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