OCT 17 — Last week as I was driving in Kuala Lumpur, I saw a policeman help a driver push his broken down car. It was gratifying to see a man in uniform coming to the aid of a member of the public. I am sure that these good deeds done by those in uniform do occur quite frequently though they may not be reported.

Although the public perception of our civil servants may be that many are corrupt, incompetent, high-handed and even lazy, it certainly does not apply to all of them.

Over the last 20-odd years, on the few occasions when I have had to call the police emergency number in the middle of the night when my alarm rang, the police were at my house in a few minutes. The officers would normally check the perimeter to ensure that no one was lurking in the bushes. This has given me a sense of security knowing that whenever I needed their help, the police would be on hand to deal with any potential threats. Of course it did not mean that we were able to avoid crimes against us altogether as there were occasions when the crimes just happened too quickly.

The only criticism that I would level against the police is that in my personal experience the perpetrators of the few crimes against us never seem to be apprehended. Although to be fair there was little in terms of evidence for the police to work with.

I have always wondered though if over the last few decades the ability of the police to gather intelligence on criminals has diminished because of the focus on politics. Intelligence gathering requires officers who are both capable and committed to their job of protecting the public. It also requires a lot of leg work and a non-partisan interaction with their local communities to obtain their support. People will more readily share information with policemen that they trust are doing a professional job.

In the past the use of the ISA and Emergency Ordinance (EO) has certainly helped the police in detaining people without having to appear in court. When these laws are removed the police will certainly have more work to do where they will have to successfully present irrefutable evidence against the accused if they are to take the criminals off the streets. I have no doubt that many of those detained under our preventive detention laws may actually be criminals. However in the pursuit of making our streets safer we should not negate the basic human rights given to all of us by the constitution.

By removing these preventive detention laws, those who serve the criminal justice system, be they policemen, prosecutors or judges, will all have to work harder and be more transparent to the public. If they all work diligently and honestly, they will all be able to regain the public trust that has unfortunately been waning. I am sure that the vast majority of our civil servants who work in the justice system want to be held in high regard by the public but this respect needs to be earned. The more transparent our system is the better the chance to protect its integrity.

There will be laws to replace the ISA and the EO that are supposed to provide for shorter periods of interrogation or preventive detention and are not supposed to be used for political purposes but for major security threats such as terrorism. While these new laws are supposed to be subject to judicial review, they will not be perfect and it is unlikely that they will be able to satisfy everyone.

We will still have the same policemen, prosecutors and judges operating under new laws. Though these new laws are supposed to better protect our human rights, ultimately it will be the actions of our public servants that determine whether we will be able to enhance the integrity of our justice system.

Nevertheless it is a great opportunity for those institutions of justice that have had their reputations battered over the years to show that they are indeed capable and in the process, regain the public trust. I am sure that many of those working in these institutions from the lowest clerk to the highest-ranking officer want to be proud to work for an institution which is held in high esteem by the public. Frankly, we the public would like that too.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.