Ombudsman instead of IPoliceCM Commission or none?
DAP National Deputy Chairman and MP for Kepong Dr Tan Seng Giaw urges the Prime Minister to consider carefully the issue of Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) especially in the context of the Royal Commission for the Enhancement of the Operations and Management of the Police.
The Royal Commission has given 125 recommendations including IPCMC. These recommendations must be implementated as much as practicable. While many policemen are good, sincere and dedicated, there have been black sheep. How do we get rid of them?
The police and others have objected strongly against the setting up of IPCMC. True, bad things such as corruption happen not just to the police, but also to other government departments such as Customs and Immigration. Let the police tell us how do we make the force clean, efficient and trustworthy?
In his column in the Sunday Star on 16 April, 2006, A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet, Tun Hanif Omar, a member of the Royal Commission referred to 'the more recent chorus performance of some members of Parliament'. I can assure him that we insist on IPCMC.
How does the police look at Tun Hanif who recommends the establishment of IPCMC?
Does he want to modify his view to pacify the police?
On April 10, 2006, most media headlined the possibility of establishing Ombudsman instead of IPCMC, 'to investigate all allegations involving all quarters (government) including ministers, without limiting its scope only to the police.'
Tun Hanif has seized on the opportunity, saying "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" (Shakespeare in Romeo and Juliet). And, "Why should it matter whether the cat is white or black so long as it catches mice?" (Deng Xiaoping in Kuala Lumpur).
One year after the Royal Commission report, the Government dithers on the formation of IPCMC. Tun Hanif notes that, meanwhile, corruption marches on albeit in more cautious ways.
He went on to mention that England established Parliamentary Ombudsman in 1983, followed by Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) 20 years later because the Ombudsman had no teeth.
By accepting Ombudsman in lieu of IPCMC, does Tun Hanif mean that when the Malaysian version of Ombudsman shows no teeth, no sweet smell and no catching of mice, then the Government can form IPCMC? Since other countries such as UK have both, why can't the Government establish IPCMC and then Ombudsman?
As there are strong objections to IPCMC by the police, does it mean that the Government would set up neither IPCMC nor Ombudsman? What is the true meaning of the Royal Commission?