“The things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty , understanding and feeling, are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness , greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and selfinterest , are the traits of success . And while men admire the quality of the first, they love the produce of the second .” In these famous lines, John Steinbeck goes to the root of our present crisis in public morality.The problem of silence is at the heart of today’s political crisis. The rage of Malaysians is over an honest Prime Minister who seems to be presiding over one of the most corrupt governments in recent Malaysian history . In these dark days, people have desperately wanted to clutch on to an honest man. They DID NOTFIND one in selfless, ethica lNajib
The G13 witnessed a remarkable spectacle in which Malaysia’s democracy won but Malaysians lost. It does seem odd that democracy should win and people lose. But democracy’s great flaw is that it is easily captured by vested interests like Mahathir and Najib. Better in giving protection to whistleblowers and victims of corruption; the government’s is better in stipulating strong punishment for false complaints. The internet is the corruption fighter’s best friend in cutting harassment corruption.I believe this will only come about if those charged with enforcing the law do not see themselves as above the law. To perceive oneself below the law needs a cultural change, especially in the police. The best feature of this court judgment is that senior officers have been punished for crimes committed by their juniors. Cultural change begins at the top. This is why we need Anna Hazare to continue his fight against corruption.
R. Nadeswaran wants the people to look at the bigger picture instead of zooming in on the police
Early this year, the then Bar Council president, Lim Chee Wee, met senior officials of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission on the allegations including one of a senior judge colluding with the lawyer appearing for one of the parties in a civil suit.
For obvious reasons the names of the judge and lawyer have not been revealed but the actions of a fellow practitioner has got the whole legal fraternity hopping mad. There was talk that the duo were exchanging text messages when the court was in session.
But the latest figures make compelling reading. Were Malaysians and the authorities lulled into complacency by the glossy figures and finely-crafted media advertisements and paid-for editorials by the Performance Management and Delivery Unit of the Prime Minister’s Department (Pemandu)?
The GCB figures show that people’s perception of the government’s effectiveness in combating corruption has plunged significantly from 49% in 2011 to a shocking low of 31%. This is a slap in the face for those advocating and setting goals of 70% by 2015. Were we taken in by snake oil salesmen with their sweet words?
In the website and at most public presentations, those tasked with anti-corruption initiatives whip out so-called facts and figures about the arrest rate, prosecution rate and conviction rate to justify their claim that the battle against corruption is winnable.
Pemandu’s Anti-Corruption NKRA director Ravindran Devagunam among others says the Societies Act will be amended to stop internal leakage of funds within political parties. Leakage is one thing but where is the source of it all?
Most Malaysian are so outraged by the rising tide of criminals in politics The key problem is not that politicians are inherently crooked or criminal. Rather, the moribund justice system gives a huge incentive for criminals to contest and win elections. Judicial processes are so dismally slow that hardly any resourceful person gets convicted quickly, and many die of old age before exhausting appeals. So, nobody knows for sure who is a criminal and who is an innocent victim of false accusations.a group of foreign investors asked me, “If you had to reform just one thing in India, what would that be?” I replied without hesitation, “the police-judicial system.” This surprised the foreign investors, who expected me to flag some economic or political issue. No, I said, many of the worst flaws in politics and business flow from the flaws in the policejudicial system.
Someone must have brought my column to the notice of Najib,http://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com editorial elder
I replied saying that I wrote “such stuff” because I thought my readers – which was the only concern to which I owed loyalty – would like it. Back came , saying he’d never heard anything so pompous in his life and that Najib didn’t have anything more to say to me.
This ended our internet conversation. A minnow like me was of no further interest to Mahathir , who obviously had bigger fish to fry. A fish called Najib, maybe?
There was a report yesterday about police using the services of psychological science to understand the mind of politicians, corporate executives and other high-profile people and use that knowledge to prepare better and remain stress free during interrogations. On the face of it, this appears a noble aim and with police being faced with many high profile scams involving high-profile people, this move and marriage seems quite legitimate. However before we can make our minds as to whether this will really benefit investigations and lead to accurate and speedy justice, we need to pause and review the history of police-psychologist co-operation and how most of the times the psychologists/ psychiatrists have been an unwitting party to abuse of psychological science in the hands of police and law enforcement agencies.When nobody is convicted beyond appeals for decades, those with muscle and money quickly overwhelm those who are honourable and law-abiding. There is an old saying that if law-breakers are not in jail, they will be in the legislatures. That is the case today.
Police is not above the rule of law
UMNO in power misuses the police to harass opponents while protecting its own goons. Instead of justice and clean politics, we have rising criminalization and rising mud-slinging, without accountability for either the criminals or mud-slingers.This government undermined the rule of law
l of police Abdul Rahim Noor has said that if the government insists on replacing the Sedition Act 1948, it should still put old wine in a new bottle.
“If indeed the act is to be abolished, the government must create a (new) act that can cover the security issues and racial harmony.
Like the English saying: ‘Put the same wine in a different bottle’,” he was quoted as saying in an interview in Berita Harian today.
However, Rahim said he would prefer if the law was retained and if necessary, some amendments be made to it.
“I do not see the rationale of abolishing it. Perhaps there needs to be some amendments, but what are the reasons to get rid of it?” he was quoted as saying.
najib abdul razakHe warned that the government should not sacrifice the long-term interests of the country for short-term gains.
While acknowledging that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak had promised to replace the Sedition Act and failing to do so would be breaking a promise, Rahim said similar moves previously have not helped BN’s fortunes.
“What I see, many acts concerning security were abolished or got rid of by the government before this but it has not helped to improve BN’s victory (in the 13th general election),” he said.
He added that there were “political risks” if the ruling coalition went against its word and the opposition would capitalise on the matter, but said racial harmony and unity was more important.
In July last year, Najib had announced that a National Harmony Act would replace the colonial-era Sedition Act but has faced urgings against the move from his new cabinet members following May’s general election.
Despite renewed calls to set up the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar said there is no need for such a body.
Instead, he threw his support behind the Enforcement Agencies Integrity Commission (EAIC) to handle issues relating to the integrity and discipline of the police.
“I don’t see a need for that (IPCMC). This has been debated widely,” he said, adding that it was out of these debates that the EAIC was set up.
“We also have an internal committee to look into misconduct of police personnel.”
Khalid told reporters at the Federal police headquarters in Bukit Aman that they had dissolved an internal task force set up to investigate the deaths in custody of N. Dharmendran and R. James Ramesh.
“We have completed our investigations and have handed over our findings to the EAIC for further action,” he said, adding that police will cooperate with the commission on the next course of action.
Lastly, I’m not a nay sayer. I do believe that there is immense scope for a mutually beneficial exchange of information between law enforcement and psychology; for example police and lawyers and judges need to be made aware of Loftus’s research on false memory y and eye-witness testimony and how confidence in a memory may be no guarantee of its accuracy/ reality.
Similarly, police and emergency response teams need to be aware of bystander effects and how to minimise that effect or ensure that help is provided speedily in such situations. Or they need to know about ‘broken window’ theory and how being strict about small and petty crimes can lead to reduction in big crimes too. They need to understand how the psychology of individuals gets changed when they feel they are a part of a crowd and how that can be channelized. They need to learn how to behave with rape victims or their families and friends.
