"HOW can a sergeant afford an Alphard, Vellfire or Mercedes?" This is not a question we are asking, but one that Bukit Aman Criminal Investigation Department (CID) director Datuk Seri Mohd Suhaily Mohd Zain did on Friday at the CID Directors' Mandate gathering at Universiti Sains Malaysia in Penang.
And he had the answer, too. This corrupt sergeant and other similarly inclined men in blue are being "paid" handsomely by criminal syndicates for working hand in glove with them. Suhaily did not put it in these words, but you get the point.
Here is more from a man who doesn't mince his words: "In other words, within this team, some are willing to kill each other for money." Who are these "some" in "this team"? Contingent CID chiefs and CID chiefs from district police headquarters across Malaysia. Blunt words from a brave man.
But Suhaily's aren't the first blunt words. Others, including two former inspectors-general of police, had spoken so. The problem is serious and it must be seriously dealt with by the police.
But how? First, a principle for the reform. It must be preventive and curative. Why? Because corruption is mostly about staff, structure and system of an organisation. Robust recruitment practices may be able to keep the "devils" at the gate, but bureaucracy and lack of control tempt even the saintly.
Even the most robust of preventive measures will not be able to keep the corruptible away. Blame it on human nature. There are souls who surrender to temptations easily and there are those who don't. Robust preventive measures must, therefore, be supported by equally robust curative measures.
An example will help. Last year, Denmark topped Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index (CPI). In other years, even if the country wasn't No. 1, it was very near there. One reason is Denmark has a police force that is perceived to be the least corrupt. The reason is not hard to find.
It has the Danish Independent Police Complaints Authority (DIPCA) that handles all allegations made against the force. When the DIPCA says it is independent, it means it. All decisions are arrived at independently of the police and prosecutors. A truly independent — forgive the redundancy because in Malaysia such linguistic abuse is permissible — is a hard sell here.
It has been since 2005 when the Royal Commission of Inquiry recommended one. Instead, we have heard a barrage of names, including the one recommended by the RCI: Independent Police Conduct Commission. It is not the name we should be after, but the independence of such an authority, or commission, if you like. The practice of enforcement agencies like the police investigating themselves needs improvement.
These aren't our words. They are those of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim spoken in Parliament on March 28, though not verbatim.
There is another independence the police need badly: to be free of influence from politicians. This is no wild allegation.
A former IGP had had enough of it that he went public. Everyone will agree, more so the police, that politics is never good for policing.
If Malaysia takes these two roads of independence, both the country and the police will be very near the top of the CPI sooner than expected.