PREVENTIVE laws were inherited from our colonial masters and have in all moral and ethical aspects of jurisprudence outlived their purpose and suitability for contemporary society.

The writing has been on the walls in recent times to abolish them, especially when it has been a significant campaign promise in the past two general elections.

They were, at one time, extremely useful and significant in the war against subversive activities and were undoubtedly instrumental in winning the war against the threat of communism during the insurgency and re-insurgency.

The nation owes a debt of gratitude to these laws but they have overstayed their welcome. We should have gradually gotten rid of them, especially after the surrender of the communists in 1989 but we did not do the needful as those in the corridors of power, apart from being too intoxicated with all the pull these laws gave them, did not have the will to call a spade a spade.

The abrupt end of Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma) by Parliament should therefore have come as no surprise, although it has put all the relevant stakeholders concerned in a tight spot, specifically in relation to the relevant detainees who have yet to be charged.

Police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers will have to come up with a necessary remedy. It is heartening to note that police have already begun to adjust their processes, with the Inspector-General of Police emphasising the fact that they will revert to procedures of detention within the ambit of relevant acts and the Criminal Procedure Code. 

Embracing the decision is crucially important as police must never look weak in any abrupt situation and the IGP has his finger on the pulse in this situation by making a cool and calm statement. 

Preventive laws have long been the bane of any democratic society, and this voting out by Parliament augurs well for the system. It is in tandem with contemporary transparency and the checks and balances available within the criminal justice system. Modern society that has infotech at its fingertips, demands it. Police, too, must act swiftly to address the lack of experience and professionalism in the methods of gathering admissible evidence. The IGP will have his task cut out for him in the days ahead. 

It is also opined that national security is not easily compromised with the demise of Sosma, although it means that police have to step up professionalism-wise in the mode and manner they gather admissible evidence. 

It is within their capabilities and only requires them to ensure that appropriate training, experience and knowledge points the relevant personnel in the required direction. The police force can achieve this if it sets its heart and mind to it. The present technology and the modern investigative mind is much more infotech-savvy and quicker in applying all available sophisticated scientific tools of investigation. 

For too long, the investigative arm has been linked to executive powers in the way these preventive laws were used as there have been instances in the past where these laws were misused for political agendas. This possibility must now be eliminated for the sake of transparency and the manner in which dissent is handled.

However, police must also be assisted in handling very serious crimes that are beyond the norm. This includes all forms of terrorism, especially those that threaten national security. Detention and interrogation for such crimes involving hardened criminals, including those who wage war against king and country, must be given extra powers of investigation. 

An act that defines these serious criminal acts that include all forms of terrorism must be enacted. The significant difference here will be the fact that the key check and balance will lie with the judiciary and not the executive. This will ensure transparency and judicial accountability.

It will also lead to a more professional manner in how those in custody are handled by differentiating the optimum force required in proportion to the seriousness of the crime being investigated. The system must be flexible as well as firm in the manner evidence is gathered, especially when life and limb are at stake and time is of the essence.

Every opportunity must be given to the investigator to gather as much evidence as possible in the right balance with human rights. A difficult act to achieve but absolutely necessary in the war against hardened and very dangerous criminals.

The key is in providing the right balance for the criminal justice system to oversee the remedies for these archaic preventive laws.

* G. Selva reads The Malaysian Insight.