Put an end to the misuse of police reports

 

More than 10 years ago, I lost the media accreditation pass issued by the Information Department which was under the then Communications Ministry.

I was told that I have to furnish a copy of a police report on the lost card without which I would not be issued a replacement. I felt this process was not only absurd but outdated. I also felt that our police force should not be bordered with such administrative tasks when there was so much crime on our streets.

Even the National Registration Department had done away with the requirement for a police report for the replacement of a lost identity card. Ditto with documents with the Road Transport Department and several other government agencies, all of whom have stored information on their database.

To date, I have never sought nor carried a media pass and I have managed to get around without any problems. I hope the system has changed.

I did not want to join the legion of people who make a report at a drop of a hat and you must give a back-handed compliment to Rani Kulop, who has the dubious honour of having filed over 1,000 reports.

The head of the right wing Malay group Martabat Jalinan Muhibbah Malaysia (MJMM) told Sinar Harian that lodging police reports had become almost a “national duty” for him as he was called upon to do so to “save the country” from seditious and evil elements.

We can only laugh at the political wannabes who pose with a piece of paper outside police stations for their five minutes of fame. We can only guess the number of man-hours lost in receiving and processing such frivolous and sometime vexatious reports.

But what is of concern to the public is when the courts are told that the victim has withdrawn his or her report. Often the withdrawals of reports sometimes involve serious criminal offences, such as rape, because the victim’s family and that of the perpetrator have come to some private arrangements.

Does such a move absolve the wrongdoer of the crime or do the police accept that no such crime had been committed? How much time, effort and money had the police spent on bringing the case before the court?

Nicky Liow Soon Hee

The case of the now-infamous fugitive businessperson, Nicky Liow Soon Hee, is a case in point. In 2018, he was granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal on two of the four charges he faced related to an assault on three Rela officers the previous year.

Magistrate Mohamad Firdaus Sadina Ali made the decision after deputy public prosecutor Norhashimah Hashim informed the court that one of the three victims in the case had withdrawn his police report against Liow,

Norhashimah said the victim, Melvin Cheong Mun Khai, 22, withdrew his report after accepting Liow’s apology but the charges related to two others would stay.

At a subsequent hearing, before another magistrate, Liow was discharged and acquitted on the remaining charges after he paid a RM2,000 compound to each victim.

Magistrate Mohamad Firdaus made the order for acquittal after being informed by lawyer Rajpal Singh, who represented the accused, that the victims had agreed to settle the case through compound payment under Section 260 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Magistrate Mohamad Firdaus then directly asked the victims – Lee Weng Poh, 29, and Leong Jun Jie, 23, – if they were forced to accept the compound payment.

So, what happens to the hard work of the police?

The men replied through an interpreter that they were not forced to accept. Liow then stood up in the dock and handed over the money in cash to the victims and shook hands with them.

So, what happened to the hard work of the police who would have spent dozens of man hours recording statements, gathering evidence and documents to assist the prosecution?

Last week, another case made the headlines. A steamboat shop owner withdrew his police report against a “Datuk” businessman for committing mischief at his restaurant after the man admitted to assaulting a couple who had also been dining there.

Suraj Singh, representing businessman Tan Wai Khan, told magistrate Nurshahira Abdul Salim that the defence had received information about the withdrawal by shop owner Kwan Pei Chong.

I am not in the least suggesting guilt or innocence, but without wanting to infer of any sinister or settlement arrangements, the question is: Should the police allow reports filed to be treated lightly and be withdrawn at one’s whim and fancy?

Irrespective of the withdrawal in this case, there is irrefutable evidence - in a video of the assault which had gone viral - and the police have recorded statements from witnesses.

Are the police and police reports being used for unintended purposes and should members of the public be allowed to withdraw reports at will? To put it bluntly, the systems in the police force are being misused and enforcing law and order becomes a mockery.

Shouldn’t there be a deterrent to prevent the misuse of the system? The perpetrator and the victims shake hands for the cameras with a win-win arrangement and leave the police to carry the cost of their work in a law-and-order situation.

Is this acceptable? - Mkini

---

R NADESWARAN, like many other right-minded citizens, is wondering how far the word “kau tim” (settle) can be applied and stretched in our system. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.