Polis DiRaja Malaysia: To Protect & Serve... who?

It never ceases to amaze me how the police are so much more effective, willing to apply large numbers of personnel and much more uncompromising in discharging their duties - when dealing with peaceful protests against the govt/politicians -versus- dealing with violent criminals like robbers and rapists.

Yesterday,... about 200 other Johoreans [gathered] in front of the menteri besar’s residence in Saujana, along Jalan Rahman Andak, to voice [their] anger and frustration.

Police had set up roadblocks in Jalan Rahman Andak, but those who came for the gathering were undeterred. They parked their vehicles at a school some 500m away and walked to the MB’s residence.

At first, the rally was strangely bereft of placards, banners or rabble rousers, with the crowd standing around quietly as a group of 100 policemen and Federal Reserve Unit members stood watch over them. (nst.com.my)

The police assigned 100 policemen and FRU to control only 200 peaceful protestors! That's 1 policeman for every 2 protestors.

Just to put the significance of the number 100 into perspective:

- there are 2,000 investigating officers (I.O) in the whole country (100 is 5%)
- the entire Johor police force numbers 3,000 (100 is 3.3%)
- it only took 300 Spartans to hold off 1,000,000 Persian soldiers.

And all to protect the MB's house from angry stares, placards and sandwich wrappers.

If you factor in how many of Johor's 3,000 policemen spend their working day sitting behind a desk or pursuing their LLB (Look Like Busy), the magnitude of this 100 officer field deployment becomes clear.

How many Johoreans were 'under'-protected by the police that day, so that the MB's house could be 'over'-protected?

Have you seen 100 cops chase after a rapist or robber before? I haven't. But then again, I haven't seen the MB being gang-raped nor his house being robbed before either.

Makes you think about where the police force's priorities and loyalties lie, doesn't it? Maybe it's because the VVIPs are not affected by the crime wave. Or maybe the force's political priorities outweigh their security priorities. That might explain why they put more resources into protecting politicians from right-minded citizens, instead of protecting citizens from criminals.

Here are links to other instances of superb performance by the police against defenceless citizens (as opposed to real criminals):

search?q=police+protestors

Other related posts:

Johor gang rape victims were all Chinese?
2 legs for RM2,400, 2 gang rapes and a 2-timing IGP

SUHAKAM confirm police used excessive force against KLCC protestors

The public inquiry held by Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) has found that the police indeed used excessive force against protesters at the KLCC last year, resulting in a number abusive, confrontational protestors being injured. From the pictures in the linked posts, you will no doubt see they were heavily armed too... with sandwiches, thermos flasks, manila cards and small children.

The findings of the inquiry included:

- Excessive force by some members of the police force;

- The crowd had started to disperse when the water cannon was activated and the police charged after them and Federal Reserve Unit (FRU) personnel and police officers used force on the crowd;

- The assembly was a peaceful one and the actions and speeches did not incite or cause a breach of peace or violence; and

- The provisions of section 27 of the Police Act 1967 that requires a licence for assemblies and the phrase "prejudicial to the interest of the security of Malaysia" went against the right to freedom of assembly enshrined in Article 10 of the Constitution.

"The interference by the police in dispersing the assembly and the arrests were disproportionate to the aim of preventing disorder," said the report. It recommended the police conduct investigations to ascertain who usedforce against the victims with a view to taking disciplinary action

At much the same time, the current IGP (Inspector General of Police) unveils a new vision and mission for the Malaysian police force. With irony... or [dare I hope] greater intent, the IGP included this assurance.

"every policeman must be friendly and approachable and respect human rights."

Malaysians can only hope it will come to pass.

Welcome to Palestine... errr Trengganu?

It was the police on one side. Civilian protestors on the other armed with no more than sticks and stones (which contrary to popular belief, do not actually break the bones of cops in riot gear).

The crowd gets rowdy, the police get riled up. The police actions to disperse turn into actions to suppress. Police firearms are discharged. Protestors get shot.

The police and govt officials come out in force to defend the shootings, citing mortal threats of fully shielded police being killed by dry sticks, loose stones and bra-strap catapults. And of course, the all-important maintenance of law and order, even at the expense of shooting unarmed civilians.

Now... this is what happened in Trengganu. But it is also exactly what happens in Palestine. And it is this very Israeli armed response to the protests of unarmed Palestinian civilians... that forms a considerable part of the very basis of the moral highground, that displaced Palestinians enjoy over their Israeli conquerors.

To me... the adoption of similar tactics by the Malaysian police has only 1 of 2 consequences.

1. The Malaysian govt now acknowledges the right of the Israeli forces to use deadly force in response to unarmed protests by Palestinian civilians. Therefore, they support the Israeli argument that the enforcement of law and order (by any means necessary) on the Palestinian population is a just and equitable objective.

OR

2. The Malaysian govt acknowledges that it has committed the cardinal sin (amongst "civilised" nations)... of firing upon unarmed civilians. And must therefore repent and atone for it. The immediate resignations of the IGP, CPO of Trengganu and Internal Security Minister would be a good start.

So, has the Malaysian govt simply made a great, big miscalculation or is the Internal Security ministry now controlled by closet-Zionists?

Also read The Star: Ceramah clash in Terengganu and Cop was protecting women, kids

and Malaysiakini: Motion to debate 'bloody' ceramah rejected

Photos of the Police vs Price Hike Protestors on May 28, 2006.

Malaysiakini is hosting some photos on the police action on that day and have called the photo album "Bloody Sunday".

http://www.malaysiakini.com/pages/albums/bloody-sunday/

The police FRU hose down the crowd that gather in front of KLCC and we see a few photos of a big dude who gets the short end of a big stick. And there are also photos of arrests being made.

While there are no photos of the FRU actually charging the protestors, the photo that appeared in Singapore's Today newpaper (photo and the blog below) shows FRU personnel kicking a man when he was pretty much down and subdued.

My question, "how did Malaysiakini obtain these before and after photos but none show the FRU actually acting on the crowd?"

And this other question is for our veritable police force. How does the Royal Thai Police manage to control and contain repeated demonstrations which were reported to be 100,000 strong at times, without incident (well, none was reported anyway and I was actually in Bangkok for a month during that time) - while the Royal Malaysian Police find it necessary to rough up 600 people who looked like they were on a picnic with their kids?!!

Should the rule of law should be placed above peace and security?

The police have apparently finished the probe into the 500 strong mob that disrupt the May 14, 2006 forum in Penang on the conflict between civil and syariah laws in Malaysia.

Police have said that the parties involved have been identified, but it remains to be seen if any concrete or meaningful action will be taken against the protesters.

An article in the Sun about this incident is here in this link.

Some of the clearer thinking senators in the Dewan Negara have criticised the police for stopping the forum for fear of the protests getting unruly. But isn't that getting the whole 'rule of law' thing wrong?

Aren't our nation's law and the police supposed to ensure that law breakers are restrained and law abiders protected? Shouldn't the police have made sure that the mob of protestors be controlled and the forum allowed to carry on?

After all, they issued a permit for the forum but I'm pretty sure the mob didn't bother to stop by the nearest police station and apply for one. I think that giving in to mob pressure, and stopping the forum, is ridiculous. That's like locking innocent citizens in jail because we're afraid they'll be harmed by criminals who are running free.

Shouldn't it be the other way round?

And it never fails me to see how utter geniuses get into the Dewan Negara. Datuk Omar Faudzar asked whether the rule of law should be placed above peace and security.

My dear datuk... the rule of guarantees peace and security. We don't abdicate the rule of law in the hopes that law breakers don't get provoked. We use the rule of law to subdue and restrain those who break the law, so that the end result is peace and security for the rest of us.

Giving in to threats of violence will not result in peace and security. It only results in more threats of violence. It is, in fact, counter productive and undermines peace and security completely. The protestors may have legitimate views but as our PM has said before, they have to use the right channels to make themselves heard.

We have already let the law breakers achieve their objective by disrupting the forum. Don't let them get away with it as well. Or else it'll be a total walkover. Now's the time for the country's law makers and law enforcers to show some backbone and fulfil the nation's trust in them.

IGP explains why Force was Necessary: Police vs Price Hike Protesters

From the Star: IGP: Cops used minimal force

KUALA LUMPUR: Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Mohd Bakri Omar has defended the action of his men against demonstrators at the KLCC on Sunday, saying they had used minimal force to disperse the protesters.

Refer to previous blogs, here and here.

"Every time our men told them to bersurai (disperse), instead of retreating, they moved forward. They became very abusive and confrontational," he said. He added that the police had a job to do and if they did not do it there would be chaos. He said the on-the-scene commander had allowed the demonstrators some 20 minutes to say their piece and disperse. "When they refused to disperse, it was then that the FRU Troop Commander decided to spray the water.

"While running away, one of the demonstrators fell because the ground was slippery.

Only one? Was it the big dude with the cracked head? So you're saying he did a Humpty Dumpty, slipped and fell on his head?!

The decision to spray water was reasonable to break up the unlawful assembly. "It is very unfortunate that in the course of dispersing these people, several of them were hurt. My men never intended to use any force at all," he said. "But what do you expect my men to do when confronted by these people? We have the right to defend ourselves when confronted."

He said allowing a demonstration without a permit could threaten the peace and security of the area concerned. "Businesses could be affected and people would not want to go there any more for fear of their safety and we will be blamed," he added.

It all sounds so rational. Force was necessary because the crowd...

- refused to disperse. Instead of retreating, they moved forward.
- was abusive and confrontational.
- a demonstration without a permit threatens peace and security.
- business affected, people fear for their safety and the police will be blamed.

But WAIT!..... Is it just me or does this scenario sound familiar? Weren't the protestors outside the Cititel Hotel on just 2 weeks ago (14 May 2006), protesting against the forum entitled "Federal Constitution: Protecting All", doing the very same thing? Reports were that they were much more belligerent.

Previous blog here.

Did the police raise their batons against this illegal demonstration? No, they decided to placate them and instead told the forum to pack it up and go home.

Why the double standards? Why the inconsistency of action? What were the decision points?

What are the latent reasons that the police decided to appease a violent, racist and constitutionally ignorant gang of ruffians, but on the other hand cut down using their batons and water cannons - what looked to me like a bunch of picnic-going families with an idealistic streak?
Is it because the latter played the religious and racial card, therefore the police absconded from their professional duty, just like the High Court?

Or... are the police taking sides? Well, they did say as much when they 'mistakenly' published a report rejecting the IPCMC. Previous blog here.

A dead little girl in a gym bag and the Police Force.

Has it come to this? The new pages were once filled with news of women being raped, but now it's children being tortured?

The victim is aged between 8 and 10, is 150cm tall, fair skinned, weighs 18kg, has curly short hair, a sharp nose and a birth mark on her left thigh.

The child's naked body was found stuffed in a foetal position inside a gym bag on Monday morning. The bag was left in front of a shoplot in PJS 1/48.

-NST

The card reads "Rest in peace with god. Malaysians will not let you die in vain."

Petaling Jaya police chief ACP Arjunaidi Mohamed said a post-mortem conducted by the Kuala Lumpur Hospital showed that the girl died of an infection. Her intestines had ruptured after foreign objects were forced into her private parts. There was no trace of semen.

Arjunaidi said bruises on her body suggested that she was tortured before she died.

-NST did a very emotional piece today on this. Read also Malaysiakini and The Star.

I sincerely hope they catch the monster that did this. But alas, I fear we might have to... [ie. let her die in vain].

What is the PDRM doing about this? Why do cases need to be sensational and shocking before the police do their job like they are supposed to?

Were we not promised better public safety, faster investigations and higher criminal convictions after the recent spate of violent robberies and rapes?

What can we hope for from a police force that has only 7% of it's personnel actually investigating and fighting criminals? (source: DAP's The Rocket newsletter).

May we ask what the 33% actually do when they are classified under administrative staff? Collecting fines and processing salary increases?

And is our country so ridden with internal subterfuge and public disorder that you need to have 39% of the force doing Internal Security (33%) and Special Branch (6%)? Do we need 39% of the police force fully engaged in the govt's fight against bloggers, youtube rappers and alleged flag burners?

Maybe we do... a case in point is where the Johor police dept sent 100 officers to control merely 200 peaceful protestors just because they were protesting in front of the Menteri Besar's house. (Read To Protect & Serve... Who?).

How many more need to stabbed, robbed, raped and tortured before our boys in blue realise that there is something very wrong with a police force that allocates only 7% of their effort to protect the people against crime, but allocates 33% to paperwork and 39% to protecting politicians from the people?

Videos of 4 Feb 2007 Anti Toll Hike Demonstration

Another Anti Toll Hike Protest this afternoon around IOI Mall / LCP Puchong toll.

Cr: ChinYanKeat, Lensa Mys.
Credit: JimJim, Lensa Malaysia.

According to Malaysiakini (Anti-toll hike protest: More arrests made Feb 4, 07 5:05pm), photographers were being detained by the police during this and previous protests, in order to seize the photos they had taken. That's why it's so important to circulate these photos and footage as far and as wide as possible. The public needs to tell the police that the world is watching them, misdeeds and all.

Among those arrested today was Syfiq Sunni, 20, a full-time reporter for Suara Keadilan, PKR’s party organ. He told malaysiakini that he was caught in the melee during the first wave of protest and one policeman had tried to seize his camera. Syfiq added that he was arrested after he refused to hand over his camera. However, he managed to give his camera to a friend before being hauled away.

This is the second time a member of the press had been detained during the four anti-toll hike rallies that have taken place over the past five weeks.

Two Sundays ago, the police swooped in to prevent anti-toll protestors from gathering near the Cheras-Kajang Highway Batu 11 toll booth and arrested 21 people. A malaysiakini journalist was detained by the police for two hours as they sought to obtain the photos he had taken. However, he was freed without the photos being handed over.

Click below for videos of the police in action:





Related posts:

Video of Police Arrests during 21 Jan 2007 Anti Toll Hike Demonstration in Cheras

Why should Toll Agreements be Official Secrets?

The Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972 - Bane of Transparency?

More photos at:
http://www.lensamalaysia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3558&page=9
http://www.lensamalaysia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3558&page=10
http://elizabethwong.wordpress.com/2...mo-4/#more-267
http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/373841/+880#

More Pictures of Police FRU vs KLCC Price Hike Protestors

More pictures of "rowdy" protestors attacking fully body-armoured Police FRU with manila cards and plastic bags filled with sandwiches.

Under the threat of such serious bodily harm and the probable use of small children as projectiles (why else would violence prone demonstrators bring their offspring) - no wonder the FRU had to beat the snot out of them.

The pictures are here and here.

Also refer to previous blogs, here and here.

Did someone do a Tian Chua of the flag-burning?

The UMNO-led outrage over the flag burning incident during the opposition protest where 2 unarmed protestors were shot shows no signs of abating.

Below is the photo that was carried by the mainstream press and broadcasters... and as someone must have calculated, sparked a big hue and cry over the alleged desecration of the Malaysian flag.

But before you jump on the bandwagon and throw both your hands up wailing that the incident is a national insult by a member of the opposition party, a blogger named mohdnasir has posted an analysis of the photo on his blog.

He basically picks apart individual elements of the photograph and puts up some arguments as to why he thinks that it is a doctored, photoshopped picture comprising of superimposed images.

And I have to say, his conclusions are intriguing.

Kita lihat gambar bendera yang dipegang oleh pemuda itu. Ia jelas satu lukisan bukan satu imej bendera sebenar. Tone warna bendera itu sekata dan ini amat tidak realistik memandangkan suasana ketika itu adalah waktu malam.

Warna jalur merahnya, robekan bendera di sebelah bawah, lambang bulan-bintang berlatarbelakangkan biru dan asap apinya juga tampak jelas semuanya adalah dilukis dan rekaan semata-mata kerana satu hal yang tidak logik malah tidak mungkin sebaran asap itu mempunyai bentuk kaku yang tidak realistik. (lihat kawasan yang ditandakan dengan garis)

The colour tone of the flag is too uniform and unrealistic, since it was night time.

Many aspects of the flag, from the stripes, the folds at the bottom, the crescent moon, stars, blue background and the smoke are clearly drawn as a separate construct.

The frozen appearance of the smoke is unrealistic. Look at the area that has been outlined.

Kita lihat pula pemuda yang mencangkung seraya membakar bendera itu.

Imej pemuda itu jelas ditampal kerana kecacatan yang wujud di sekurang-kurangnya 3 tempat:

A. Tempelan adalah ketara di tangan pemuda itu dengan imej seluar dan kain pelikat dua orang pemuda di belakangnya.

B. Apabila imej itu diteliti dengan resolusi yang tinggi kita akan dapat melihat kesan tampalan di aliran badan pemuda yang mencangkung itu.

C. Kedudukan bayang-bayang pemuda itu salah kerana aliran cahaya dari hadapan tidak memungkinkan bayang-bayang untuk berada tepat di atas objek.

A. The hand of the flag-burning youth and the images of the trousers and sarong of the 2 people behind him are clearly superimposed.

B. When the image is viewed in high resolution, we can see the effects of superimposition around the silhouette of the squatting youth.

C. The position of the shadow under the youth is incorrect as it is impossible for the light source (which is in front) to throw a shadow that corresponds to a light source which is directly on top of the youth.

Close up of point (C).

Malaysiakini even goes so far as to post a 'reconstruction' of that night's events based on first person accounts - I'm not sure though if it corroborates this analysis of the photograph.

Not withstanding that, what do I think?

I think mohdnasir makes a very sound argument. I think we should all take this photograph with a large pinch of salt. If nothing else, the persistent efforts of UMNO to talk only about this flag burning (as if to crowd out all other current events that have cropped up since, from the public eye) DEMANDS that we place their efforts and hence, their 'evidence' under intense scrutiny.

Read here for Malaysia-Today's take on UMNO's insistence on pursuing the flag-burning issue. RPK makes an excellent point, which I'm about to paraphrase. Why does UMNO feel so angered and outraged by bloggers, youtube rappers and flag-burners (when these incidents are ultimately trivial and superficial) and yet, they feel no shame, nor experience as compelling a call to action when confronting rampant corruption, police shootings, racial & religious extremism and spiralling crime?