In that special edition bulletin (which readers will discover was contentious only because various proxies were either trying to disavow or claim ownership), one of the points against the setting up of the IPCMC was this:

“Let the politicians be aware that they will eventually lose powers, control, and influence over a neutral, professional and people-centred police (as suggested by the Royal Police Commission).”

Of course, this is a strange point to make if one is really interested in the proposition that the state security apparatus should be neutral. If neutrality was indeed the goal, independent commissions not beholden to political interests would be desired as opposed to political operatives whose motives would always be questioned.

Police cartels

However, it is an interesting point, because the top brass of the police then and now seem to think political interference is beneficial to public order. Hence, for law enforcement, political interference is a net plus and this makes their job easier when everyone is scratching each other’s back, while some attempt to pick a pocket or two.

How does it make their job easier? All you have to do is look at the Copgate affair, where two IGPs - Musa Hassan and Abdul Hamid Bador - had a battle royale.

Here is a snippet that gives us an inkling of the nexus between the security services and organised crime - “Tengku Goh is reportedly an underworld boss who enjoyed Musa’s backing when Musa was Johor police chief.

“Musa was said to have eliminated all loan sharks, money-laundering syndicates, gaming and drug syndicates and crime lords in Johor, but allowed Tengku Goh to continue operating - until the Bukit Aman CCID found out about Goh’s activities.”

Hamid thought there was a cartel within the force out to get him and he thought he could control it. He could not.

Remember what Hamid said about politicians and about keeping the Special Branch free of political interference?

“The most notorious ones are the politicians. They have no fixed principle. One day they will jump here and another day, when they see an opportunity, they will turn the other way,” he said in the interview. “When you politicise race and religion, it can bring down the country.”

Hamid did many things wrong but at least he had the notion to attempt to bell the cat. He knew of the culture of corruption in the police. As reported in the press - Hamid said some officers still indulged in corruption, despite various warnings and advice.

The enabling politicians

While social activists, former law enforcement officers and various pressure groups are clamouring for reform, the people most often standing in their way are not the police - who do want reform for various reasons - but political operatives who stand to benefit from alliances with power groups within the police force.

What did a Special Branch report conclude on the border security apparatus in the Wang Kelian, mass graves?

“The enemy we have to fight is one that operates as an institution. We are dealing with institutionalised corruption so deeply entrenched that expecting internal discipline is like asking the chief crook to rat out on his runners,” a Special Branch officer had said.

The political apparatus in this country does not want any government agency to be accountable to Parliament. It does not want any public oversight of any government agency. And as long as these agencies are not answerable to elected reps with powers to sanction aberrant behaviour, the outrage will continue without a solution.

A charlatan endeavours to make the public sceptical of government agencies to amass power and when in power, forces the public to place their faith in corrupted agencies to remain in power.

This is the most important lesson we can learn.