Freedom of the press is really freedom of the reporter. It is the reporter on the scene who puts together the story, and how the story later reads depends entirely on the freedom (and support) given in the preceding stages of investigation, writing, final editing, and proof-reading. All this requires the reporter to visit the scene.

Reporters are given daily assignments, and they go where the news is being made. More often than not, they go to a place where the news is handed out in a fully digested form, written by public relations employees. There is the press conference, where prepared statements are confidently mouthed by mincing ministers. Prepared copies are handed out, with a strong admonition no changes are to be made. Questions designed to challenge the prepared menu are discouraged. Any gutsy guest is barred, or not allowed/invited back, maybe because they were sacked. Noticing this, fellow members of the news pack involuntarily lower their voices, lips ... cover their fangs.

The reporter who has an active mind resents these efforts to control and direct the creative effort which is required to dig out the details of a news story. There is always a contest, because the individuals involved do not wish the full truth to be known. A great effort is made to prevent any independent investigation by representatives of the media. The police and members of the party-in-power scurry mightily to conceal their joint conspiracy in betrayal of the public trust.

Reporters are held in close check by editors, who in turn are tutored by owners. This is the fact of life which must be recognised, and statements by owners, government officials, police officers, and editors that this supervision "does not exist" must be independently verified by the reporters themselves. A large dose of scepticism is warranted when the subsequent news always provides a positive portrait of the political party-in-power which other evidence and common sense deny.

In the instance of a political party which takes a financial interest in a newspaper, radio or TV station, the independence of the media is lost. Every piece of news must be screened for its propaganda purpose. Even an extended period of neutrality is suspect, for this may be just a prelude to lull, designed to create the necessary confidence for a later betrayal.

When independent investigative journalism is absent the rats in the rafters have their sway. Police reports of events lacking independent verification often take flights of fancy that arouse reader revolt on revelation of the truth. When investigating officers give sworn testimony that is later found to be a texture of pre-fabricated prevarication, it means the police feel totally secure they won't be exposed or punished.

When police activities are discovered to be illegal, in the absence of self-regulation the people must turn to their elected representatives for prosecution. When the public officials and prosecutors are themselves criminals the democracy has deteriorated into a corrupt dictatorship. This is what has happened in Malaysia.

Such a statement, made without extensive corroboration, naturally invites disbelief. Found to be false, the writer deserves the scorn and disrespect of innocent and law-abiding citizens. What then, are the activities of the police and the ministers which would lead a writer to have such a crass opinion? Certainly no writer would wish to paint a picture which will not bear the close scrutiny of an honest interest. The good faith and credit of a nation is to be regarded with respect, and only a persistent showing of contempt for minimum standards of civilised conduct makes such exposure of high level criminality an urgent necessity.

The theory that police may arrest citizens, hold them without bail, without legal representation, without family or other visitation, and keep them in solitary and unsanitary conditions, and put them under constant interrogation, is not one that is acceptable to the more educated or enlightened peoples of the world. It is only practiced by insensitive thugs in uniform, for whom the torture and abuse of others is a daily sport. These goons, who have made police work their livelihood, have not received supervision and training to prevent mistreatment of the public. Over the years they have become habituated to insensitivity, so hardened in the heart as to allow them to bring pain and distress to the fellow human beings they incarcerate. The BN ministers and parliamentarians who tolerate and encourage this conduct must share the burden of guilt. They are thought to order and condone such behaviour, as they do nothing to condemn nor discourage it.

A willingness to detain without cause and interrogate interminably in the effort to generate self-incrimination is a characteristic of the Malaysian police force. This practice is condemned by the international community, and Malaysia can expect long range repercussions from an indifference to the opinion of important trading partners. Already the currency and bonding capacity of both government and private corporations of Malaysia are shunned by knowledgeable participants in the international money market.

In the ongoing case of the Islamic martyrs, there has been no effective defense. The suspects have had little opportunity to give their side of the story. Independent witnesses have not been allowed to discredit the perjury of prosecution witnesses. Yet the entire matter is seen to be a concatenation of conflicting construction. Much might be mentioned in support of this. From a potential list of easily verified facts, exceeding fifty in number, only three are sufficient to expose the fundamental falseness.

First, the holes on Bukit Jenalik, said to have been dug by the martyrs, at the time of surrender, were few in number and not sufficiently deep to bury a small animal. Anyone visiting the scene in the months after the event in the Summer of 2000 could see that the holes could not have held the bodies of men as claimed, much less been used for purposes of concealment or defense. Yet when the judge and all the parties of the court were taken to visit the scene, including the TV cameramen, the holes were large enough to bury a car. Obviously heavy equipment had been brought in to mechanically enlarge the holes to credible size. Who did this, and why?

Second, the strange death of Jaafar Putih, the only independent surviving witness, points to police complicity in a coverup of the truth. Rather than being released from the hands of the martyrs, as alleged by the IGP, Jaafar Putih was held in the custody of the Lenggong police until the day he died under suspicious circumstances, aa full ten days later. He was in police custody an hour before he died of stomach pains a short distance away. The facts surrounding the handling of Jaafar Putih have not been made public by the police or the prosecutors, for obvious reasons. It cannot be defended. Jaafar Putih knew too much, and was kept away from the press and the curiosity of a sceptical public. His young nephew who gave him a ride pillion the day of his death, was called to the Lenggong police station the next day. He did not return home. He was himself taken into custody. Where is Mahmoud bin Mansoor today? Is he missing because he knew where Jaafar Putih ate his last meal?

Third, the weapons which were said to have been taken from the army camps were laid out for public viewing. These weapons were fresh from their cases. Freshly oiled, without a scratch or dent. Yet the IGP and the defense minister told reporters at their separate press headquarters that these weapons were in use, taken from active service in the armouries of two army camps. Supposedly they were carelessly stacked into three pajero vehicles for transport to the dirt and mud of Bukit Jenalik. There they were dumped inside large concrete containers full of water. But there was no ladder found at the scene, either for lifting the rifles to the top of the pipes (higher than a man's head), nor any means of retreiving the rifles should they be needed for defense. The idea of placing rifles in water tanks must have come from some script writer in the prosecutor's office, as anyone who visits Bukit Jenalik knows it is unrealistic to believe this a true story.

It is numerous stories such as this, told with a stern face by policemen all over Malaysia who stand alonside Malaysian ministers, though the statements are obviously false, which emphasize to the public the necessity for independent journalists who can verify that news given from official sources has a foundation in fact. The police tell the judges whatever they choose, with no effort to compose a credible scenario. The absence of a defense leads the judge to make what he will of such cases. Inevitably with a nudge here and there, a fee here and there, a judge manages to find another innocent citizen guilty. Dante reserved for them the lowest level of hell.

It is the independent investigative journalist who is the safeguard of democracy, and it is the freedom of the reporter to bring the pieces together to make the grand pattern palpable that protects each of us from the abuse of the police and the elected representatives who have the duty to supervise them. In Malaysia there are numerous cases of blatant murder committed with immunity by the police which require investigation. The five Indians killed in Sungai Besi and six more Indians killed south of Tumpat (in Kelantan) are but two more stories of cold blooded police murder that cry out for redress.

Are these stories to be told by reporters and writers, or is it to be the result of an investigation by a Royal Commission of Inquiry? Either way, it is a thing which must and will be done. The families and children of the victims demand justice. The police have told their story in reports and sworn testimony. Now it is time for the victims to tell their story. Under the circumstances, it is best for the police release all political prisoners and direct their energies to correcting a lack of internal control. The time for accounting has come.

Let the true stories begin.

back to list of articles