By Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjong, Lim Kit Siang, in Penang on Sunday, 1st October 1995:
When and who gave the Inspector-General of Police the powers to dabble in foreign policy?
Firstly, I want to congratulate the Sabah Police for a very professional and incident-free handling of the Timorese doomsday cult movement in Beluran, Sabah,. involving 96 men, 40 women and 55 children.
Malaysians are proud of the Police handling of the Timorese cult movement as compared to the bloody operations against cult movement conducted in the United States, for instance.
DAP will always give credit where credit is due and we are not stingy with our praises, whether the Police or any other enforcement branches of the government, just as we will not spare anyone, regardless of rank or position, if criticism is justi¬fied.
There is no doubt that the public is dismayed by the killing of two persons and wounding of nine others in the 10-hour rampage in Perak when Cpl. Baharom Ahmad ran amok three days ago.
The mother of the seven-year-old victim of this amok rampage, Leong Sin Nam, is going through “mental hell” at the death of her son.
The police must take urgent action to explain how it proposes to compensate the two dead and the nine wounded for one of its police personnel running amok.
The Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Rahirn Noor yesterday continued with his series of erroneous statements against me.
He described as “baseless” my allegations of police bias when conducting investigations involving government leaders and police officers when compared to opposition leaders or critics of the government.
He said “the system provides for ‘check-and-balance’ and anyone who is not satisfied with any police action could bring the matter to courts”.
It is sad that the IGP does not. understand that it is precisely because the Police hide behind the courts, claiming that this will provide a ‘check-and-balance1 that the public have no confidence in the police when it comes to police investiga¬tions involving government leaders and police officers.
Rahim tried to explain why the police called off its probe into Australian mass media allegations that Malaysian politicians had been recruited and paid by Australian spies.
The IGP said that police investigations were called off “in the interest of ties; between the Australian and Malaysian Governments.”
When and who gave the IGF the powers to dabble in foreign policy?
I will ask the Prime Minister or the Foreign Minister to explain in the forthcoming Parliament when and why the Inspector-General of Police was given a foreign policy brief.
The IGP’s explanation is very weak. Why did the IGP suddenly realise that police investigations should be called off “in the interests of ties between the Australian and Malaysian Governments” after Australian mass media had reported that it was the government politicians who had been recruited by Australian spies and not opposition leaders?
Will the reason calling off the police probe “in the interests of the ties between the Australian and Malaysian Gov¬ernments” apply if it were really Opposition leaders who had been recruited by Australian spies?
Rahim should realise that the calling off the police probe is not only very unprofessional, his explanation is also not professional.