Malaysians Against Rape, Assault & snatcH theft is alarmed to read that the PDRM lost assets worth RM1.33 million between 2010 and 2012 as revealed by the Auditor-General’s 2012 report.
The audit report also showed that there is poor management of assets at PDRM Headquarters, and three contingent police stations in Kuala Lumpur, Selangor and Johor. This is due to late reporting and late or no investigation of lost items. Some cases were not investigated for more than three years.
The report states that between 2010 and 2012, the police lost 156 units of handcuffs, 44 firearms, 29 vehicles, 26 walkie-talkies, 22 radios, six cameras, four computers, one cell phone, and 21 unspecified items.
Out of 95 cases of missing assets in 2012, only two of the missing items were found. In 2011, 17.8 per cent of 45 cases were resolved and written off. Between 2010 and 2012, surcharges of RM63, 346 were slapped on errant officers in 30 cases, and only RM6, 879, or 11% collected at the end of 2012.
An audit on 88 cases of missing assets in the police headquarters and three police contingents of Kuala Lumpur, Selangor and Johor revealed that the actual date for 92 units of handcuffs, a mobile card reader and a walkie-talkie all worth a total of RM30, 986 going missing was unknown.
The audit also revealed that the missing assets were only realised during a check by an officer that started in 2010. The police were late in investigating missing asset cases and late in taking action against the errant police officers.
For example, in the case of 36 missing handcuff units was written off without slapping a surcharge on two police officers who were responsible for the loss. And the case dropped because one police officer died in 2009 while the other retired in 2008.
The report also gives two examples of misplaced firearms and bullets on 23rd March 1980 and 12th December 2002 at IPK Johor where initial reports by the head of department was only done on 9 October 2010!
MARAH is in agreement with the report’s finding that the PDRM’s management of missing assets is unsatisfactory. How the PDRM lost 44 firearms from their inventory nor the type of firearms lost is explained. Has PDRM identified the responsible parties for the missing firearms? The armoury SOP strictly requires maintaining a log of arms movement details. Has any disciplinary action been taken against these responsible parties if there was proof of dereliction of duty?
MARAH has always been supportive of the PDRM’s efforts to combat crime. We now urge Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar to audit the weaknesses in the police system.
The police have a civic duty to explain these losses to the public and tighten up their operations, especially the checks and balances to plug any existing loopholes.
They must conduct spot inspections of their assets so that the reasons behind the loss of assets can not only be identified but rectified.
Records in Bukit Aman and state police contingent headquarters containing information on missing assets and the status of investigations need to be coordinated and updated regularly.
Strict disciplinary action against the errant officers or personnel involved must be taken as a preventive measure to prevent further asset loss by an Investigating Committee from the police contingent instead of the police district involved to ensure transparency and return some degree of trust and honour to the already badly bruised image of PDRM.
Malaysians Against Rape, Assault & snatcH theft