11:54AM Jun 26, 2014 ( Malaysiakini)
Lawyer vexed that IGP shoots and PM ducks
Vexed with the latest statement of the
inspector-general of police on an interfaith custody dispute, lawyer M
Kulasegaran asked if Khalid Abu Bakar is above the law.
Kulasegaran also noted that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi (right) appeared to be afraid of the police chief.
The lawyer went on to advise Khalid to resign if his conscience was preventing him from exercising his duties.
"There is uneasiness everywhere when the nation's highest ranked policeman is seen as not respecting clear, unequivocal and unambiguous court orders.
"If the IGP's conscience is disturbing him, it is best he resigns before there is lawlessness and total loss of public confidence in the police force," he added in a statement.
Kulasegaran is representing M Indira Gandhi in the custody tussle with her former husband, Muslim convert S Pathmanathan, who is also known as Riduan Abdullah.
On May 30 2014, the Ipoh High Court ordered the arrest of Patmanathan for the seizure of a daughter he had with his Indira. The order to arrest, to be carried out by June 30, was then stayed for a week.
Yesterday, Khalid said the police would not arrest Patmanathan but would only monitor him.
'IGP has no business questioning court order'
Kulasegaran accused the police chief of confusing the people by stating that Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution presented two separate court systems.
"It is none of IGP's business to question the court order. Since when has the IGP taken over the duties of the attorney-general?” he asked in a statement.
He said that when a court grants an order, the police must carry it out without questioning it.
"Can the IGP ignore this order? Isn't the conduct of the IGP contrary to the court order? His action will erode the confidence of the people," he added.
Furthermore, Kulasegaran (right) asked, whether the police chief made the statement with the consent and knowledge of the home minister.
The lawyer also pointed out that when Indira and he met the Ipoh police chief yesterday, the state police chief never uttered the word "monitoring".
Kulasegaran also asked if the IGP and his advisers have read the Ipoh High Court's 136-page judgment.
"Since when it is the job of the police to interpret court decisions? A policeman's job is just to enforce court orders, not question them," he said.
"It has to be noted that the custody orders from both the civil and syariah courts for the husband and wife have no directive for the police. So why is the IGP going on a 'frolic of his own'?" he asked.
In Indira's case, he said, a specific order was made asking the police to arrest Patmanathan (left).
"The police have now to act as the warrant of arrest has been directed against him and the police have to give effect to it. There are no two ways about this," he added.
Kulasegaran said the IGP must get the advice of the attorney-general and not act on his own.
"The AG can act on behalf of the IGP and file proceedings for directions to court. Why have all these not been forthcoming?" he asked.
Kulasegaran also noted that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi (right) appeared to be afraid of the police chief.The lawyer went on to advise Khalid to resign if his conscience was preventing him from exercising his duties.
"There is uneasiness everywhere when the nation's highest ranked policeman is seen as not respecting clear, unequivocal and unambiguous court orders.
"If the IGP's conscience is disturbing him, it is best he resigns before there is lawlessness and total loss of public confidence in the police force," he added in a statement.
Kulasegaran is representing M Indira Gandhi in the custody tussle with her former husband, Muslim convert S Pathmanathan, who is also known as Riduan Abdullah.
On May 30 2014, the Ipoh High Court ordered the arrest of Patmanathan for the seizure of a daughter he had with his Indira. The order to arrest, to be carried out by June 30, was then stayed for a week.
Yesterday, Khalid said the police would not arrest Patmanathan but would only monitor him.
'IGP has no business questioning court order'
Kulasegaran accused the police chief of confusing the people by stating that Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution presented two separate court systems.
"It is none of IGP's business to question the court order. Since when has the IGP taken over the duties of the attorney-general?” he asked in a statement.
He said that when a court grants an order, the police must carry it out without questioning it."Can the IGP ignore this order? Isn't the conduct of the IGP contrary to the court order? His action will erode the confidence of the people," he added.
Furthermore, Kulasegaran (right) asked, whether the police chief made the statement with the consent and knowledge of the home minister.
The lawyer also pointed out that when Indira and he met the Ipoh police chief yesterday, the state police chief never uttered the word "monitoring".
Kulasegaran also asked if the IGP and his advisers have read the Ipoh High Court's 136-page judgment.
"Since when it is the job of the police to interpret court decisions? A policeman's job is just to enforce court orders, not question them," he said.
"It has to be noted that the custody orders from both the civil and syariah courts for the husband and wife have no directive for the police. So why is the IGP going on a 'frolic of his own'?" he asked.
In Indira's case, he said, a specific order was made asking the police to arrest Patmanathan (left)."The police have now to act as the warrant of arrest has been directed against him and the police have to give effect to it. There are no two ways about this," he added.
Kulasegaran said the IGP must get the advice of the attorney-general and not act on his own.
"The AG can act on behalf of the IGP and file proceedings for directions to court. Why have all these not been forthcoming?" he asked.
Comments
Post a Comment