The single most alarming feature of the Durian Tunggal shooting probe is this: the “voice analysis” process can be engineered to deliver a convenient, face-saving outcome because the police control the inputs. Police say they have taken voice samples and sent the audio to Cyber Security Malaysia for analysis, yet the public is not even told—openly, verifiably, without ambiguity—who the police officers are whose voices are being matched.

That is not a minor detail. That is the core integrity issue.

When the same Police Department under suspicion controls the chain of custody, sampling, submission, and what the public is allowed to know, Malaysians cannot be expected to trust that the right voices were sampled—or that the evidence pipeline was handled independently. This is a built-in escape route, pre-designed for exoneration:
“voices do not match,” “audio was tampered,” “findings inconclusive.”

And if this process remains opaque, Malaysians will reasonably expect the final “forensic” outcome to be weaponised to “discover” tampering and bury the case—not because the truth is unclear, but because the system is protecting itself.

Malaysia is once again being dragged into a rule-of-law scandal that reeks of impunity. A case that the Attorney-General’s Chambers reclassified as murder on 16 December 2025 has been handled with secrecy, delay, and narrative management that would be condemned in any democracy that respects justice.

This is a direct affront to Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.

What Malaysians are being shown is not equality. It is a two-tier system: one set of rules for ordinary people, another for those police in uniform.

1) Murder reclassified by the AGC—yet no immediate arrests: the law has two tiers

A murder reclassification is the gravest legal lens available. Yet there were no immediate arrests or remand of the police officers involved.
That is privilege. It broadcasts a poisonous message: that the police uniform confers practical immunity.

2) Wayang kulit by the Melaka CPO: propaganda that stains the entire process

The public was subjected to wayang kulit when the Melaka CPO paraded parangs to frame a story of “attack” and “justified force.” This happened before central evidence was independently tested.

This was propaganda. It was a crude attempt to seize the narrative, pre-empt scrutiny, and inoculate the institution against accountability. At minimum, it makes the CPO seem complicit in a cover narrative rather than committed to the truth.

In many Western democracies, a police chief facing a fatal shooting scandal and staging narrative theatre would be forced to resign or be removed pending investigation. Malaysia deserves that same standard, not a lower one.

3) Delay that undermines justice: an inquest and forensics should have been immediate

Instead of an immediate, independent investigation task force and a forensic-first response, the public got a parang parade and delays that deepened suspicion.

Had an immediate inquest-driven, forensic-first response been initiated, critical evidence could have been secured when it mattered most:

When these steps are delayed, Malaysians cannot be blamed for concluding that delay serves one purpose: to manufacture uncertainty, so that later authorities can shrug and say, “We cannot determine.”

The conclusion Malaysians are being pushed toward

Malaysia is being asked to accept an inversion of justice: a murder reclassification without arrests; an “investigation” conducted in secrecy; and forensic processes controlled by the very institution whose members may be responsible. That is not transparency—it is an institutional cover-up culture by the police.

Justice requires clear, prompt actions: make arrests when warranted, secure evidence without delay, and pursue truth without bias or exceptions. Failing this, Malaysians cannot expect real accountability.

Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy
President

Malaysian Advancement Party

30.12.25

Tiga individu ditembak mati oleh polis pada jarak dekat. Rakaman audio kemudiannya muncul dan secara jelas bercanggah dengan naratif rasmi polis. Namun, Ketua Polis Melaka tetap bertegas bahawa mangsa telah menyerang pihak polis. Apabila kemarahan awam memuncak selepas rakaman audio itu didedahkan, Ketua Polis tersebut tidak menjawab isu pembunuhan berkenaan.

Sebaliknya, beliau menyerang kredibiliti wanita yang merakam audio itu — mempersoalkan identitinya, mendakwa beliau mempunyai rekod jenayah, malah menyeret nama bapanya ke dalam kancah ini. Ini jelas satu cubaan terancang untuk mengalihkan perhatian daripada pembunuhan tersebut dan menjatuhkan kredibiliti seorang saksi utama.

*Inilah bolehland, di mana putar belit menggantikan kebenaran, maklumat palsu dijadikan senjata, mangsa difitnah, keluarga ditraumatiskan, siasatan bebas dinafikan, dan pemimpin politik lebih cenderung menenangkan pihak polis daripada menuntut pertanggungjawaban.*

Perdana Menteri Anwar Ibrahim pula tergesa-gesa mempertahankan tindakan polis sambil berjanji bahawa “siasatan telus” akan dijalankan. Kata-kata ini kosong maknanya. Ketelusan mustahil wujud apabila pegawai polis yang terlibat tidak ditangkap atau digantung tugas, membolehkan mereka bebas mengganggu bukti, menyelaraskan cerita, dan mengelak daripada pertanggungjawaban. Jika inilah piawaian keadilan di bawah PMX, maka dakwaannya sebagai reformis dan juara kedaulatan undang-undang amat tercalar.

Hanya selepas tekanan awam yang berterusan barulah Peguam Negara mengarahkan pihak polis mengklasifikasikan semula kes ini sebagai kes bunuh.

Namun sehingga hari ini, tiada tangkapan. Tiada reman. Tiada akibat. Jika orang awam terlibat, mereka pasti telah ditahan serta-merta. Dwi-standard yang ketara ini mendedahkan sebuah sistem yang melindungi mereka berseragam, sambil menafikan keadilan kepada rakyat biasa.

Mengapa masih tiada siasatan bebas?

Bagaimana pihak polis boleh dipercayai untuk menyiasat dakwaan pembunuhan yang dilakukan oleh anggota mereka sendiri — lebih-lebih lagi apabila kebenaran hanya terbongkar selepas rakaman audio tersebar kepada umum? Ini bukan keadilan; ini adalah perlindungan institusi terhadap diri sendiri.

Keadaan menjadi lebih membimbangkan apabila Timbalan Menteri Undang-Undang, K. Kulasegaran, dilihat berdiri bersama keluarga mangsa di luar Bukit Aman menuntut keadilan. Di manakah Menteri Undang-Undang? Mengapa tanggungjawab ini diserahkan kepada timbalannya?

Kesunyian daripada mereka yang berkuasa berbicara dengan jelas. Seseorang sedang dilindungi — dan ia bukan mangsa.

Persoalan yang kini mesti ditanya oleh rakyat Malaysia adalah mudah tetapi mendesak:

*Adakah keadilan benar-benar wujud di negara ini?*

*Adakah kedaulatan undang-undang terpakai kepada semua — atau hanya kepada mereka yang tidak mempunyai kuasa dan seragam?*

Jika kerajaan benar-benar serius tentang reformasi, hanya satu jalan yang wajar diambil: gantung tugas pegawai-pegawai yang terlibat, tangkap dan reman mereka seperti mana-mana suspek lain, dan lantik satu siasatan yang benar-benar bebas. Apa-apa yang kurang daripada itu adalah pengkhianatan terhadap keadilan.

*Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy*

*17.12.2025*

Three individuals were shot dead by the police at point-blank range. Audio evidence later emerged that directly contradicts the official police narrative. Yet the Melaka Chief Police Officer insisted the victims had attacked the police. When public outrage intensified after the audio was made public, the CPO did not address the killings. Instead, he attacked the credibility of the woman who recorded the audio, questioning her identity, alleging she had a criminal record, and dragging her father into the mud. This was a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the killings and discredit a key witness.

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim rushed to defend the police, promising “transparent investigations.” These words ring hollow. Transparency is impossible when the officers involved were neither arrested nor suspended, leaving them free to tamper with evidence, coordinate their stories, and evade accountability. If this is the standard of justice under PMX, his claim to be a reformist and champion of the rule of law is deeply compromised.

Only after sustained public pressure did the Attorney General instruct the police to reclassify the case as murder.

Yet even now, the officers involved remain untouched. No arrests. No remand. No consequences. Had civilians been involved, they would have been detained immediately. This glaring double standard exposes a system that protects those in uniform while denying justice to ordinary citizens.

Why is there still no independent investigation? How can the police be trusted to investigate an alleged murder committed by their own officers, especially when the truth only surfaced because audio evidence leaked into the public domain? This is not justice; this is institutional self-preservation.

The situation becomes even more disturbing when the Deputy Law Minister, K. Kulasegaran, was seen standing with the victims’ families outside Bukit Aman demanding justice. Where was the Law Minister? Why was the responsibility pushed onto her deputy? Silence from those in power speaks volumes. Someone is being protected, and it is certainly not the victims.

This is bolehland, where spin replaces truth, misinformation is weaponised, victims are smeared, families are traumatised, independent investigations are denied, and political leaders appease the police instead of holding them accountable.

The question Malaysians must now ask is simple and urgent:

Is there real justice in this country?

Does the rule of law apply to everyone—or only to those without power and uniforms?

If the government is serious about reform, there is only one path forward: suspend the officers involved, arrest and remand them like any other suspect, and appoint a truly independent investigation. Anything less is a betrayal of justice.

Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy

17.12.2025

The six-month ultimatum from DAP Secretary-General Anthony Loke to PM Anwar Ibrahim highlights doubts about the government’s commitment to the reforms promised by PH three years ago. Why have DAP leaders remained silent in the face of mounting public dissatisfaction, only to speak out now, especially following setbacks like Sabah?

This raises the crucial question: Is the ultimatum a genuine push for reform or a political manoeuvre?

Pakatan Harapan, as the leader of the unity government, must be honest about the obstacles to reform. If progress has stalled, PM Anwar, rather than deflecting or remaining vague, owes voters a direct explanation. Are reforms being blocked by coalition partners or diluted by compromise? Voters deserve a clear acknowledgment of these realities rather than deflection or silence.

In a government built on coalition trade-offs, silence or vague responses on reform are unacceptable. Malaysians expect clear transparency from PH. If coalition dynamics block reform, PH must admit it openly—instead of shifting blame or issuing ultimatums after loss. Transparent acknowledgment of limitations is a basic expectation, not a weakness.

Notably, PH Ministers occupy half the Cabinet. Why is only Anthony Loke voicing dissatisfaction now? Does this mean PKR and Amanah have abandoned their manifesto promises?

Pakatan Harapan’s key reform agenda is to restore public trust in Malaysia’s institutions through transparent, accountable, depoliticised governance.

This means ensuring transparent, merit-based appointments to bodies such as the MACC, the Attorney General’s Chambers, and the Judiciary, so that no institution serves political interests. It also calls for robust parliamentary reform to strengthen oversight, empower committees, and improve checks and balances.

Equally urgent are long-overdue reforms on police misconduct, custodial deaths, and PDRM’s “Shoot to Kill policy”. Cases like Teoh Beng Hock, Indira Gandhi’s missing daughter, Pastor Raymond Koh, and Amri Che Mat highlight the need for an independent, empowered police complaints commission, transparent probes, and meaningful accountability. These reforms are not preferences but essential to a functioning democracy.

If reform proposals have been rejected, PMX, alongside DAP, should directly acknowledge it and explain the positions of cabinet ministers. Malaysians deserve full transparency on decisions affecting promised reforms.

Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy

13.12.2025

MAP expresses its deepest alarm and outrage over the fatal police shooting of three men in Durian Tunggal, Malacca, on 24 November 2024. Since the incident, the authorities' actions have revealed troubling systemic failures. These failures erode public trust and undermine hopes for a credible investigation.

But at the heart of this tragedy lies one extraordinary piece of evidence—a recording captured by the victim’s wife—that has the power to reshape the entire narrative.

“Once-in-a-Generation Recording” that threatens a decades-long machinery of false Police narratives.

This audio recording is not just another detail in the case. It is an extraordinarily rare, one-in-a-million piece of evidence. It appears to capture the victims in agony, possibly being manhandled, followed by gunshots that silenced them one by one.

The final victim is heard begging for his life. He pleads with the police not to shoot him because he has children. Moments later, another gunshot is heard. After the killings, voices—believed to be police officers—can be heard discussing the scene. Their conversation strongly suggests the crime scene may have been staged to pin the blame on the dead. This would represent one of the most serious policing scandals in Malaysia’s recent history. It directly challenges the long-standing narrative that “they shot at us, so we shot back in self-defence.”

This audio is unprecedented. Communities rarely, if ever, obtain real-time evidence from inside fatal police encounters. It is even rarer to capture the final pleas of a dying man and subsequent conversations that raise the spectre of scene manipulation. Its existence alone exposes how fragile the old police narrative truly is.

And it is precisely because this recording threatens to unravel years of unquestioned explanations in fatal shooting cases that the police appear to be dragging their feet in admitting the rot in their system.

In any credible investigative process, evidence of such significance would have been urgently secured and safeguarded. Instead, the authorities’ inaction has created a troubling perception:
a system slow to pursue truth when truth threatens institutional comfort.

A Familiar Pattern of Delay and Denial

MAP is deeply concerned that police may later try to discredit or dismiss the recording as "tampered" or "inconclusive." This mirrors patterns from past cases where important evidence was set aside when it contradicted official accounts. Authorities may challenge the recording just because it reached the media, as seen with the Albert Tei video. Evidence does not lose value because the public sees it; itbecomes more important.

Waytha Moorthy Ponnusamy

10.12.2025