Bar Council president Steven Thiru has every right to question the IGP over matters of public interest and the IGP, as head of the police force should respond to those questions.
If the IGP cannot respond, he should say so and not throw in concepts such as asking his questioners to “keep their questions in court” or the doctrine of “separation of powers”.
Khalids response to Steven comes across as arrogant and immature.
He must remember that the actions of his men will always be subject to public criticism as the police deal with the public and they exercise powers of arrest and investigations given to them by Parliament. The use or abuse of these powers are certainly matters which are questionable.
Khalids reliance on the doctrine of separation of powers reflects a shallow understanding on his part of the concept. It has nothing to do with public criticisms of the police and the manner in which they conduct themselves, public criticism and the need for responses to them.
I call upon the IGP to therefore answer the president of the Bar Council.
Steven has asked him why his men had not arrested the protesters who held a rally to demand that a church in Petaling Jaya bring down a cross from its facade, but detained those who participated in the anti-GST rally on May 1.
I too demand that the IGP respond. As I said earlier, this is a matter of public interest and one which I will be most certainly be raising in the Dewan Rakyat in its next sitting.