorist conduct is, of course, his paramount duty.

Therefore by saying the cancellation of the Better Beer Festival 2017 by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) was motivated by concerns to avert terrorist threats and then leaving the matter at that without substantive explanation is puzzling.

The IGP ought to be more forthright and open with justifications for the claims made by the police with respect to the refusal of DBKL to allow the festival to go ahead.

Merely saying that threats from religious extremists factored in the cancellation of the event is not enough.

Would future threats to the opening of Parliament or the holding of the annual Merdeka parade prompt the response of cancellation by the authorities? And that, too, without adequate explanation?

The IGP has to be as substantive as he has apparently been with the Singapore authorities in respect of the terrorist threat.

We understand certain information must necessarily be kept secret. But not when they involve apparent threats to events that are considered normal by the standards of civil society.

The public wants to know if suspects have been detained in connection with the threat against the Better Bear Festival, and whether charges are being mulled against them.

The public has a right to know, as otherwise they will think that the police force is being used to further the agenda of certain political interests of Better Beer Festival’s opponents.

The festival was scheduled to have been held in a controlled public space and, in that sense, it would have been entitled to protection by the police in the normal course of its operations in the interest of public security.

We can think of many events that would be exposed to threats from terrorists if it is said that a beer festival planned to be held in a controlled public space can be refused permission to go ahead on the basis of unsubstantiated threats from religious extremists.

Aren't we opening up a can of cancellations, the end of which we cannot envisage?

I urge the police to be more open and forthright and not content themselves with inexplicable justifications that invite more questions than provide answers.

Threats from terrorists and extremists are no small matter. And combating them requires public awareness and vigilance, which are not helped by an attitude of the police that makes all decisions on public security dependent on assessments that are not subject to public scrutiny and appraisal.

The threat from terrorism cannot be contained within an environment denuded of clarifying information and the co-operation of an aware public.