Why Do We Have Police Stations? For Show?
Read this report in e.sinchew-i.com and come to your own conclusions about the state of our police stations and the personnel manning them.
****
Aramugam is dead. Who was Aramugam? He was no ordinary man. He was in fact, abnormal. Only 3 feet in height, Aramugam was a crippled midget who had lost the use of both arms. Ever since he was a child, Aramugam used to stand on the sidewalk below a dental surgery in Kulai, selling lottery tickets for a living. Even though an Indian, Aramugam could speak Mandarin, and had quite a number of Chinese friends.
His death caused a public outcry in Kulai; his Chinese friends hold the police responsible for Aramugam's murder. The night Aramugam was kidnapped by gangsters, an eyewitness had called the police. However, even after waiting for an hour, no help came. The next day, Aramugam's neighbours contacted the police after they discovered that his home had been broken into and he was missing. The anxious neighbourhood watch then stopped a police patrol car and brought the cops to Aramugam's home, requesting that the police conduct an investigation. On the third day, the Kulai village chief personally brought two police officers to Aramugam's home to survey the scene, and again, the police failed to take action.
Finally, someone brought the eyewitness to lodge a report at the police station. They were told: because no one had lodged a report, the police had no record of the incident. And because there was no record, no investigation could be carried out. What is the meaning of all this? Aramugam's Chinese friends are simplistic villagers. They don't have any clear understanding of the complex legal procedures, but they do know how to differentiate between right and wrong. They cannot accept the negligent attitude of the police towards law enforcement, and have no idea how the police define the term "lodging a report."‧
When the eyewitnesses called the police during the kidnapping, wasn't that considered as lodging a report?‧ When Aramugam's neighbours called the police for help, and when the neighbourhood watch brought the police patrol to Aramugam's home, wasn't that considered as lodging a report? When the Kulai village chief led another two officers to Aramugam's home, wasn't that considered as lodging a report? If none of the above actions taken by Kulai's chief and residents could be considered as lodging a report, then please tell us, under what conditions can the police be convinced to take action?
If the police require someone to personally go to the police station to lodge a report before an investigation could be conducted, does it mean the fire department will also require the victims to visit the fire station and ask for help before dispatching firemen to put out the fire? If the police refuse to take action regarding incidents reported over the phone, then what are the police hotlines for? If the police had taken immediate action when they received the witness' call, would Aramugam have died? Who is to blame for his death?
When faced by these questions put forth by the Kulai residents, the reporter could make no reply. Even the village chief, who is also the president of Kulai Neighbourhood Watch Committee, had no answers. He could only say, "Everyone understands the way the police do things." What a depressing thing to say.
Is this how we Malaysians view our police? Aramugam is dead. His death has revealed how terrible bureaucratic red tape can be, as well as showing us that there is a serious problem with the nation's police force. We must reform the police force. This sad state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue!The police have given nine major reasons for refusing to allow the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC). However, Aramugam's death has shown us just how necessary the IPCMC is. It has nothing to do with "causing a state of anarchy which would undermine the ruling coalition's power," or "undermining the IGP's power." It certainly wouldn't "weaken the police, directly or indirectly, causing police officers to lose confidence or be afraid of carrying out their duties." In fact, the opposite is true. Rejecting the establishment of the IPCMC will "endanger national security and public order," "victimise the people," and cause "crime and criminals to run rampant!"
By Lim Mun Fah, Sin Chew Daily
****
Aramugam is dead. Who was Aramugam? He was no ordinary man. He was in fact, abnormal. Only 3 feet in height, Aramugam was a crippled midget who had lost the use of both arms. Ever since he was a child, Aramugam used to stand on the sidewalk below a dental surgery in Kulai, selling lottery tickets for a living. Even though an Indian, Aramugam could speak Mandarin, and had quite a number of Chinese friends.
His death caused a public outcry in Kulai; his Chinese friends hold the police responsible for Aramugam's murder. The night Aramugam was kidnapped by gangsters, an eyewitness had called the police. However, even after waiting for an hour, no help came. The next day, Aramugam's neighbours contacted the police after they discovered that his home had been broken into and he was missing. The anxious neighbourhood watch then stopped a police patrol car and brought the cops to Aramugam's home, requesting that the police conduct an investigation. On the third day, the Kulai village chief personally brought two police officers to Aramugam's home to survey the scene, and again, the police failed to take action.
Finally, someone brought the eyewitness to lodge a report at the police station. They were told: because no one had lodged a report, the police had no record of the incident. And because there was no record, no investigation could be carried out. What is the meaning of all this? Aramugam's Chinese friends are simplistic villagers. They don't have any clear understanding of the complex legal procedures, but they do know how to differentiate between right and wrong. They cannot accept the negligent attitude of the police towards law enforcement, and have no idea how the police define the term "lodging a report."‧
When the eyewitnesses called the police during the kidnapping, wasn't that considered as lodging a report?‧ When Aramugam's neighbours called the police for help, and when the neighbourhood watch brought the police patrol to Aramugam's home, wasn't that considered as lodging a report? When the Kulai village chief led another two officers to Aramugam's home, wasn't that considered as lodging a report? If none of the above actions taken by Kulai's chief and residents could be considered as lodging a report, then please tell us, under what conditions can the police be convinced to take action?
If the police require someone to personally go to the police station to lodge a report before an investigation could be conducted, does it mean the fire department will also require the victims to visit the fire station and ask for help before dispatching firemen to put out the fire? If the police refuse to take action regarding incidents reported over the phone, then what are the police hotlines for? If the police had taken immediate action when they received the witness' call, would Aramugam have died? Who is to blame for his death?
When faced by these questions put forth by the Kulai residents, the reporter could make no reply. Even the village chief, who is also the president of Kulai Neighbourhood Watch Committee, had no answers. He could only say, "Everyone understands the way the police do things." What a depressing thing to say.
Is this how we Malaysians view our police? Aramugam is dead. His death has revealed how terrible bureaucratic red tape can be, as well as showing us that there is a serious problem with the nation's police force. We must reform the police force. This sad state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue!The police have given nine major reasons for refusing to allow the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC). However, Aramugam's death has shown us just how necessary the IPCMC is. It has nothing to do with "causing a state of anarchy which would undermine the ruling coalition's power," or "undermining the IGP's power." It certainly wouldn't "weaken the police, directly or indirectly, causing police officers to lose confidence or be afraid of carrying out their duties." In fact, the opposite is true. Rejecting the establishment of the IPCMC will "endanger national security and public order," "victimise the people," and cause "crime and criminals to run rampant!"
By Lim Mun Fah, Sin Chew Daily
posted by The Malaysian. at 6/12/2006 02:23:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home