Police’s duty is to maintain law and order

Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Khalid Abdul Bakar has been called unprofessional and irresponsible after making the "sandwich" remarks when dealing with a child custody case involving different decisions made by the shariah and civil courts.

As the law enforcement unit, the police cannot absolve themselves with ridiculous reasons.

The IGP opined that not enforcing the decisions of the two courts and placing the children in the Welfare Department would be the best solution to ensure fairness to those involved.

In fact, it is a dereliction of duty and is sufficient to constitute a contempt of court.

Under the principle of separation of powers, the IGP's decision is unwise. The police cannot act beyond their authority, have its own interpretation on judicial rulings, and even ignore court orders.

The police should perform their duty of maintaining law and order and take actions to arrest the Muslim convert father who refuses to return the children.

In the custody cases in Negri Sembilan and Perak, the Muslim convert fathers have not only ignored courts' decisions of awarding custody to their children's mothers, but even committed false imprisonment.

Police have sufficient reasons to take action against the fathers and return the children to their mothers.

However, it is disappointing as so far, the police have taken no action.

The courts' order are not directed only at the two fathers, but also granted the police an absolute power to enforce law.

The IGP, however, has his own view and has confused his role as a law enforcement officer. He has gone beyond his own duty and is now playing the roles of a judge and a jury. It seems fair but there is suspicion of partiality.

If the police think that the court orders are not clear, the police's responsibility is to seek further clarification and instruction from the courts, instead of ignoring the orders and making their own judgments.

The Muslim convert fathers disregard the laws while the police refuse to implement court orders. These have severely tarnished the judiciary.

The courts' rulings are based on the long-term interests of the children and belief that the mothers are more suitable to raise them.

In one of the cases, the father has been indifferent to his children and how could such a father play the role of a guardian and take proper care of the children? Could the IGP consider himself more qualified than the judges to judge who is more suitable to have custody of the children?

Custody cases involving convert families in recent years are a problem caused by double judicial systems.

The IGP faces a dilemma in the face of different decisions from two courts, which is also a problem to many others, particularly those involving parents and children.

However, it is not the responsibility of the police to solve the problem, but the duty of the judiciary and legislature.

The government should show its political determination to solve various problems brought by the double judicial systems.

Prior to this, former minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz had proposed that disputes in marriages under the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act should be dealt with in the civil courts.

However, the controversy continues and some shariah lawyers and religious departments do not agree with it. In addition, the cabinet had also resolved to withdraw a shariah law which allows one parent to give consent for the religious conversion of a child, but the resolution has not been executed.

In fact, the answer can be found if we get back to the Federal Constitution.

If we interpret it with the spirit of the rule of law and view it based on the facts of the cases without adding political, religious and racial factors, while the judiciary, legislature and executive are playing their respective roles well, the dispute might not go on infinitely. – www.mysinchew.com