The 28 million population is aghast with the defiance and violence perpetuated by the Bersih 3.0 mob towards the law enforcement agency i.e. the police.
The opposition (and not quite the Bersih 3.0 participants) are in the blame game towards police brutality. The politician and social media propagandist are working overtime in their ceramah circuit and cyber battlefield.
They have got the Bar Council, 'friendly' foreign observer and international media are lending their hands to prepare reports to demonise the police. National Union of Journalist (NUJ) are claiming members of the press are being harassed also.
This is the only excuse or weapon left for them. Otherwise, Anwar hope of being Prime Minister in the upcoming general election will be as good as nil. Barisan Nasional can be ambitious enough to win a two third majority, though it is still doubtful.
Was it police brutality or law enforcement?
As already discussed in previous posting here, The Police Act 1967 Article 27 empowers the police to regulate assemblies, meetings and processions. Article 27 B empowers them to use of force when ordered to disperse, they do not disperse.
The police power comes also under the Federal Constitution. No question over constitutional rights of the police to enforce the law and maintain public order.
The Anwar friendly "independent" foreign observer and Bar Council will likely raise Article 3 and Article 5 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights on the rights to "peaceful assembly"and no once should be subjected to "inhuman or degrading treatment".
Our posting on that subject here reveals that the police should also not be subjected to inhumane and degrading treatment in the course of carrying out their job. There are also eight other Articles to consider in favour of the police, namely Articles 6, 7 , 8, 12, 21, 28, 29 and 30.
Bias Bar Council
If they decide to close one eye on those articles, then Bar Council and Foreign Observers reports are bias. And predictably, page 3 ofBar Council report only quotes Article 3, 5 and 8. Let's not even bother to read the rest of the report.
The 30 page Bar Council is basically only 2 page long. The rest is their arrogant assumption to conclude everyone else are not able to read and understand the law except them, thus attempt to teach the law.
In item 1.3 they unanimously concluded that:
i) The rally was peaceful until around 3pm when the police opened fire with their water cannons and teargas;Notice how bias Bar Council are against the police.
(ii) The use of force by the police without any obvious provocation or cause, was far worse indiscriminate, disproportionate and excessive;
(iii) Police brutality was more widespread;
(iv) There was a concerted effort by the police to prevent and stop any recording of their actions and conduct;
(v) Police fired tear gas directly at the crowd and their firing pattern was to box in the participants rather than allowing them to disperse quickly;
(vi) After which there were pockets of retaliatory behaviour exhibited by the participants of the rally to the wrongful use of force by the police;
(vii) The police were observed taunting and mocking the crowd;
(viii) When items were thrown by some of the participants at the police, the police
stooped to return like for like; and
(ix) The police personnel were not wearing and displaying their police identification number on their uniform.
Not only their office front display such contempt of the police, none of their conclusion blame it on the participants.
The Foreign Observer was reported as taken from Anwar Ibrahim's blog as below:
‘Rally Peaceful Until Protesters Were Provoked’Police Action
An international fact-finding mission on the Malaysian election also notes that the mainstream media is biased.
KUALA LUMPUR: An international fact-finding mission on election found that the Bersih 3.0 rally yesterday was peaceful until the police acted provocatively.
Speaking at a press conference to present a preliminary report on the rally here today, independent Senator Nick Xenophon from Australia said: “It was peaceful [until the protesters were provoked].”
He also criticised the one-sided report on the rally in the mainstream broadcast media.
“The mainstream media is biased and unfair. We saw more of Prime Minister Najib (Tun Razak) in Sabah on television than the largest political expression in Malaysia,” said Xenophon.
[Comment: Readers should ask is Nick Xenophon is a fair and truly independent observer. Read Rocky Bru's here.
If he criticised the one-sided report in the media, he should be specific. The mainstream media are bias for the opposition. Only few are pro-Government.]
Another member of the seven-men team, India Times editor MJ Akbar, said the participants were actually in a festive mood.
“The crowd had ample time to turn violent if they had wanted to. [But] there was a festive mood until the provocation happened,” Akbar said.
[Comment: Was it police provocation or enforcement? Police is legally empowered and justified but not the protesters. Who provoke who first? Was he around the night before?]
Senator Hasil Bizenjo of Pakistan was surprised that transport services to Kuala Lumpur were crippled yesterday.
“In other countries transport is provided for people to attend a rally. Here some people told me that they had to walk 20km to attend the rally,” Bizenjo said.
[Comment: That is the organiser's job. Does he expect the police to transport protesters who are attending an illegal assembly?]
The other members of the team are writer Nasir Tamara of Indonesia, Clinton Fernandes of University New South Wales, Dean Amado Valdez of the Philippines and Juliane Schmucker from Germany.
Recalling a conversation the group had with Umno secretary-general, Tengku Adnan Mansor, Fernandes said:
“He [Tengku Adnan] stressed the importance of ‘avoiding racial strife. He also said improvement on election is not needed because the people here are immature.”
Fernandes also quoted Tengku Adnan as saying: “One of the problems with Indonesia is that there is too much freedom.”
However, Akbar said that “democracy needs freedom from fear and freedom of assembly”.
“It is unfortunate that some voices believe that this nation wants to exercise harmony without democracy,” he said, adding that he believes Malaysia deserves democracy.
[Comment: Democrasy has the minority and majority to think off too. Rights and freedom to assembly is subjected to the rule of law. Democrasy should not be the excuse to promote lawlessness and chaos. By design, Bersih 3.0 is meant to be violence, incite police use of force, and chaotic! ]
The preliminary report also highlighted the mission’s concern over the integrity of the 240,000 election workers, and the lack of free and fair elections.
Bizenjo pointed out the weakness of Malaysia’s democratic institutions.
“The Election Commission looks so backward… It needs to improve. Even Pakistan has moved to electronic voting,” he said.
[Comment: Bizenjo should improve the practise of democrasy in his country, Pakistan first before meddling in Malaysia which have uninterrupted general elections for the past 60 years.
We do not have Prime Ministers murdered in the streets like in Pakistan.]
The members also declared their independence even though they were invited by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim to witness the rally.
“We don’t care who wins. I am not a Malaysian,” Fernandes said.
[Comment: Anwar and the obserrvers are most improper to make claim of independence. It has to come from other credible parties. Do they have any?]
Obviously the two reports withheld important pieces of information.
Bar Council report acknowledged the unruly behaviour of the participants. They intentionally hid that part in the Appendices in page 26 of the 30 page report.
The Mole had expanded on this fact that the Bersih participant provoked the police to carry out their duty here.
This is what happened. The police had acted only after protesters had violently and in rage broke the first two line of barricades.
The first barricade were the police human barricade.
Protesters ran after the police after the first barricade was broken
The second barricade was the steel fences.
The last barricade left was the barbed wire fence that Anwar and Azmin irresponsibly provoked the crowd to break. Thus it was the protesters that provoked the police to defend by spraying water and tear gas to the crowd and not otherwise.
This provocation had build-up from the night before, around midnight. The police were being jeered, patrol cars were thrown bottles and objects, and bus ferrying riot police were abused.
The police were patient from the night till afternoon. If it had been the army, they would have shot into the crowd for repeatedly ignoring warnings and disperse orders. Mind you, the so-called 'brutal' police have a court order and empowered under the Police Act 1967 and Federal Constitution to act to disperse the unruly and defying crowd.
After being warned to disperse and subjected to water spray and tear gas, the mobs did not disperse but turned violence. The police has a duty to control and bring back public order. The violence must not be allowed to continue.
Some of these protesters were armed with sticks and bamboos. There was a case of a police pistol being taken by mobsters swarming them.
The next course of action was to not allow the mob to regroup at Sogo, Jalan Tun Perak, Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman, among other places. The police had to 'attack' by moving forward with the backing of water cannon and tear gas.
They arrested the hardcore and ringleaders including "Chegu" Bard, Tian Chua, etc. Hishamuddin Rais was too coward, as usual, to face the police despite orchestrating it from afar.
Till 6:30 pm, the mobs still resisted.
The police went on another mode to not allow any chance of regrouping by the mob. The went for the Genghiz Khan tactic to "scare off" several hard-core stubborn ones and released them. They then spread the news that police is on rampage albeit tactically selective.
If it had been other foreign countries, including the so-called democratically advanced one, the treatment would have been more severe. Read RBF here.
If the police were brutal, what are casualties for the Bersih side as compared to the reported police casualties?
Police on motorcycle were thrown large stones and beat up in numbers.
Patrol car was thrown objects and window smashed while moving causing the car to lose control. Then mobs smashed the car badly and overturned it.
Before that a roadside cone was poked towards the driver, Constable Mohd Kamil Parimin that gave him a broken nose. When he was taken out, he was subjected to further aggression that resulted in seven stitches on his head.
The Al Hijrah cameraman, Mohd Ariz's act of chivalry in his attempt to save the police man was rewarded by the mobs with nine stitches!
There are many more policemen badly injured in the line of duty:
Bil Pangkat//No/Nama Tempat Tugas Kecederaan Tempat Rawatan (i) KONST 165534MOHD FAIRUZ bin ZULKIFLI Anggota Trafik KL Cedera di badan akibat ditendang dan dipijak. HKL. (ii) KONST 171668NAZRIL AZIZ bin RAHMAN Anggota Bukit Aman Cedera di kepala akibat di baling batu.T.H.S. Lee Rpt. : 15081/12 HKL (iii) KPL 141269ABU BAKAR bin ABD RAHIM Anggota Petaling Jaya Cedera di mulut akibat dibaling objek keras. HUKM (iv) KONST 171506AZIZI bin MOHD NOH Anggota Trafik Bukit Aman Cedera di pipi kanan akibat dibaling objek keras. HKL. (v) KONST 179157MOHD NOR FIRDAUS bin Hj ABU BAKAR Anggota Caw. Khas PUTRAJAYA Retak tulang tangan kanan akibat dipukul dengan kayu.Dang Wangi Rpt:- 16848/12 HUKM (vi) KONST 175128MOHD KAMIL bin PARIMIN Anggota Bahagian Pengangkuta IPD TERENGGANU Cedera di kepala dan menerima 7 jahitan HKL (vii) L/KPL 152574MOHD NASIR bin ABU MANSOR Anggota Trafik KL Cedera di Badan dan tidak boleh duduk. HKL (viii) KONST179689 ZAMAN bin ALI Balai Polis Wangsa Maju Setapak Patah hidung HKL (ix) KONST 184197 SHUIB bin JAMALUDIN IPD KANGAR Tekanan Darah Tinggi HKL (x) KONST 171481 BASIRON A/L BAH PELON BALAI POLIS TUN RAZAK Cedera di buku lali akibat disepak. Dang Wangi Rpt :- 16857/12 HKL (xi) KPL 148646 MOHD ISKANDAR RIMIE BIN ALI PGA Pengkalan Hulu Pengsan HKL (xii) L/KPL 124962 TUAN RUZI BIN TUAN SENG IPD Machap, JOHOR Luka di bahagian bibir dan lebam seluruh badan HKL (xiii) L/KPL AMIRUL BIN NAWRI Balai Polis Port Dickson Sesak nafas HKL
List courtesy of Bigdog here.
What about the other side?
Thus far it is only an unfortunate passerby Su Kuang Hong hit at the car side by the
uncontrolled police car. He was admitted into HKL.
There is one death at around 11:00 am but that was due to hs personal health issues.
Perhaps they are many more. But are their injuries as bad as the that experienced by the police? Are those beaten up by the police broke any bones or bruised badly?
Trust the opposition to make a big news and turn it into a political propaganda if any of them were to be badly injured. Without any, it is as good as none.
As far as the claimed violence on the press, did they have their press tag on? Secondly, were they registered with the police to cover for the event? Thirdly, are the complaining press members from the pro-opposition Chinese press?
One press member, a camerawomen with Malaysiakini was together as part of the mob. Among others, she was on record screaming curses at the police and instructing the crowd to overturn the car. When there is no one stuck under the car as many spinned it to be, she yelled to the crowd to run out of fear of an explosion.
See the video below:
With a press behaving irresponsibly, don't expect Waldord Astoria butler service from the police. In the first place, why should they expect such pampering?
Pak Kadiaq Jasin here reminded them not to be cry babies:
1. Journalists, media photographers and cameramen must accept that their occupations carry a certain degree of risk. If they cannot accept that they should not be journalists, photographers and cameramen.Why? Why Why?
2. It is easy for a “peaceful” demonstration to turn violent and for media personnel to be mistaken for protestors in the melee, especially now when every other Dick, Tom and Harry carries a camera and, in many instances, claims or pretend to be members of the Press and some members of the Press were attired like protestors. (That is why, despite my ugly face being fairly widely known, I still carry the press accreditation card issued by the Information Department because some young police personnel and state officials may not recognize me.)
3. I hold the Bersih 3.0 organisers responsible for their flock breaking the agreed and publicised rules and breaching the barriers because they claimed that the demonstration would be a peaceful and apolitical one.
4. I hold the police force responsible if its members provoked or acted unreasonably against the Press and the protestors.
5. When the reporter asked about protests in the early days, I told her that in those days, protesters (including Anwar Ibrahim) seemed to know and accept what they were getting into. They were willing to be arrested or had their legs beaten with rotan by the riot police (FRU).
6. In fact, they took pride in being “caned” and considered the cane marks as battle wounds and proofs of commitment to what they stood for. I told her that too many people who took part in the protest were clueless and were made up of “ponens”, “pondans” and “darai” who cried foul at the slightest mishandling or injury.
7. Some were so ignorant that they thought the Bersih 3.0 demonstration was a festival, a fiesta, a carnival and a family outing such that they turned up with their young children.
8. I posed the question: Could the Bersih 3.0 organisers have misled the public by deliberately misrepresenting the event?
9. And despite the demonstration being billed as apolitical, opposition leaders, led by Anwar Ibrahim and his loyal aide Azmin Ali, turned up in full force.
If Bersih wish to exercise the right to peaceful assembly to express their demand for free election, what does it got to do with taking over Dataran Merdeka (or in the past Bersih 2.0 was Stadium Merdeka)?
They could have voiced it peacefully in any of the stadium assigned by Government without having to risk the safety of protesters and policemen but still get their point through.
It is fair on pollice to be wary of big protest involved opposition political parties. The reformasi era protest seldom resulted in cars being smashed as what happened at Bersih 3.0.
Although they claim to be non partisan, Bersih 3.0, just like Bersih and Bersih 2.0 were hijacked by politicians and non partisan protesters were used. That is the reason Anwar Ibrahim had Benji Lim thrown out of his press conference when he couldn't answer allegations that the opposition party hijacked Bersih 3.0.
Wait till the independent committee absolved police from brutality and violence against the press.
Be sure to expect the committee be accused as bias from these non-rationale opposition and opposition sympathisers. In fact, they will accuse them before the committee convene.
They are dead set to make a political propaganda of the police as committng brutality and smear this important pillar of the nation.
- Another Brick in the Wall