Having Past Criminal Records Or Clean It S Never Fine For Cops To Dispense Summary Executions

---

 
Letter to editor
JUDGE, jury and executioner.
That sort of description should be reserved for some fictional characters in a streaming series who bring their own brand of brim fire and hell onto unsuspecting criminals.
It should not in any circumstances whatsoever be used to describe real-life law enforcement officers entrusted with the safe being of Malaysian citizens.
I refer to the case of three young Indian men (aged between 21 and 29) shot dead by the police in Durian Tunggal, Alor Gajah, Melaka on Nov 24.


Like many Malaysians, I am horrified to find out that there exists an audio recording purportedly of the victims (with one of them pleading for his life for he has a child to care) just prior to being shot.
This seems to go against the police version of events that they were killed in a violent confrontation.
However, what is even more horrific is that there are Malaysians who seem to think that summary executions (as alleged by the victims’ families) are acceptable.
I refer to the many social media posts that are ill-conceived and worse, seemingly unclear of the concept of law and human rights.
For instance, the many comments appended to Sepang Viral’s Facebook post seem to suggest that the coppers were right in doing away with this alleged societal menace.

Misconception
First and foremost, there seems to be a presumption of guilt that the three men did indeed carry out a string of armed robberies as claimed by the coppers.
One commenter suggested that the victims of said robberies can also sue the families for compensation. He sarcastically noted that if they could afford to hire lawyers, surely, they can afford to pay off any legal suits.

Blind belief that the police can do no wrong also seem to imply that enough people subscribe to the notion that crime must be defeated by whatever means necessary as exemplified by this deluded comment.

Another example of people unclear of the concept, one commenter sought to place the onus on the victims’ spouses by claiming that they should have known what their better halves were up to rather than playing victim.
Hence, they should have reported their crimes to the police and insinuating that such action may have prevented the shooting incident.

One commenter pointedly asked if the community felt no shame in exposing their identities as kin of suspected robbers. Another suggested forfeiting the families’ properties as ill-gotten gains. Again, there is a presumption of guilt.

Cops are vindicated
It is quite incredible and shocking that NONE of the comments in this post seem to think that the PDRM (Royal Malaysia Police) has done anything wrong.
To kill suspects that are already under arrest and apparently co-operating is perfectly acceptable to this twisted and ill-informed demographic. One even expressed disbelief that the criminals were demanding justice.

Utterly incredible that one commenter argued that the police were well within their rights to respond violently.

Wonder if these commenters also hold the same view of the police officer who allegedly ran over a teenage motorcyclist in a road rage incident.
Wasn’t the victim also a law breaker who flouted road rules? Was the cop justified in running over the victim and then reversing to crush his body (allegedly)?

If the answer is “yes”, great. They are at least consistent with their world view. If the answer is “no”, why then the difference?
As lawyer Latheefa Koya pointedly asked, since when has the country descend into this state where the police wielded such power to deliver summary executions.
“There are laws and processes that must be followed before a person is deemed guilty of an offence,” justified the former chief commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
“From whose mouth then is a perceived criminal being labelled as a criminal … and since when has the police taken law into their own hands to execute criminals (based on their own judgment or interpretation of law)?”















She is quite right by implying this is NOT keeping the law but creating a state of lawlessness.
Thinking aloud from another perspective, all the three men were shot in their foreheads when the police – even upon acting on self-defence – could have injured them on their legs or arms if there was indeed no intention to eliminate them for good. 
Law Abiding Citizen
Ampang, Kuala Lumpur
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of  MMKtT.
- Focus Malaysia.

---