Initiate Reforms in Governance, Security and Parliament, Empower Democracy

Governance and parliamentary reforms? Can the new government commit to it?

In his first speech after taking his oath as the nation’s ninth prime minister, Datuk Ismail Sabri is making an offer to the opposition bench to join him together in bringing about the recovery for our nation and its people by extending his invitation across political divide to join the national recovery council and the special committee to manage covid-19 as well.

We want Ismail Sabri to be sincere in such offer and if he is truly sincere in his offer, then he must also come up with extensive plans to carry out reforms in the areas of governance, security and the parliament in order to empower democracy and citizens participation in its policy making.

Reforms in governance must include efforts to curb corruption, open and transparent governance, giving more powers to the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) to act on its own, put the MACC and the Election Commission (EC) under the jurisdiction of the parliament, as well as to restructure the government institutions and government-linked companies (GLCs) to ensure total accountability and more responsive to the needs of our people.

Asides, reforms in the security sector is also crucial in order to ensure transparency, accountability in actions undertaken by the police force, immigration department as well as other enforcement agencies related to security handling. Necessary avenues must also be established to allow public scrutiny, complaints to be lodged and investigation to be carried out independently to ensure security sectors are clear of any misdeeds, power abuse, inefficiencies or corrupt practices. This includes oversight bodies like establishing the Independent Police Complaints & Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), enhancing the powers of the current Enforcement Agencies Integrity Commission (EAIC) to provide better oversight onto powerful agencies like the immigration departments, the armed forces as well as the other paramilitary agencies such as volunteer corps department (Rela) and the civil defence department (APM).

Does this government have the political will to carry out the police reforms?

Yes, there are certain to be some level of secrecy within the security sector that need to be maintained for security reasons but in doing this, the security apparatus cannot always go overboard until in many occasions the rights of the citizens are being violated and people are being prevented from questioning the actions which were considered questionable. Oversight on the security sectors is to bring these security related agencies towards a more professional manner in its actions, being accountable and transparent in the interests of the general public.

Then, parliamentary or legislature reforms are also crucial in order to have an effective check and balance on the sitting government so as to promote and enhance professionalism in governance in order to better serve the people and the entire nation. This include amending the standing order of the legislature to empower the parliamentary select committees to provide an effective oversights on government ministries, departments, agencies as well as GLCs in terms of policy implementations, budgetary matters as well as scrutinies on its activities-at-large.

Other legislature reforms should also include recognition of the roles played by the opposition bench, by institutionalised the shadow cabinet, the role of the leader of the opposition, providing more assistance and budgets to such roles like research facilities and access to government and policymaking details. Similar legislature reforms must also be encouraged at state levels to enhance the roles of the state opposition bench, recognising the roles of shadow excos or cabinets by providing all the necessary facilities to allow effective check and balance to take place.

The government must also understand and accept the fact that the roles undertaken by the opposition bench is not at all about going against all kinds of government policy or implementations. The opposition bench must not be regarded as an “enemy of the state” where annual allocations are denied for these constituencies. Instead the government must see the opposition bench as a crucial partner in the administration in ensuring good governance, accountability and transparency as well as ensuring competency to see that the service to our people are best assured.

In empowering democracy, the input of alternative policies must be encouraged for the betterment of our people and the nation as a whole. Therefore, allowing the opposition bench and civil societies to be in partnership in governance to bring about change, improving the way things are being carried out, knowledge sharing, providing good scrutiny to improve and enhance public service should be the way to ensure participatory democracy flourish.

So, is the Ismail Sabri government ready to undertake such commitment? We look forward for your sincere approach, not just for the nation’s recovery post-covid but for the long term democratic partnership as well.

Whether it is BN or PN, both are similar, that is Failed!

Despite being dragged to its knees in the previous government with its coalition chief being forced to resign the premiership, PN still insist that the new government a PN-led due to its advantage in numbers. However, based on the unstable sitiuation, all three coalitions, BN, PN or GPS could still undermine each other if their demands were not met.

Only after three days Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri, who is the Umno vice-president, has been sworn in as the nation’s ninth prime minister, his party has already start disputing the claim by PPBM that the new government under Ismail Sabri would still be a Perikatan Nasional (PN)-led one.

Immediately after former premier Muhyiddin Yassin who is also the PPBM president and PN chairman claiming that the Ismail Sabri’s new government is still a PN government, Umno secretary-general Ahmad Maslan and Umno supreme council member Abdul Rahman Dahlan disputed the idea that the next government will still be a PN-led, thus it should be called the Barisan Nasional (BN) government instead or simply a coalition government as this new administration consist of three coalitions namely the BN, PN and Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS).

Looking at Umno’s attempt of trying to undermine the PN’s position again, the PN leadership called for an emergency meeting today to discuss on this and there it goes, Muhyiddin announced it once again, the Ismail Sabri’s administration will still be a PN-led government based on the fact that PN has the highest number of parliamentary seats in the combination of the BN, PN and GPS majority quest.

Currently, PN has 50 seats on its side, and BN has a total of 41 seats while GPS got 18 on their side. Although, PN no longer holds the PM’s seat, it still have the “say” on how this government should be run based on its total number of seats. However, the fact that is, though PN still has the edge, BN, PN or GPS still could undermine each other’s position if any of these coalitions dissatisfies with one another’s gain or demands were not met.

To us, we have been observing the situation ever since Muhyiddin and the PPBM decided to topple the then Pakatan Harapan (PH)-led government, then collaborated with the other two coalitions BN and GPS to formed the rebel government under his own new entity, called PN which includes the Islamic radical party PAS, Sabah State Reform Party (STAR), Sabah Progressive Paarty (SAPP) and Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Gerakan) in its fold, the entire nation has been turned upside down, the covid-19 became even worst, continuous lockdown did not bring about any improvement nor recovery, thus resulting to the economic decline due to restrictions of business activities. Both BN and GPS too cannot claim that they weren’t part of these problems because they have been part of the then PN-led government under Muhyiddin as well.

So, the PN-BN-GPS 1.0 government has definitely failed in its effort to curb the health and economic crisis from the very beginning due to its intense political bickering since. Today, we are going to see the PN-BN-GPS 2.0 government about to be established very soon, maybe in the next couple of days. Still we view them all as being a failure because this administration will consist of the same coalitions who used to be part of it, then parted ways, then in the end of the day, returned to the same fold, with the new prime minister who was from the previously failed government.

So, whether one insist it is a PN-led or BN-led, both held the similar position before. They are proven failures and nothing more else but mere failures who just had a big fight earlier then regroup under the same old features, but still bickering then on what this “new” government should be named. The fact that is they are all still failures who cannot really find an effective solution to it, and they will start blaming each other again in the next few months to come in order to gain some political mileage over each other.

And if BN and PN still cannot get on with it, just quit and let the opposition coalition takes helm to put our nation back to its feet. Do not bring our nation towards destruction.

If PN had failed from March 2020 until recently, then the BN should come up with its action plan and solution stop our people and the entire nation from bleeding to death. Come up with your results, or you will be shown the door once again!

Parliamentary Scrutiny on Government is Not Playing Politics

We had seen and heard many leaders of the Perikatan Nasional (PN)-led rebel government keep on claiming that opposition members of parliament (MPs) or opposition parties who are questioning the budgets, policies and implementations of the rebel government are merely playing politics.

These PN leaders especially the head of the rebel government Muhyiddin Yassin, his finance minister Tengku Zafrul Aziz and several other ministers too very often claimed that opposition MPs and opposition parties continuous “playing in politics” will further “harm our nation’s recovery plan” and jeopardising the economic recovery efforts.

We view such statements made by PN leaders as misleading, trying to convince people with their fake and false statements indicating or alleging that the opposition is trying to harm or threaten the stability of our nation and the well-being of the people.

For those who do not understand much about parliamentary democracy will certainly made to believe that the activities or statements made my opposition MPs or the opposition parties were harmful or threatening our nation’s stability.

People need to be educated and understand more on politics and what parliamentary democracy is really all about. It is not just a “fighting” between the government and the opposition. It is also not a “power struggle”, but the way this rebel government painted on the opposition’s role has been disappointing, trying to make the opposition look bad and causing people to perceive the opposition as mere “troublemakers”.

In actual fact, this rebel government is unleashing fake news and untrue statements to our people almost everyday to reflect the “evil plot” of the opposition parties in the eyes of the general public.

In parliamentary democracy, it is the utmost duties and responsibilities of the opposition MPs or any opposition parties to scrutinise the sitting government (in this case the rebel government of Muhyiddin Yassin) on their budgets, policies and implementations. It is not about the opposition is trying to prevent good things from being carried out by the government for the people. Opposition scrutiny on the government is about ensuring the government’s transparency, accountability and to ensure competency of the government implementation and policy outlines.

The attempt by the rebel government to stop the parliament from continuing its proceedings by reasoning the widespread of covid-19 is yet another lame excuse by them to stop the MPs from scrutinising the head of the rebel government and his ministers on matters related to budgets, policies and implementations is gravely disappointing.

If the parliamentary proceedings cannot be carried out physically, then it should be carried out virtually but such too has been prevented by the rebel government, reasoning that they do not have sufficient funds or resources to convene the parliamentary sittings via online. Yet another lame excuse escape scrutiny.

Almost everyday, we have been seeing Muhyiddin Yassin meeting top government officials as well as foreign dignitaries using the most sophisticated onliine gadgets and hardwares that many of us would dream to have them. So, with the availability of these up-to-date high-technology and sophisticated online gadgets and hardwares being used in the Prime Minister’s Department as well as the other government ministries, why are they keep on claiming that they do not have sufficient funds or resources to convene the parliamentary sittings via online proceedings? This is yet another attempt to keep the parliament away from the government’s daily affairs.

And when the opposition MPs wanted to enter the parliament in order to meet the Speaker and convene the meeting of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), they were greeted blockades and stopped by hundreds of police personnel stationed at the entrance of the parliament.

On the next few days, these opposition MPs were being called up by the police, one by one, to have their statements taken on the alleged “illegal assembly” that has taken place at the entrance of the parliament and Dataran Merdeka recently. What illegal assembly? These MPs has their constitutuonal right to enter the parliament even when there is no sitting on that day.

The actions committed by the Muhyiddin rebel government as well the police force are clearly offences under the Sections 124, 124B, 124C of the Penal Code whereby these MPs were prevented from exercising their duties, this government has carried out and again, attempt to carry out activities that are detremiental to the parliamentary democracy.

The people must understand that scrutiny is not about doing things against the government of the day. It is about check and balance in parliamentary democracy. It is the a constitutional duty and responsibilities of these MPs to provide checks on whatever the government does, even if it is good for the people to ensure the budgets, policies and implementations are carried out transparently, be accountabled and to ensure competent implementation of the same.

Apa gunanya sidang parlimen 5 hari tanpa semak imbang?

Sidang parlimen pertama sewaktu perintah darurat bakal diadakan 26 Julai ini. tetapi adakah PN akan cuba menggagalkannya di masa yang terdekat ini?

Setelah ditekan bertubi-tubi, dikritik dan dikecam dengan begitu hebat sekali oleh rakyat jelata di atas kegagalannya, tidak mengendahkan titah perintah DYMM SPB YDPA, akhirnya kerajaan pemberontak Perikatan Nasional (PN) terpaksa juga akur dengan tekanan tersebut dan bersetuju untuk memanggil sidang parlimen dengan menjadualkannya pada 26 Julai 2021 ini.

Akan tetapi, adalah amat berdukacita sekali apabila aturan urusan persidangan yang telah diumumkan baru-baru ini kepada ahli-ahli parlimen mendapati persidangan parlimen tersebut sekadar “taklimat ringkas” yang bakal disampaikan oleh beberapa orang menteri yang menguruskan krisis kesihatan dan pandemik yang sedang melanda negara. Sebarang perbahasan, persoalan dan apajua penyemakkan terhadap dasar kerajaan adalah tidak dibenarkan sepanjang persidangan lima (5) hari tersebut.

Jadi, ini bermakna, ianya suatu bentuk pembohongan yang paling besar pernah berlaku dalam sejarah parlimen dan negara, yakni suatu pembohongan yang berselindung di sebalik nama “sidang parlimen”.

Yang lebih memburukkan lagi keadaan, difahamkan jabatan perdana menteri turut merancang untuk menghadkan bilangan ahli-ahli parlimen dengan menetapkan keahadiran secara bergilir dengan alasan ianya bagi tujuan untuk mematuhi SOP dan penjarakan fizikal semata-mata. Nampaknya ini adalah jelas rancangan kerajaan pemberontak PN untuk menjarakkan diri mereka lebih jauh daripada ahli-ahli parlimen agar dapat mengelak daripada berhadapan dengan puluhan soalan yang bakal dikemukakan kelak.

Selain daripada itu, jabatan perdana menteri juga difahamkan telah mengarahkan speaker dewan agar menggunakan kuasanya untuk menghadkan atau tidak meluluskan permintaan agar dasar-dasar yang dibentangkan nanti dibahaskan ataupun dipersoal jika timbul sebarang keraguan yang memerlukan penjelasan yang lebih terperinci. Sama ada ini benar atau sebaliknya, terpaksalah kita menunggu sidang parlimen yang akan datang.

Cukuplah dengan rancangan keji PN mempergunakan darurat untuk menggantung parlimen dan menghalangnya daripada bersidang, tetapi setelah gagal untuk meneruskan penggantungan dengan cubaan melanjutkan perintah darurat, kini cuba pula “mempolitikkan kes harian covid-19” bagi membolehkannya sekali lagi cuba mengketengahkan rancangannya untuk memendekkan sidang parlimen ataupun membatalkan terus sidang yang telah dijadualkan pada 26 Julai ini.

Saban hari, menjelang sidang parlimen tanggal 26 Julai ini, kes harian wabak ini didapati naik mendadak dengan begitu tinggi sekali sehingga mencapai suatu angka yang boleh menunjukkan dengan jelas bahawa seolah-olah kerajaan pemberontak PN ini benar-benar ingin “menggagalkan usaha memerangi” penularan wabak tersebut oleh kerana ingin menyelamatkan kedudukan diri mereka, menyelamatkan kuasa politik mereka, mengekalkan kuasa mutlak yang mereka nikmati sepanjang tempoh darurat dan perintah kawalan pergerakan (PKP) ini.

Oleh sebab itulah, apabila kita perhatikan, ramai menteri-menteri, menteri besar, exco-exco dan para pemimpin PN berani melanggar SOP dan perintah PKP dengan sewenang-wenangnya kerana mereka telahpun mengetahui akan “rancangan sebenarnya” pemimpin mereka. Ingin kami tanya sekali lagi, adakah ini semua benar?

Melakukan suatu kejahatan ataupun perbuatan yang keji, tetapi berselindung pula di sebalik agama, undang-undang ataupun institusi feudal dan simbolik, sebab itulah rakyat jelata mulai muak dengan karenah tersebut lalu tidak mengendahkan, bahkan ramai pula yang mula tidak menghormati dan mengecam SOP, sekatan dan perintah-perintah tersebut yang telah sekian lama menghadkan pergerakan mereka, yang lebih tragik menyebabkan ramai yang hilang punca pendapatan, menjadi bankrap, perniagaan gulung tikar, kekurangan bekalan makanan, inflasi dan pengangguran meningkat mendadak, “atas hasil usaha gigih” kerajaan pemberontak PN ini, ramai juga yang telah mengambil keputusan untuk membunuh diri kerana sudah tidak dapat lagi menahan kesengsaraan hidup. Bersorak gembira PN nampaknya!

Ketiadaan parlimen bersidang dengan peranannya untuk menyemak imbang apajua dasar, perbelanjaan dan perlaksanaan kerajaan terbukti para hari ini, keadaan negara telah menjadi lebih buruk ekoran berlakunya ketidakcekapan pentadbiran dan salahguna kuasa, ini yang didapati hanya mengutamakan kuasa dan kedudukan masing-masing.

Selepas itu, PAS akan cuba mengatur strategi pula untuk sekali lagi menyalahkan DAP kononnya “sebaran ajaran Kristian” parti tersebut telah menyebabkan penderitaan rakyat menjadi semakin tidak terkawal sekarang.

PN dan para pemimpinnya di sana, di sini, cubalah sedaya upaya untuk mencari alasan demi alasan untuk memansuhkan institusi parlimen dan mengketepikan perlembagaan untuk memerintah seumur hidup, kita akan melawan arus keji kamu dengan sebaik-baiknya.

Kleptokrasi mula tular ke dalam program imunisasi covid?

Baru-baru ini, negara kita dikejutkan dengan satu lagi tajuk, kini berlaku pula di dalam Program Imunisasi Covid Kebangsaan (PICK) yang dikelolakan oleh kerajaan pemberontak melalui menteri penyelarasnya, Khairy Jamaluddin sambil dibantu oleh menteri kesihatan Adham Baba yang sebelum ini didapati tidak cekap dalam menguruskan perlaksanaan tersebut.

Apakah sebenarnya sedang berlaku ini? Kenapa ada segelintir petugas PICK yang sanggup mencuri dan menipu para penerima vaksin dengan memberikan suntikan palsu, picagari kosong untuk menyuntik para penerima? Agaknya sudah berapa penerima yang telah ditipu? Satu kes sudahpun disahkan, manakala beberapa kes lagi sedang dalam siasatan.

Sekiranya kes kecurian dan penipuan bekalan vaksin di dalam program vaksinasi kelolaan PICK ini benar-benar berlaku dan ianya didalangi oleh kumpulan-kumpulan tertentu yang bertujuan untuk mengaut keuntungan, ianya akan merupakan satu skandal ataupun kleptokrasi yang wajar disiasat dengan teliti bagi membendung amalan tersebut daripada terus merebak ke seluruh negara. Selain itu, perbuatan ini juga dilihat suatu bentuk pengkhianatan baru yang belum pernah kita saksikan.

Nampaknya kleptokrasi ini bukan sahaja telah menular di dalam MARA, FELDA, FELCRA, Tabung Haji, 1MDB, SRC International, SSER, PKFZ dan sebagainya, kerana kleptokrasi ini masih aktif dan kini tular pula, kali ini di dalam program imunisasi covid kebangsaan (PICK) yang sedang dikendalikan oleh kerajaan pemberontak yang diterajui Perikatan Nasional (PN) pimpinan Muhyiddin Yassin.

Negara kita kini sedang menghadapi krisis kesihatan yang paling buruk pernah berlaku dalam sejarah, diburukkan lagi dengan ketidakcekapan kerajaan pemberontak dalam pengurusan krisis kesihatan tersebut di mana perintah kawalan pergerakan (PKP) telah berlanjutan berbulan-bulan lamanya, sudah menghampiri genap dua tahun, sehinggakan ramai yang terputus bekalan makanan, hilang pekerjaan dan punca pendapatan, perniagaan tidak dapat beroperasi, syarikat-syarikat perniagaan dan pembuatan menjadi bankrap, kadar inflasi yang semakin meningkat serta kekurangan bekalan makanan di beberapa kawasan berikutan kesukaran pergerakan dan pengedaran sewaktu PKP dikuatkuasakan.

Tambahan pula dengan perintah darurat yang masih berkuatkuasa, ia memburukkan lagi keadaan apabila kerajaan pemberontak ini berbelanja secara memboros, tidak dapat disemak atau diteliti oleh parlimen seperti yang sepatutnya sehinggakan keadaan dalam pentadbiran PN ini kucar-kacir, kegiatan perolehan awam yang melebihi harga pasaran, penuh dengan SOP dan larangan atau kebenaran yang mengelirukan serta bertindih di antara satu sama lain, serta berlaku pelanggaran demi pelanggaran SOP oleh menteri-menteri dan para pemimpin PN yang kerap. Tidak ada penyelarasan yang menyeluruh bagi memastikan kecairan maklumat yang betul, tepat serta kena pada masanya bagi membantu rakyat jelata mengatasi segala cabaran berikutan PKP yang telah banyak menghadkan kegiatan harian.

Dalam keadaan yang kelam kabut ini, golongan kleptokrat-ala baru ini mula mengambil kesempatan, kini sasarannya adalah pada PICK yang kini sedang dilaksanakan di seluruh negara, memandangkan ianya sedang dalam keadaan yang kurang teratur. Agaknya sudah berapa penerima vaksin yang telah ditipu dan disuntik dengan menggunakan picagari kosong? Jika sekiranya didapati sah, berlakunya puluhan suntikan kosong, mungkin ratusan atau ribuan suntikan kosong juga boleh berlaku di Pusat Penerimaan Vaksin (PPV) di seluruh negara. Jadi, di manakah bekalan vaksin yang dicuri itu akan dihantar atau dijual? Di pasaran gelap?

Masih belum pasti lagi bagaimana golongan kleptokrat imunisasi ini beroperasi dan siapakah dalangnya di sebalik “operasi menggelapkan vaksin” tersebut. Adakah kalangan para pemimpin PN itu sendiri yang telibat, kita belum pasti lagi kerana komplikasi perlaksanaan PICK ini yang masih menampakkan banyak masalah sehinggakan kategori penerima vaksin yang sepatutnya berdasarkan kumpulan usia seseorang kini telah dipecahbelahkan mengikut sektor-sektor awam atau komersial yang dianggap “penting” oleh kerajaan pemberontak agar ianya dapat meneruskan “penggembangan ekonomi”nya untuk negara.

Bukan sahaja pihak polis harus mengambil tindakan, menyiasat dan sebagainya, bahkan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) juga wajar turun padang bagi mendalami siasatan tersebut dan bukan sekadar menunggu laporan diterima terlebih dahulu, baru mengambil tindakan. Di manakah inisiatif SPRM dalam membendung rasuah dan salahguna kuasa?

Penyalahgunaan kuasa di dalam PICK ini bukannya satu perkara kecil ataupun dilakukan oleh pencuri-pencuri yang menceburi “bidang” tersebut. Kami berpendapat, ianya dipercayai didalangi oleh pihak-pihak atasan dalam pentadbiran yang punyai kepentingan tertentu, yang jelas dengan keadaan, inventori dan kadar pasaran serta permintaan bekalan vaksin tersebut.

Ooh, ya!

Kepada para pemimpin PAS khususnya Abdul Hadi Awang dan konco-konco tertinggi partinya, dinasihati agar PAS tidak menyalahkan DAP di dalam kes kecurian vaksin ataupun suntikan dengan picagari kosong ini, kerana skandal tersebut langsung tidak kena-mengena dengan apajua cubaan untuk mengKristiankan para penerima vaksin di negara ini. Di harap PAS memahami keadaan yang sebenarnya.

How Are Police Reforms Carried Out?

A police reform process requires coordination among multiple parties or should we say, stakeholders. The federal government together with relevant state or provincial government as well as local authorities should initiate and actively support the efforts to reform and to convince other stakeholders as well to provide their support for such reforms: oversight bodies, management authorities, civil societies and the general public may all be consulted or involved directly in this process.

Police reform typically involves a period of strategic analysis or assessment, design, planning, implementation and evaluation.

Strategic analysis or assessment is about assessing the need for and reform priorities that requires a thorough analysis of the police organisation, its personnel and relationships with other institutions, civil societies and the public in general. Consultations with the stakeholders from all interests groups in the society and across all ranks within the police force will help to:

  1. identify underlying challenges within the police force,
  2. conducting an audit on its operational, standards and practices,
  3. determine how different actors perceive existing challenges,
  4. propose and establish need for reforms,
  5. put the reforms to test its willingness or acceptance,
  6. rallying support and resources.

This information serves as a foundation crucial for evaluating the reform process at the later stage.

Design and planning will be fed by the initial analysis or assessment. The detailed plans for reform will come up with a well-defined goals, clear roles and responsibilities and a timeframe for ahieving these reforms. Democratic governance goals, which focuse on greater accountability with effective control and oversight mechanism must be balanced with the operational objectives of the police force to ensure the feasibility of reform and public support. Such will definitely be influenced by several factors that includes:

  1. support from other areas of the secority sector,
  2. public attitudes and relationships with the police,
  3. the existing organisational and command structures,
  4. resources available for reform.

This stage also needs to establish monitoring, review and evaluation mechanisms to ensure the reforms are implemented successfully.

The implementation of a reform plan requires a sufficient political will, financial and human resources as well as timeframe. Asystematic change management approach and effective internal-external communication strategies provide clarity of the change process and helps generate support from within and outside the police force.

Reform will only achieve its objectives if it makes sense to all police personnel and those who interact with the police force. Establishing a performance management and reward system can cement change in police values and practices. Committed leadership from the chain of command is essential.

If theres is a change in leadership, political suport for reform should be maintained to ensure proper and smoother implementation of the reform plan.

Evaluation is about gathering data or information throughout the process and evaluating results against clear and previously established criteria allows success to be measured and identifies areas where implementation efforts needed to be improved and adapted. Progress evaluation demonstrates the benefits of reform to poliitical leaders and the population and the process helps to build support for the police and for future improvements.

Advocating and implementing reform in the police force is not only a police business, but it is also a public interests as a whole because public security and safety involves the entire segment of the community at-large. The police force is a civilian-based institution, therefore it needs reform and change regularly to be able to adapt into the society’s needs and demands.

Police Reform

What is Police Reform?

In a context of security sector reform, police reform aims to transform the values, cultures, policies and practices of the police institution so that the police can discharge their duties with respect for democratic values, human rights and in accordance to the rule of law.

Such reform aims to achieve a professional system of democratic policing that:

  1. takes a people-oriented approach to security and public safety,
  2. protects human rights in accordance with the nation’s law as well as international convention,
  3. responsive to different security needs of all people, regardless of gender, age, ethnics, class or any other characteristics ot associations,
  4. assisting all people, particularly members of the community in need of immediate help,
  5. upholds high levels of accountability in its conduct,
  6. establish an effective system of democratic control and oversight on the police force,
  7. builds a public security service that is efficient and effective in the interest of our people and the nation.

Police reform also aims to improve how the police interact with other parts of the law and order sectors such as the judiciary system, prisons (correctional) system, the cabinet, legislature or other independent authorities with management or oversight responsibilities.

Why Police Reform is necessary?

The political, legal and social context in which the police operate changes frequently. The public security service need to adapt to meet the evolving public serucity and safety needs as well as the expectations of the people they serve.

Police reform, in this case, may become necessary for many reasons that depend on the local, state, federal or international context. For example:

  1. the process of responding to changing public security requirements, such as the evolving patterns of crimes or emerging new threats to our public safety,
  2. new or updated legal frameworks,
  3. changes in political direction or public policies through general elections,
  4. exposure of police misconduct, corruption or increase of custodial death,
  5. peacebuilding, post-conflict or transitional judiciary systems,
  6. conflict resolution, prevention and mediation,
  7. social transformation and evolving social expectations, such as greater demand for justice, equality, human rights, democracy and in particular Community 4.0,
  8. the emerging new political system through democratization.

Police reform commonly aims to:

  • achieve equal treatment and opportunities for all in access to public security and justice with police and judiciary system protecting and promoting respect for democracy, human rights and rule of law,
  • improve public awareness in policing via provisions of balanced and relevant information on police funding, expenditure, activities and results as well as the legitimate roles and responsibilities of the police,
  • address corruption, misconduct and promote integrity through training, education, effective complaint handling and removal of incompetent or corrupt officers and officials,
  • modernise and improve outdated procedures and come up with new legal frameworks, provisions codes of conduct and practices, training and standard operation procedures,
  • achieve cooperation among other enforcement agencies, including multilevel frameworks as well as with other security apparatus like, the armed forces, civil defence department, border security and the intelligence community,
  • improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the police institution to enhance performance of its legal duties, ensuring accountability of public resources utilisation.

Is there a standard framework for police reform?

Actually, there is no standard framework nor any foundations as a guide towards police reform. However, there are two major goals to all police reform: (a) improving police capacity and effectiveness, and (b) to improve the integrity and accountability of the police.

This means, the police reform at times focuses on internal elements of the police institution and at other times on management, operations, control and oversight of the police force.

Internal police reform can involve changes to any part of the police institution and its organisational structures, for instance:

  • leadership structures, chains of command and ranking composition of the police,
  • policies on its human resources management such as, recruitment, traning, promotions, transfers, appointments, retirements, benefits, rewards and disciplinary system,
  • regulations, systems for control and supervision, codes of conduct and standard operation procedures in both management and field services,
  • development and operationalisation of special competences, tactical and specialised units,
  • provisions to protect the rights and safety of the members of the police force,
  • internal control, supervision, investigation and disciplinary procedures,
  • resourcing, budgeting, equipment, logistics and training,
  • policies and strategies for public outreach and community engagement.

Police reforms that focus outside the police institution normally affect police strategies, roles, functions, management, supervision and control or even the legal framework as well as the modus operandi within which the police operate. For instance, such reforms might involve:

  1. updating legal frameworks to better reflect its standards by adopting some international conventions or clarifying roles and mandates for law enforcements,
  2. revision of budgeting procedures, where the legislature and finance ministry can change the way the police budget is allocated, holding the police to accountability in a sense of efficient use of public funds,
  3. reorganising the police system: the government can change the territorial or jurisdictional responsibilities of the police, amend or enhance its strategies, reform relevant departments within the police force or implement new security or public safety policies that affect police mandates and its operational requirements,
  4. enhancing external oversight: mandates for a parliamentary responsible Independent Police Complaints & Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) with responsbilities for police oversight should be created to enhance professionalism and accountability within the police force. Yes, we are all aware that, internally, the police itself already has an Integrity & Standards Compliance Department or better known as JIPS, but for the purpose of enhancing public confidence and awareness of the police force, the IPCMC must be established to involve all stakeholders in improving state and human security by developing public safety and security provisions, management and oversight more effective and accountable within a framework of democratic police-people approach, ensuring the rule of law and human rights are adhered to.

The police force has not change much ever since its inception in the year 1807 and institutionalisation via Police Act 1967 (Akta Polis 1967) after our nation gained its independence in 1957, therefore the term “Democratic Policing” is still unknown to the majority in the police force until today. Democratic Policing is actually a set of values that describes the public expectations of the police force in a democratic environment where people-oriented policing approaches and involvement of all stakeholders are essential in ensuring a total public security and safety within the community and our nation as a whole.

Undi18, adakah rakyat sekali lagi dikhianati?

Undi kita telah dikhianati oleh Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (PPBM) apabila parti tersebut memberontak terhadap kepimpinan gabungan yang dianggotainya, Pakatan Harapan (PH) dan meninggalkan gabungan tersebut di mana sejurus selepas pemberontakan mereka, ianya telah mengakibatkan kejatuhan kerajaan yang diterajui oleh PH pada penghujung Februari 2020 yang lalu.

PPBM seterusnya membentuk satu gabungan politiknya yang baru bernama Perikatan Nasional (PN) dan mengajak Barisan Nasional (BN) serta Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) untuk bersamanya membentuk sebuah kerajaan pemberontak bagi mengambil-alih tampuk pemerintahan daripada PH pada awal Mac 2020.

Kerajaan pemberontak pimpinan PN hasil kerjasama BN dan GPS yang dipimpin oleh PPBM telah menarik balik beberapa siri pembaharuan yang telah dan sedang diusahakan oleh kerajaan sebelum ini. Undi kita sekali lagi dikhianati apabila kerajaan pemberontak pimpinan PN ini memansuhkan rang undang-undang pindaan perlembagaan yang menghadkan tempoh jawatan perdana menteri kepada hanya dua penggal, sejurus itu membenarkan seseorang pemimpin parti menjawat jawatan perdana menteri mengikut keselesaannya tanpa had.

Tidak lama kemudian, negara kita sekali lagi dikejutkan dengan satu lagi pengkhianatan apabila kerajaan pemberontak pimpinan PN turut memansuhkan rang undang-undang pembentukan Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan dan Salahlaku Polis (IPCMC) tanpa sebarang alasan yang munasabah. Tujuan pembentukan IPCMC yang dirancang sebelum ini adalah untuk membentuk suatu mekanisme semak imbang terhadap Polis Di Raja Malaysia (PDRM) yang turut meliputi aspek penambahbaikan, pemodenan organisasi dan pembaharuan menyeluruh terhadap pasukan keselamatan tersebut.

Minggu lepas pula, kita dikejutkan sekali lagi dengan satu siri pengkhianatan apabila kerajaan pemberontak pimpnan PN menunda perlaksanaan Undi18 kepada satu tarikh yang belum dapat ditentukan lagi untuk dilaksanakan hanya dalam tahun 2022-2023. Alasan yang diberikan oleh PN adalah kerana Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya (SPR) tidak meempunyai cukup masa untuk merealisasikan perlaksanaan tersebut disebabkan oleh perintah darurat dan perintah kawalan pergerakan (PKP) yang sedang berkuatkuasa disebabkan oleh penularan wabak covid-19 yang turut menyebabkan perlaksanaan pendaftaran pengundi baru secara automatik juga tidak dapat dilaksanakan.

Persoalannya adalah, kenapa Undi18 hanya dapat dilaksanakan apabila pendaftaran pengundi baru secara automatik dapat dijalankan? Kenapa Undi18 tidak boleh dilaksanakan terlebih dahulu, sementara pendaftaran pengundi baru secara automatik boleh dilaksanakan kemudian? Kenapa ianya wajib dan perlu dilaksanakan serentak?

Kami berpendapat, Undi18 tidak dapat dilaksanakan disebabkan oleh PKP berikutan penularan wabak covid-19 itu hanya alasan remeh semata-mata kerana yang kita dapat perhatikan selama ini adalah PN tidak dapat menerima hakikat kebangkitan suara anak-anak muda yang telah menyedari bertapa pentingnya politik dalam hidup mereka dan kesedaran golongan muda yang semakin rancak dalam keinginan mengetahui dengan lebih mendalam hal-hal berkaitan perlembagaan, pemerintahan, pembuatan dasar serta perkara-perkara yang berkenaan dengan hak asasi kemanusiaan, kebebasan bersuara dan sebagainya.

Apabila penangguhan Undi18 itu mula mendapat kecaman umum, kerajaan pemberontak pimpinan PN mula berdolak-dalik dan menyalahkan SPR pula, kononnya mereka (PN) tidak mempengaruhi keputusan tersebut. PPBM mendakwa “tidak dapat menerimanya” tetapi “tetap akur” dengan keputusan SPR. Sementara itu PAS pula mendakwa perlaksanaan Undi18 belum lagi sesuai di masa kini kerana kematangan golongan muda dalam politik belum lagi mencapai tahap yang menyakinkan.

Seterusnya, kerajaan pemberontak pimpinan PN juga telah mengerahkan pihak berkuasa untuk mengambil tindakan susulan terhadap golongan muda dan beberapa pemimpin muda yang telah mengadakan bantahan terbuka baru-baru ini terhadap keputusan PN untuk menangguhkan perlaksanaan Undi18.

Hampir kesemua negara di Asia Tenggara telahpun meminda had umur mengundi rakyat mereka bagi membolehkan mereka mengundi dalam pilihanraya apabila mereka telah mencapai umur 18 tahun kelak. Ini bermakna kerajaan pemberontak pimpinan PN masih memandang rendah akan kematangan muda-mudi negara kita ini ataupun PN sebenarnya amat takut dengan kebangkitan dan kesedaran golongan muda yang mula menyerlah dalam hal-ehwal politik negara. PN takut dengan kebangkitan dan kesedaran golongan muda akan menyebabkan pemerintahan mereka tidak akan bertahan lebih lama seperti yang diharapkan dan sebab itulah PN mengambil kesempatan daripada wabak covid-19 ini uuntuk menangguhkan terus perlaksanaan Undi18 tersebut agar ianya hanya direalisasikan dalam setahun dua lagi.

Ketakutan PN juga jelas terbukti apabila kerajaan pemberontak mengarahkan Jabatan Pendaftaran Pertubuhan (ROS) agar menolak terus permohonan pendaftaran Ikatan Demokratik Perpaduan Malaysia (Malaysian United Democratic Alliance-MUDA) tanpa mengemukakan sebarang alasan bagi penolakan tersebut walaupun setelah jawatankuasa penaja MUDA berjaya memenuhi semua permintaan ROS bagi membolehkan permohonannya memperoleh kelulusan.

Persoalan yang seterusnya adalah, rakyat kita sudah berkali-kali dikhianati, satu demi satu kami menyaksikan pengkhianatan tersebut di depan mata. Adakah PN yang dipimpin oleh para pemimpin yang khianat, akan juga bakal mengkhianati negara di suatu hari kelak? Adakah di bawah PN ini, negara kita akan jatuh ke tangan kuasa-kuasa asing di masa yang terdekat?

Ini adalah kerana PN kini penuh dengan pengkhianatan, tidak habis-habis dengan perbuatan khianat sehinggalah pada hari ini.

Menjelang 214 tahun penubuhannya, PDRM masih mengalami defisit kepercayaan

Menjelang 214 tahun penubuhannya, Polis Di Raja Malaysia (PDRM) dilihat masih menghadapi defisit kepercayaan sehingga pada hari ini. Apakah sebenarnya telah dan sedang berlaku? Ini bukannya suatu usaha untuk memberikan suatu gambaran yang negatif terhadap PDRM, tetapi pendapat kami serta pelbagai maklum balas yang diperolehi daripada masyarakat secara umumnya.

Tujuan utama kewujudan PDRM hingga pada hari ini masihlah sama, yakni membanteras dan mencegah jenayah, memelihara keselamatan dan ketenteraman awam serta memastikan keharmonian di kalangan masyarakat terperlihara dengan sewajarnya.

Namun PDRM juga berdepan dengan pelbagai cabaran “politik dalaman” yang padat, pada masa yang sama juga gejala-gejala seperti penyalahgunaan kuasa, amalan rasuah dan pengurusan yang kurang memuaskan terus menghantui pasukan keselamatan tersebut.

Masyarakat antarabangsa pada hari ini telah mengorak langkah ke arah modenisasi dengan pembangunan sains dan teknologi dan pasukan-pasukan keselamatan di banyak negara juga tidak terkecuali daripada usaha pembangunan, dan pemodenan teknologi tersebut bagi meningkatkan keberkesanan mereka dalam memerangi pelbagai bentuk jenayah serta memastikan agar keselamatan dan keamanan negara masing-masing terpelihara.

Contoh pembangunan dan kemajuan pesat pasukan-pasukan keselamatan di beberapa buah negara khusus wajar dicontohi dan diambil sebagai panduan bagi merealisasikan usaha yang sama di negara kita ini. Pemodenan PDRM di negara ini hendaklah meliputi pelbagai aspek, daripada pembabitan seseorang rekrut pada hari pertama, perjalanan latihan asas dan lanjutan sehinggalah tamatnya pengkursusan tersebut dengan penyerapan penuh serta tanggungjawab dan penugasan harian setiap anggota yang terlibat.

Apa yang kami dapat lihat sehingga pada hari ini adalah proses pembaharuan dalam PDRM sering terbantut kerana ramai pegawai dan anggota yang masih tidak dapat menerima hakikat di mana bantuan dan nasihat daripada pihak awam perlu diterapkan dalam proses pembaharuan tersebut.

Yang jelas adalah apabila Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan dan Salahlaku Polis (Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission-IPCMC) dicadangkan pembentukannya bagi membantu PDRM memerangi gejala-gejala yang tidak sihat dalam pasukan keselamatan tersebut serta membantu memulihkan imej dan melaksanakan pembaharuan, ramai di kalangan pegawai-pegawai dan anggota-anggota polis yang membantah langkah-langkah tersebut.

Malah yang lebih memburukkan lagi keadaan tersebut adalah apabila ada kalangan pemimpin-pemimpin utama parti-parti politik konservatif yang berasaskan kaum dan agama di negara ini cuba memberikan gambaran yang salah dan tidak tepat mengenai proses pembaharuan dan pembentukan IPCMC sehinggakan dua kesatuan sekerja polis yang paling berpengaruh, yakni Persatuan Pegawai Kanan Polis Di Raja Malaysia (PPKP) dan Persatuan Pegawai Rendah Polis Di Raja Malaysia (PPRP) secara terbuka enggan menerima usaha pembaharuan dan IPCMC kerana tidak dapat menerima “campurtangan” daripada pihak luar dan bukan dari kalangan pasukan keselamatan, sebaliknya mendakwa bahawa PDRM mampu menyelesaikan masalah dan cabaran dalamannya secara tersendiri tanpa sebarang bantuan daripada “pihak luar”.

Berikutan salah faham PPKP dan PPRP serta perbuatan beberapa parti-parti politik konservatif yang berasaskan kaum dan agama serta pertubuhan-pertubuhan radikal berhaluan kanan yang terus mencemarkan langkah-langkah murni tersebut, usaha pembaharuan dalam PDRM dan pembentukan IPCMC sekali tergendala buat kali kedua apabila kementerian dalam negeri (KDN) mengambil keputusan untuk memansuhkan Rang Undang-Undang (RUU) IPCMC 2020, sebaliknya digantikan pula dengan satu RUU IPCC (Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan Polis) 2021 yang mana peranan dan fungsinya dikurangkan kepada hanya bertindak sebagai sebuah badan penasihat dan pemerhati yang tidak mempunyai sebarang kuasa tatatertib dan tindakan susulan. Malah, yang lebih tidak menyenangkan adalah IPCC itu akan diletakkan di bawah seliaan menteri dalam negeri itu sendiri di mana semua lantikan dan keputusan akhir akan dibuat oleh menteri tersebut.

Cabaran PDRM tidak selesai di situ sahaja, apabila terbongkar satu lagi elemen negatif dalam PDRM, apabila ketua polis negara Tan Sri Hamid Bador mengakui bahawa wujudnya satu kartel dalam pasukan keselamatan tersebut yang mempunyai kepentingan tertentu dan salah satu daripada usaha kartel tersebut adalah untuk memastikan ketua polis negara yang ada sekarang digantikan dengan “pegawai kanan daripada kalangan kartel” tersebut agar matlamat dan kepentingan mereka dapat dicapai.

Memang tidak dapat dinafikan kartel tersebut wujud kerana politik dalaman PDRM amat padat, mungkin lebih padat daripada jangkaan kami sebenarnya kerana sebaik sahaja ketua polis negara mengakui wujudnya kartel tersebut, beberapa orang bekas ketua polis negara mula tampil memberikan pengakuan yang tidak begitu jelas bahawa memang wujudnya pelbagai masalah dalaman sewaktu era kepimpinan mereka yang lalu dalam PDRM.

Malah pengarah Jabatan Integriti dan Pematuhan Standard (JIPS) PDRM Datuk Zamri Yahya turut mengakui wujudnya sekumpulan pegawai-pegawai kanan polis yang hidup dengan begitu mewah kerana giat menerima rasuah sebagai balasan tidak membanteras atau bertindak terhadap “beberapa kumpulan jenayah” yang sedang menguasai kawasan-kawasan yang tertentu.

Hakikatnya adalah PDRM sememangnya mempunyai masalah dalamannya dan cabaran yang perlu ditempuhi dengan bantuan nasihat dan tenaga pakar dari luar bagi menambahbaik pasukan keselamatan tersebut. Seperti juga Jabatan Imigresen Malaysia dan Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan, kedua-dua agensi penguatkuasaan ini juga menghadapi pelbagai masalah dalaman dan amalan rasuah turut terkesan daripadanya.

Kenapa masalah tersebut terjadi? Ini adalah kerana ketiadaan sebarang pemantuan dan usaha semak imbang dalam memastikan ketelusan dan keberkesanan agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan tersebut yang menyebabkan elemen-elemen negatif dan gejala rasuah semakin serius dan sukar ditangani kerana pelbagai “tindakan politik dalaman” yang menghalang sebarang usaha untuk menambahbaikkan keadaan.

Ketiadaan pemantuan dan usaha pembaharuan serta kelembapan kerajaan pusat dalam menangani masalah tersebut menyebabkan pertubuhan-pertubuhan sivil dan hak asasi kemanusiaan (NGO) mula mengambil alih peranan untuk berkempen memberikan penekanan dan menyeru agar pemantauan yang lebih berkesan dilaksanakan supaya fungsi-fungsi agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan tersebut dapat menjadi lebih telus dan cekap dalam perjalanan penugasan mereka.

Dalam usaha menyeru agar pembaharuan dilaksanakan dalam PDRM dan agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan yang lain, kami juga dapat melihat dengan jelas ada di kalangan pemimpin-pemimpin utama parti-parti politik konservatif yang berasaskan kaum dan agama serta pertubuhan-pertubuhan radikal berhaluan kanan cuba menabur fitnah dan tohmahan kononnya “ada usaha untuk membubarkan PDRM”; “menghina pasukan polis”; “menghapuskan PDRM”; “menghina pegawai polis”; “menghina Islam” dan pelbagai tohmahan lagi, sambil berusaha mempengaruhi para pegawai-pegawai tinggi agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan tersebut agar menyokong mereka dengan membantah dan tidak membenarkan sebarang usaha murni untuk memperkenalkan apajua bentuk pembaharuan di dalam agensi-agensi di bawah kelolaan mereka.

Keselamatan awam dan kepolisan bukan sekadar terletak di atas bahu PDRM dan agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan yang lain. Ianya juga melibatkan kepentingan umum dan kami sebagai rakyat Malaysia juga berhak untuk memberikan sedikit sebanyak maklum balas, cadangan dan pendapat bagaimana pembaharuan dalam agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan tersebut dapat dilaksanakan demi kebaikan semua pihak dan khususnya kepada hal-hal berkaitan dengan keselamatan negara.

Sekiranya hendak mengatakan kita ini “menghina”, “memansuhkan”, “cuba menghapuskan” dan tidak menghargai sumbangan agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan tersebut dan cuba “campurtangan” dalam usaha menambahbaik keadaan semasa agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan tersebut, itu suatu dakwaan yang salah dan berbentuk fitnah yang bertujuan untuk mengancam dan menghapuskan kepercayaan orang ramai terhadap para pegawai dan anggota agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan.

Hakikatnya adalah, sekiranya lebih banyak halangan dilakukan terhadap usaha pembaharuan dan penambahbaikan tersebut, maka lebih tinggilah defisit kepercayaan terhadap agensi-agensi yang berkenaan. Defisit-defisit inlah yang akan dengan sendirinya mengakhiri kewujudan dan penghormatan terhadap agensi-agensi tersebut.

Para pemimpin-pemimpin utama parti-parti politik konservatif yang berasaskan kaum dan agama serta pertubuhan-pertubuhan radikal berhaluan kanan hendaklah bertanggungjawab penuh terhadap defisit-defisit kepercayaan tersebut.

Let the IGP pursue the cartel in PDRM by himself. The home minister should not interfere

Few days ago, the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Hamid Bador has alleged that there is a cartel of senior police officials within its ranks which aim to topple him as the country’s IGP and have him replaced with another official who is will answer to the cartel’s needs and demands.

Then the next day, the home minister, Datuk Hamzah Zainuddin responded that the IGP should not expose such to the public but the IGP should instead meet the minister personally and report the matter to the Police Service Commission (SPP).

The home minister should mind his own business as he is a mere political official overseeing the entire home ministry, not the specific operations of a department under the jurisdiction of the ministry. Hamzah should not interfere in this matter and should let the IGP resolve the matter on his own based on his years of experience and professionalism.

Handling over the matter to the home minister to deal with, would mean he will tend to politicise the matter or the minister will take sides on matters which may politically benefits him. Many will ask why we are saying such even if the police force (PDRM) is under the jurisdiction of the home ministry, therefore its minister has the “power” to take on the issue?

First, the Tan Sri Hamid was appointed by the then prime minister Mahathir Mohamad after the later assume the premiership in 2018. Hamid’s contract is due to expire this May 2021 after completing his two-year contract. What is most certain is Hamid’s contract will not be renewed based on the fact that he was appointed by then then government which was toppled on last February 2021 following the Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (PPBM) and 11 other Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) MPs’ rebellion against their own Pakatan Harapan (PH) coalition government then.

The home minister is also the PPBM secretary-general, while the current head of the rebel government, Muhyiddin Yasin is also the PPBM president, therefore any Mahathir-appointed men still on the government payroll today will be taken off once their contract ends. Just look at all the chairmen, CEOs, COOs and presidents of the statutory bodies and GLCs nationwide, all were systematically chopped off and replaced with political leaders who are neither competent nor experience in the fields they were being assigned.

In the case of Hamid’s tenure, if he choose to reveal the list of the PDRM cartels to Hamzah as “advised” by the later, the IGP will certainly be victimised given the fact that his contract will be ending come May 2021, therefore the home minister will take this opportunity to discredit him and may as well use this reason to shorten his contract or even have Hamid’s tenure terminated with immediate effect reasoning that he has been “negligence” in his position as IGP. The home minister is definitely wanting to push all the unpleasant ones to a scapegoat, when he stretches his hand on.

So, the IGP has made the right choice by not revealing the list of the PDRM cartels to the minister, instead assured the minister that he is capable of handling these cartels on his own, professionally, based on a policeman’s experience. Let it be, and the minister should stop his misadventure by interfering into the IGP’s way of handling his professional matters.

The home minister should also be reminded that he should instead look into the “much dirtier” and “scandal ridden” immigration department which is current experiencing strings of mismanagement, corruption and power abuse that could undermine the nation’s security because as of today, there are still millions of illegal immigrants in our nation which are still unchecked nor undetected.

We applaud the IGP’s move not to reveal the PDRM cartels to the home minister and urge him to stand where he is. PDRM has the Integrity & Standards Compliance Department (JIPS), make use of the JIPS effectively to flush out these rogue police officers from the force before you leave at the end of May 2021.

IGP Hamid, remember, your legacy is important to ensure your good name once you leave. Do not let the home minister discredit you politically.