Joshua and Ruth Hilmy: Why do minorities distrust the police?
Yesterday, on Day 3 of the Suhakam inquiry into the disappearance of Joshua and Ruth Hilmy on Nov 30, 2016, yesterday’s witness, the owner of the house at which the couple were last seen, continued his testimony.
He believes the purpose of life is to follow Jesus Christ. That makes his intelligence suspect in most eyes today. Yet, he is very intelligent. His degree in Engineering is from one of the premier institutions of the world and he does critical work in an industrial operation.
Theologians would say he epitomises the hermeneutic of suspicion.
I bring that up because though challenged often, he ardently defended his testimony that he did sight several emails exchanged between Khairy Jamaluddin (KJ), Youth and Sports Minister, and Joshua Hilmy.
His basis was that when, during a phone call, Joshua first told him about these emails, he did not believe him. So, when he met Joshua several weeks later, he expressed his scepticism. Joshua’s response was – as I wrote before – to show him the emails.
He focused his attention not on content, but on authenticity. He cannot remember the details. But he was satisfied that the emails showed signs of being authentically from KJ. He is immovable in his conviction that he has formed a right opinion.
Yet there were some strange things in his testimony. I will recount a few.
First, he insisted that he was “100% sure KJ planned the kidnapping,” though he could not suggest possible reasons. He said he did not make a police report because “police won’t investigate it” and even IGP Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador has said words to the effect that the police are not independent.
Supporting his contention about police disinterest is his observation that he was only questioned after the new government came into power – he was questioned in 2018 and 2019, though the disappearance was reported in March 2017.
When asked to comment on KJ’s denial (reported in the media), he insisted the denial was additional evidence that KJ was behind it, since his examination of the emails compelled him to give up his earlier disbelief.
Second, since about 2018, he has not been in the vacant house in Kampung Tunku which he co-inherited with his brother when his father died – the house at which Joshua and Ruth were last seen.
He said when the police asked him to open the house for them to inspect it, he gave them written permission to break the lock and enter. They did and they told him he could pick up the keys from the Sungei Way police station. He had still not picked up the keys.
Third, when questioned about whether he felt he had been put under surveillance, he said in 2019 he had noticed some cars parked outside his children’s school, seemingly doing surveillance, because the people in the car were equipped with walkie talkies.
His wife asked the school guard to question the people in the cars. After the guard questioned them, they “moved the cars a few metres.” He did not seek to learn who they were or what their purpose was.
He thought they might be observers who alert trucks of upcoming operations to enforce traffic regulations (the Department of Transport yard was nearby). Yet, he said only state agents would have access to walkie talkies – he said he knew walkie talkies can be bought online easily, “but I think usually people don’t do that.”
Fourth, he said uniformed officers from the Sungei Way police station in Petaling Jaya came to his home in Penang state twice to record statements from him. Both times, the statements were recorded by an officer with the rank of Inspector.
He said the second time was necessary because the first officer had been transferred and perhaps also because of Suhakam’s interest. He said he did not volunteer any information beyond the questions he was asked.
Today, the police signalled their intention to not reveal details of their purported investigation. Speaking for the police, ASP Loh signalled it by saying that the police investigation is ongoing. This was the reason they gave for not revealing any documents in in the cases of Amri Che Mat and Pastor Raymond Koh.
Lim Heng Seng, who is appearing for the Bar Council, picked up on a point I raised in my testimony yesterday: the comments of DCP Awaludin Jadid, a senior police officer, in a speech he made in November 2016.
In that speech, Awaludin bemoaned the fact that the police could not act “easily” against Muslim apostates by using the Internal Security Act (ISA).
Lim deftly introduced a decision handed down by the Supreme Court in 1989 in which it was held that the use of the ISA against Joshua Jamaluddin was an abuse of power because even the alleged conversion “to Christianity [of] six Malays,” was not a threat to national security.
(Note: Philip Koh, one of the lawyers who represented the families of Amri and Raymond and is now also a member of the team of lawyers representing Ruth’s family, appeared for Joshua Jamaludin in 1989)
As I travelled home, I wondered why so many are convinced the police would not investigate cases involving members of minority groups.
I think it is partly because of the failure of the IGP and ministers to take action over the words and ill-informed, illegal policies adopted by senior police officers like Awaludin over the years.
I think it is also partly because of the continuous denial by the police of their involvement in the disappearance of Amri and Raymond – and the bogus task force set up to “investigate” Suhakam’s conclusions that the cops did it.
I think it is partly because of the belief among many Christians that persecution by the state is normal for Christians and should not be resisted – after all, their King, Jesus, was crucified and punishment including execution was the reward of faith for the early Christians.
They forget that love for neighbour requires standing up for justice. As Reverend Martin Luther King Jr said, “an injustice anywhere is an injustice somewhere” and must be exposed and dealt with.
Motivation for pursuing justice also comes from our concern for police officers. As the American black historian Mary Frances Berry put it:
When you have police officers who abuse citizens, you erode public confidence in law enforcement. That makes the job of good police officers unsafe.
Rama Ramanathan is an activist for Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of The Leaders Online.
