Screenshots

In any mature democracy, civil servants must resign or be sacked if they oppose government policy.

No thanks to many past & present leaders, we can hear government servants openly rejecting cabinet directives and getting away with them.

The IPCMC is welcomed with open arms by the majority of the rakyat and if our PRDM (Yep, PRDM for Polis Raja Di Malaysia) is not abusing its powers, why the fear and vehement objection against the IPCMC? Well, it is quite obvious that they are guilty : guilty of human rights abuse and the blatant abuse of power. I have heard of many horror stories involving the police and those who were unfortunate enough to be hauled back to the balai. What you read in the papers is only the tip of a humongous iceberg as much of it goes unreported. They were subjected to much humuliation and mind you, these are people with respectable professions earning a good, honest living.

Our local police force are worse off than the triads. At least if you don't offend triad members, you are left in peace. However not so with our police force. You are guilty until proven innocent. Even if you are innocent, they will try to nail you with something. A very good example are road blocks to weed out drunk drivers. There were a few times when I was stopped and asked to do a breathanalyser test. There was once when the reading was '45', and our friendly neighbourhood cop said that I've broken the law cos the limit is 40. Fortunately, I know my rights and the rules (you'd better if you are a drinker) & that the limit is 81 and above. I told him that, and he shrugged and asked me to blow into it again. Lo and behold, he then turned around and said I'm ok. 'Boss, boleh pegi sekarang'. I've also had friends who were accused of drink driving when they only went out for some teh tariks, dressed in their Ah Pek T-shirts, worn bermudas and Tat Sing slippers. There was also an ocassion when they cop said that I have to be hauled up to the balai when the reading surpasses '40', because 'bacaan ni panduan je'. What?! In that case, can I also say that if the reading is '100', I can go scot-free since it is just an indication? Anyway, Lady Luck was next to me that night, and the reading was only '20'.

For those not in the know, please ensure that the reading on the breathanalyser reads '0' before you blow in it. Apparently the cops do NOT clear the breathanalyser's contents from the previous person tested but instead they let it remain in the device. It takes about 2 minutes for the device to be fully cleared of this. So if you blow into the tube before this clears fully, you could be getting cummulative results. So you have been warned.

It is clear that the IPCMC is required badly to curb the police from abusing its power. So Pak Lah, where the fark is it? Hopefully it wouldn't turn out to be another toothless tiger at the end of it all.

Why not ask AAB to resign since no one listens to him? And it is not the first time.

I suggest we hv Aisehman the next PM in 2008 and Jeff the DPM. howaboutdat?

I suggest Apollo Market talk no nonsense. !

I have read most of the views on the proposed IPCMC
both from the main stream media and other public
domains. My view is that there is a tremendous public
interest and concern on the subject arising out of
their genuine concerns on the effectiveness of any
remedial measures to improve the quality of the police
force in this country. I have great respect for the
Royal Commission that has put up such a comprehensive
recommendations to the government. Indeed it deserves
to be studied and thoroughly deliberated by all.

My frank views are as follows:-

1) Corruption in this country has become a very wide-
spread phenomena and this is not restricted to the
Police Force alone. It is all over the place from
office boys right up to members of the cabinet
themselves. I have no doubt that Pak Lah is well aware
of this. The problem is that the ACA (anti
corruption agency) is hardly effective. This is
largely because it reports to the Prime Minister and
not to an independent party that is above politics
such as the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong himself.

2) To set up a special commission to police the police
force is certainly a very lop-sided decision. We need
to examine the issue from a much higher and wider perspective. I
would like therefore to propose that the existing ACA
be revamp and made answerable directly to the Agong
who will be advised by a panel of senior legal
personalities and other professionals not involved
with any political parties.

3)The new ACA should be given a wider scope of
responsibilities which should include all the intended
responsibilities that are to be assigned to the
proposed IPCMC.This should also include independently
assessing and monitoring the conduct of all government
servants , and politicians holding positions in the
government. Ensuring that good governance and the
principle of transparency are abided to by all.The agency should have enough power and cloud to bark and bite to make it effective.

4) A responsible whistle blowing culture be developed
among members of the public. It must be imbued in them
that whistle blowing is part and parcel of the
responsibilities of a good citizen. It is also to be
instilled as a noble way of expressing their civic
consciousness and love for the nation.

5) There must be adequate provisions in the law of the
land on the protection of whistle blowers and a scheme
of how they would be given recognition and where
appropriate rewarded.

In the light of the above perspective it should become
apparent that the UMNO back benches ,who had been
turned around by the police, were moved by their
misguided pride and unfounded sentiments rather than
in-dept understanding of the issue and related
subject.As regards the Police I could well appreciate
the predicament and the difficult position they are in,in view of the
lop-sidedness of the proposal.

As regards the opposition leader and his followers
they would just bark whenever there is opportunity to
do so .They fail to realise that this is the best time
to propose to the government to tie-up all the loose ends in its efforts to eradicate corruption and improving the integrity of government servants hence strengthining good covenance public sector.

As for Pak Lah his cool mindedness and patience pays
if he could find a solution on the line suggested
above.

Let's start with the establishment of the IPCMC first, ok? Let's not even talk about revamping the ACA at the moment when we can't even get past the recommendations of the Commission. Otherwise, you would have have the other 1,001 other Govt agencies protesting against this.

What lop-sidedness are you talking about? We need to curb the blatant abuse of police power. Let's start somewhere and it is quite obvious that what the police force is currently doing, needs to be re-examined in-depth.

Eradication of corruption? Wishful thinking, at best. First and foremost, I'd like to lead a life whereby I need not fear being potentially harassed and humiliated by the local police force when I'm innocent.

Pak Lah? Cool minded and patient? I think you must mistaken it for indecisiveness and lack of guts to pursue what is best for the nation.

The year must have been annus horribilis for the PDRM. With increasing crime rates, more brutalities and rise of whitecollar crimes, they've achieved 20-40% success, despite resource and manpower limitations. Also few will deny it's not easy to nab a suspect and see him walk loose after the detention period has expired and interrogation methods have to be adjusted according to public opinion, only to have the suspect turn up again elsewhere.

Those are redeeming thoughts and the PDRM should be supported again, especially after Bakri's speech to his men and women.

However, the new case of strip-questioning of a 60-year-old woman, with possible theft in the premises, creates fresh anxieties about whether the 'some' who blacken the name of the PDRM are just a few or more than meets the eyes of the rakyat whom they've vowed to serve.

Despite all of one's despair at what has happened to the PDRM, one would like to back them again, these who as Haniff had said 'came from society too', and one can understand the impact on their morale if the IPCMC is implemented, but..what else can the rakyat avoid asking for?

If they're being put on the square, they can argue so too should the others in the non-PDRM corps, eg. the 2,000 civil service officers who didn't declare their assets now under investigation.

It's a catch-22 situation that can only be solved by a holistic approach to raise the level of integrity and performance of the entire civil service, not just the PDRM.

Out of all these difficulties, the old gratitude of the rakyat should resurface, but the new performance order of the re-transformed PDRM should also emerge and sometime in the near future, both may meet and things will get better.

Does this mean 'cut them some slack'? Only events can tell.

By the way, one is happy that Malaysia is a caring society, and may even provide education for the children of Indonesian workers in the country. But pray tell, if the country had recruited only the workers, where did their children come from?

Not a dull moment in bodekland.

My dear Neil you are not nailing the right nail.

In a democratic country no one should be singled out as much as no one should be given protection against the enforcement of the rule of law. Every one should be made equal and be treated likewise before the law. It must be so and be seen as such. They must be subject to the same rule of the game. If not it would be difficult to rule this country.

For your information I hardly like the police in this country .However in the name of fair play I still subscribe to the view that there should only be one single authority that is given the task to do the oversight and bring all of us to court if we are corrupt or dishonest.

Such authority should be above politics and adequately protected from the influence of any outside parties.

Suria Kenchana, if you would read back the archives, i was amongst the first to propose that the ACA be floated to answer direct to parliament; that's not so different from your proposal that it reports to HM.

Also, my post above didn't negate your proposal at all, in any place. I was mostly dwelling (or trying to) on matters from the PDRM's point-of-view.

Anyway, given my diminishing eyesight, i would consider it a blessing if i don't hammer my own thumb these days.

Poweroot 4-in-1 teh-tarik is yummy.

Jeff Ooi:
the NST article was written under 'Comment' but without name of author.

IPCMC must be realised. It will show that we are serious about the reformasi of the PDRM. The 61 year old lady case is not an isolated case. How many of us have encountered toll booths manned the men in blue in every process of getting bail for relatives or friends? Why do we always think of the nearest YB when we want to deal with them? Saturday nights must be the busiest for YBs all over the country.

I think we should continue to deliberate with good judgment and wisdom regardless of the recent incident committed by another police personnel.I appreciate that the outrages and wanton act of yet another bad sample from this species of our society up sat everyone of us very much.It is under such stress and anxiety the the wise would be differentiated from the foolish.

The police ,unlike the army are very much part and partial of our civilian society AND MORE.More because they are suppose to enforce the rule of law and investigate any criminal violations and help bring such cases before the court.They are aware of most of these violations whether by the people at large or the politicians.They are much aware of how the enforcement of the law had been unevenly enforced by vested political interest for the last 20 years.Indeed, the behavior and integrity of the Police reflects the deterioration in our social and ethical values.The police is just a small segment of our challenged society.

To accept a prescription that focused only on them in our effort to overcome all the crimes and social evils in our country is to just conceal the symptoms which would certainly not cure the chronic disease that had spread all over the place.A partial solution ,and in this instance , a discriminatory one ,is going to create more problem than solving any of them.Indeed, this may well be a red herring that would detrack our focus from solving the whole problem.

I would therefore maintain that we should not accept anything less than a total solution in overcoming these social and ethical ailments in our society.I sincerely believe what I had propose earlier is worth examining further.The ACA must be overhauled and be given a new mandate and that they should only be made responsible to the DYMMY Dipertuan Agong and the most higher up that is observing all of us all the time.