Madius
KOTA KINABALU: UPKO Honorary President Datuk Seri Panglima Wilfred Madius Tangau today called on the police and relevant authorities to ensure equal and impartial treatment in law enforcement, particularly in handling the proposed Christian gospel concert and a separate case involving remarks about a priest and a nun.
He said the authorities should apply one evidence-based standard of law enforcement regardless of political affiliation, religion or community, and clarify, as far as legally permissible, the present status and general legal basis of action in both matters.
Madius, who is also the Member of Parliament for Tuaran and Tamparuli Assemblyman, said a police report was merely information requiring assessment and did not constitute proof that an offence had been committed or that any individual was guilty.
Referring to two police reports lodged over the proposed Christian gospel concert, he said the reports alone did not establish that the event was unlawful or that its organisers or performer had committed any wrongdoing.
“The police may open an investigation where the information received discloses a possible offence or otherwise warrants further inquiry under the law. An investigation is a fact-finding process, not a finding of guilt,” he said in a statement today.
Madius said the Sabah Police Commissioner had reportedly confirmed on Sept 28 that two reports had been received concerning the concert.
At the time, no investigation paper had been opened, although police were monitoring the matter, recording statements and considering whether to advise the organisers to postpone the event on public-sensitivity and public-order grounds.
He stressed that a security assessment and any recommendation to postpone an event were distinct from an investigation or enforcement action, adding that such decisions must be based on identifiable risks and lawful, proportionate measures.
Madius also drew attention to a separate case involving 86 police reports over remarks concerning a priest and a nun allegedly made by Sepang UMNO division chief Datuk Noorazli Said, which had prompted an investigation and the recording of statements from 93 witnesses.
He noted that Noorazli had subsequently apologised for the remarks, describing the apology as relevant context, although it did not, by itself, determine the legal outcome of the investigation.
Madius said the two cases involved potentially different facts, laws, evidence and security considerations and should therefore be assessed independently.
“The number of reports alone does not establish inconsistent treatment. Law enforcement cannot be judged solely by comparing report numbers,” he said.
Nevertheless, he said the public was entitled to understand the standards applied by the authorities, with consistency requiring a commitment to legality, evidence, procedural fairness and objective reasoning rather than identical outcomes in every case.
He said Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution guaranteed that all persons were equal before the law and entitled to equal protection of the law.
“This guarantee does not require every case to be handled identically. It requires that distinctions in treatment be based on relevant and lawful differences rather than arbitrariness, discrimination or improper considerations,” he said.
Madius said political affiliation should neither shield anyone from lawful scrutiny nor expose anyone to heightened scrutiny, while religious gatherings should not be subjected to greater scrutiny merely because objections or police reports had been lodged.
He stressed the importance of distinguishing between receiving a police report, assessing whether it warranted further action, opening an investigation, conducting a security or public-order assessment, and taking enforcement or prosecutorial action.
“A report is not an investigation; an investigation is not proof of guilt; and a security assessment is not proof of illegality,” he said.
He added that any enforcement or prosecutorial action must be grounded in applicable laws, relevant facts and sufficient evidence, rather than the number of reports, public pressure or controversy.
On the proposed Christian gospel concert, Madius said any restrictions could also engage the freedom to profess and practise religion guaranteed under Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.
While acknowledging that religious gatherings were subject to lawful regulation, he said any restrictions must be supported by clear legal authority and proportionate grounds.
He said the organisers were responsible for complying with all applicable licensing, immigration, venue, safety and crowd-management requirements.
Any decision to impose conditions on, postpone or prohibit the concert, he said, must be legally authorised and supported by specific and credible security, public-order or other legitimate considerations.
Madius cautioned that public sensitivity could inform security planning but should not be treated as an independent justification to veto an event.
He said authorities should consider whether less restrictive measures, including appropriate safeguards and conditions, could adequately address any identified risks before recommending a postponement or prohibition.
He reiterated his call for the police and relevant authorities to clarify, as far as legally permissible, the present status and general legal basis of action in both matters, while ensuring that any disclosure did not compromise ongoing investigations or operational security.
“Sabahans are entitled to one evidence-based standard of law enforcement — applied impartially, without political favour, religious prejudice or surrender to public pressure,” he said.
