Media
Statement by Tony Pua, DAP National Publicity Secretary and Member of
Parliament for Petaling Jaya Utara in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, 17 July 2013
Yesterday,
Member of Parliament for Batu Gajah, V Sivakumar highlighted another death in
custody under the police on Tuesday 16 July 2013. This is the the 11th reported case
this year involving a 26-year-old Chew Siang Giap, who was detained for 60 days
at the Kangar district police headquarters, was sent to the Batu Gajah rehabilitation
centre on July 12.
According
to the police report made by the son’s father, "when identifying the body
at the Batu Gajah Hospital, he found bruises on the victim's body. Upon
confirming that the victim was his son, the father said there were black
patches that looked like bruises on the victim's ear, shoulder and thigh".
The
question that needs to be asked now is whether the Najib administration is so
completely heartless as to see Malaysians die in custody, that no urgent and
drastic actions need to be taken to remedy the situation. Malaysians are certainly beginning to think
so as the authorities have shown a complete lack of remorse in these deaths
where there have been substantial evidence of the victims being tortured.
The
frequency of deaths under police custody is increasing at such a pace that it
is imperative for the Federal Government to establish the Independent Police
Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) immediately to check on police
professionalism.
The Home
Minister who was responding in Parliament on the 10th July continued
to insist that the proposed IPCMC is unconstitutional and that the existing
Enforcement Agencies Integrity Commission (EAIC) is sufficient to resolve the
above tragedies.
If the
EAIC which was set up since 2011 is indeed effective in improving police
professionalism, then surely we would not have seen the number of unnatural
deaths under police custody today. In
fact since 2011, none of the deaths under police custody have been investigated
by the EAIC. It is of course not helped
by the fact that the Government has never been serious about EAIC in the first
place, leaving the agency severely understaffed and under-budget.
Most
importantly however, the EAIC is not seen as a threat or deterrent to the rogue
police officers. The EAIC for example,
can only refer complaints to disciplinary authorities of the relevant
agency. It has no prosecution powers and
has to refer findings on criminal prosecution to the public prosecutor.
On the
other hand, the proposed IPCMC has inherent powers to act on officers found
guilty of misconduct. The IPCMC is
empowered to mete out caution, discharge, deprive good conduct badges and
allowances, stop increment, demote, severely reprimand, transfer or
dismiss. The IPCMC also has the power to
institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence commenced by
the commission.
In other
words, the IPCMC has teeth to enforce discipline, while the EAIC basically has
its hands tied behind its back. The
Government has rejected the IPCMC in 2006 essentially due to an open revolt by
the Police against its implementation.
What’s
more, the argument by the Home Minister that the IPCMC is “unconstitutional”
and was “against the concept of justice” are just flimsy excuses. Even the former Chief Justice, Tun Mohamed
Dzaiddin Abdullah who chaired the Royal Commission Inquiry on the Royal
Malaysia Police which first recommended the IPCMC has refuted the Home
Minister’s argument that the IPCMC is “unconstitutional”.
He
referred to Article 140 which “provides that Parliament may, by law, provide
for the exercise of Police Force Commission's disciplinary control over members
of the police force in such manner and such authority as may be provided in
that law”.
He
further added that the establishment of an external oversight body “has been
adopted by many modern policing systems whose experience has been that internal
mechanisms alone are inadequate, unreliable and frequently ineffective."
Therefore
it is important for the Najib administration to demonstrate that it is truly a “transformative”
government seeking to reform injustices in the system by setting up the IPCMC. The issue isn’t just one of increasing the
number of investigating officers in the EAIC (although it will certainly help),
but one which is about giving teeth to the relevant Commission. The Government is free to rename the IPCMC as
the EAIC, and expand the Commission to include as many agencies as it
wants. However, if the Commission doesn’t
have teeth, then it is certainly designed to fail.
Tiada ulasan:
Catat Ulasan