Syed Hamid Albar – the _

[1883] Of it is not about defending a criminal; it is about rule of law

While Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar said that his statement about criminals should not be regarded as heroes does not refer to the recent death of Kugan^[1] — an alleged criminal who died in police custody under suspicious conditions — I find it hard not to make the connection. Surely such statement is linked to the controversy because such statement cannot be cooked up all the sudden out of nowhere. There has to be a trigger and that trigger is most definitely the death of Kugan. The Home Minister is taking concerned individuals for fools it seems. One lesson of March 8 2008 has yet to sink into him.

Regardless of that, to state that various individuals and groups are taking criminals as heroes is an argument done in bad faith. It dishonestly paints individuals and groups rallying around Kugan in bad light. That is definitely not the best way to build bridges. As a person once served as the Foreign Minister of this country, I actually expected a more refined argument from him. One that is befitting of diplomats. I guess, I was wrong.

Firstly, Kuran is an alleged criminal. Nothing has been proven yet and to consider Kugan as criminal is to assume too much. Indeed the police personnel involved should be considered innocent until proven guilty too. Investigation into the matter should duly take place first because any conclusion is made. That is a reasonable standard to take up but it must be made applicable to Kugan too. Any double standard will make the matter worse.

More importantly, concerns for the death, even if Kugan was convicted of the crime he was accused of, is not about defending a criminal. As a Home Minister, he should know that this is about rule of law.

While investigation is underway, pictures circulating on the internet are hard to ignore.^[2] Those pictures of terrible wounds on Kugan are incriminating to the police; it suggests torture took place while Kugan was under the care of the police. Did the police carry out torture on Kugan?

The possibility of torture and murder are both transgression of rights. When that transgressions occur, that means there is a possibility of disrespect for rule of law. Even criminals have their rights and that death, if indeed caused by the police, would be the ultimate transgression of rights.

When right to life is held with contempt, then something is not right. That is the whole point of this issue. It is quite cleanly and clearly not about defending or mourning a criminal. If Kugan were still alive, were not tortured and were properly convicted if indeed he was guilty of the accused crime, then trust me, nobody would have come to the side of Kugan.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

^[1] — PUTRAJAYA, Jan 28 — The people should not regard criminals as heroes and the police who enforce the law as demons, Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said today.

Speaking in general terms, he said no one was above the law and added that action would be taken against those who broke the law, even if it was the police. [Syed Hamid: Don’t regard criminals as heroes. Bernama. The Malaysian Insider. January 8 2009]

^[2] — [A. Kugan: Horrifying pictures depict latest victim of police brutality/murder? Jelas.info. January 22 2009]

[1262] Of Karen Armstrong’s lecture in Kuala Lumpur

The lecture by Karen Armstrong was not as impressive as I expected it to be. I enjoyed it nonetheless. The lecture was titled The Role of Religion in the 21st Century but the content was positively about the commonalities shared by the world’s major religions.

I reached the Mandarin Oriental Hotel early and managed to catch free breakfast at the hotel. If I had not spent too much time at the lobby, I would probably have sat somewhere closer to the front. Alas, I sat somewhere in the middle, right beside what seemed to be a fan of Armstrong. We got into a small chat and I learned through her that Armstrong’s A History of God is banned in Malaysia.

By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved.

Apart from Armstrong herself, former PM Mahathir Mohamed was there. So too was his daughter Marina Mahathir. When the former PM was introduced to the audience, there was a tremendous ovation for him, even louder than what Armstrong had received. That showed how popular he still is and how much respect he commands among the public.

Through the lecture, it is clear that Armstrong is apologetic to the idea of religion. While at it, she mentioned several religious versions of the non-aggression axiom. I of course hold the axiom due to its morality, not because I am told to do so.

One particularly interesting point she shared is about the condition during the birth of major religions. She stated that religions were born out of revulsion of violence or immorality of that time. I am unsure about the truth of such general statement but after thousands of years, I feel that that revulsion itself has become the violence that those religions abhor in the first place.

Despite being apologetic, she did criticize the religious conservatives or fundamentalists, saying it is amazing how the opinion of the deities always coincide with theirs. That remark drew laughter from the crowd.

There was the Q&A session after that. A person came to the microphone and called for the government to undo the ban on Armstrong’s book. The crowd immediately gave the person a resounding round of applause. Armstrong completely agreed with the person and continued to say something to the effect that when freedom is suppressed, the human spirit sours and so too religion with it. The call for freedom is all the more impressive because this event was organized by the Institute of Diplomacy and Foreign Relations, an arm of the Malaysian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Syed Hamid Albar, the Malaysian Foreign Minister, was there, sitting by the former PM’s side. Furthermore, since the restriction on the book began in 2005, the remark is a direct comment against the Abdullah administration.^[1]

The whole lecture finally ended around noon. As I was leaving, I unwittingly came into the former PM’s path. While I do not agree with many of his policies, I still regard him as a respectable leader and to shake his hand is an honor which I grabbed without hesitation.

By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved.

There was a small lunch after that and I noticed Haris Ibrahim there speaking to somebody. Azmi Sharom, one of the speakers at the recent DAP forum, was there too.

After all that, I visited Kinokuniya, finally bought Rumi’s Masnavi that I first encountered, briefly, years ago and later, sadly got elected as the treasurer of a special interest group within the Malaysian Nature Society.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

^[1] erratum — the original factually incorrect sentence before correction: Furthermore, since the book was first published in 1994, I would assume the ban came in during the Mahathir administration. Therefore, it was a direct comment.