Where's the logic of the Home Minister that the RCI into PDRM, is making an unconstitutional proposal of setting up an IPCMC?
Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi continues to surprise Malaysians with his reckless claims and perverse logic that establishing the IPCMC will result in overlapping jurisdictions and laws among the county's enforcement agencies, as well as being unconstitutional and contrary to the concept of justice. Where is the logic of the Home Minister that the Royal Commission Of Inquiry into PDRM, is making an unconstitutional proposal of setting up an IPCMC, when its chairman Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin Bin Haji Abdullah was the 9th Chief Justice of Malaysia?
This is the first time since the recommendations were first made in 2005 that the IPCMC has been declared unconstitutional by the BN Federal government as a flimsy excuse for rejecting its establishment. Zahid’s wild claim is a slur on the reputation of the highest judge in Malaysia and questions his basic legal competency in making an unconstitutional proposal.
Zahid is not a lawyer and he should ask the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail to forward legal arguments how setting up the IPCMC is unconstitutional. Should Zahid fail to prove his claims, he should apologise to Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin for putting Tun Dzaiddin’s legal expertise into disrepute.
Such wild claims by the Home Minister to justify the unjustifiable and defend the indefensible in the face of overwhelming factual evidence to the contrary, has been the governing approach adopted by the BN Federal government. When Suhakam chairperson Hasmy Agam opposed the reinstatement of the Emergency Ordinance (EO), an upset police officer Senior Assistant Commissioner Mohad Nazir openly repudiated Hasmy by saying that "prevention is better than cure".
Hasmy had correctly pointed out the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Scotland Yard, Interpol, the Los Angeles Police Department and the Victoria Police as notable examples of good policing without an EO. In response, Mohad retorted that even the United States had the Patriot Act and Guantanamo Bay for the purpose of homeland security. Mohad is wrong because such laws in the United States are intended to combat terrorism and not crime.
Such ignorance by Mohad cannot be faulted as the Home Minister is also equally guilty, giving full credence to the adage that “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”. However Ahmad Zahid cannot be so easily forgiven for continuing to sully the reputation of his office by failing to uphold the laws but instead choose to conveniently label any proposal that the BN government wishes to reject as “unconstitutional”.