Private Security Services anyone ?
I read a recent letter by a reader, "Living in Fear", to The Star voicing his concerns and fears of private security company conducting door to door collections of "security fees".( Dubious guards doing the rounds - The Star 10th January 2007). Subsequently, his concerns was refuted by "The chairman of the resident association" (Residents themselves wanted security patrols - The Star, 12th January 2007).
The housing estate involved in this case is Taman Tun Dr Ismail.
In his letter, "Living in Fear" claimed that he has been indirectly "intimidated" to pay subscription fees for the unauthorized security services. He also claimed that, his and his neighbour rubbish chute doors has been stolen. He take it as warning from the private security for his refusal to pay "protection money" to the private security company. His opinion is, the resident is more comfortable working with and extending cooperation to the local police to fight crimes and ensure safety of the community.
The Chairman of the Resident Association replied in his letter that, in his capacity as Chairman, he appointed the private security company because "majority of the residents wanted private security services". He also indicated that the private security scheme is voluntary. He "encouraged" the residents to enroll with the private security company so as to "keep the housing estate safe, clean, and green".
My frank opinion is, most resident associations in Malaysia are basically social clubs formed by a few active residents. These self appointed Resident Committee members are not representatives of the majority of the residents in the various housing estates. The question is, is the "Chairman of the Resident Association" mandated by the majority of the residents to appoint Private Security Company to conduct security patrolling in the housing estate ? Is it the charter of the resident association to provide security service ? I would like to believe that, most likely, the so called Resident Association acted in a haste and self righteous manner. The second question is, has the private security firm been vetted by the local police department and the Domestic Affairs Ministry ? When the Chairman of the Resident Association claimed that majority of the residents wanted the private security services, can he substantiate it transparently with a list of the residents who wanted the service ?
Personally speaking, when the Chairman of the particular resident association said that residents are "encouraged" to subscribe to the private security services, I have problem with the semantic of the word. moreover, I also find it illogical for the Chairman to claim that "Private Security Service" can help to keep the housing estate "clean and green". Aren't these assessment related services supposed to be provided by the local municipal council ?
The right thing to do is to let the professional police force handle peace and security of the housing estate. As a social club, the resident association should confined its role to only organizing the dialogs between the police department and the local resident on how to work hand-in-hand to promote peace and security.
Let me relate my own experiences with "Private Security Services" in my housing estate about a year ago. I was approached by a group of Indian youths wearing uniform and riding cubchai ( small motorcycles) to pay monthly security fee. They also claimed that they have been appointed by the Chairman of the resident association in my housing estate. In no uncertain term, they told me that, the only way to ensure the safety of my family members is to pay up the monthly subscription fees. They also told that they are licensed to carry weapons. When I refused to pay, for a few nights in a row, the Indian youths passed by my house and intentional create loud engine noises in the middle of the nights to indirectly harassed me. For the first time, all my shoes were also stolen. After I threatened to report them to the local Police, the "harassments" stopped. All these sounds like a bunch of gangster legitimizing themselves to collect protection money by wearing uniforms and using the name of local resident association.
I also like to highlight my personal awareness of "safety and security" in one small housing estate. There is a small segment of a housing estate in USJ where a few residents are very active. They formed the USJxx Resident Association, and start implementing private security services and as well as vigilante patrol. Sad to note that, the security is that area actually degrade. A friend of mine who live in that segment of the housing estate told me his personal horror story about security and safety in his neighbourhood. In his own word, "Every resident here have a tale to tell !"
The point here is, all Resident Associations, are by themselves not necessarily mandated by majority of the local residents. Most likely, each resident association consists of probably less than 50 members who gathered together to form a "club" for social and welfare activities. Therefore, the Chairman or Committee Members, should not take liberty to decide on the welfare of the majority of the residents. What is good for Ah Kow, may not be good for Ahmad, or Sammy ! The local resident association should confined its activities as a social club. In their extended roles, maybe they should also organize gathering or dialogue with the police department or professional security consultants. The peace and security of the housing estate should be left to the local police to manage.
To me, this sounds like a typical case of a group of moral minority imposing themselves to dictate how the silent majority should conformed to their misguided honest intentions. I called on the local police to take control of the street of housing estates and flush out all "dubious" private security companies. I also called on the Housing and Local Government Ministry to provide a standard charter and guideline in the constitution of all local resident associations to ensure their office bearers do not misbehave or over step their roles and responsibilities.
The Chairman of the local netizen association appointed me to conduct daily rantings and musings, however, it is a voluntary choice of yours to listen to my nonsense. But, to keep your peace of mind, the Chairman encouraged you to listen to my daily rants.
The housing estate involved in this case is Taman Tun Dr Ismail.
In his letter, "Living in Fear" claimed that he has been indirectly "intimidated" to pay subscription fees for the unauthorized security services. He also claimed that, his and his neighbour rubbish chute doors has been stolen. He take it as warning from the private security for his refusal to pay "protection money" to the private security company. His opinion is, the resident is more comfortable working with and extending cooperation to the local police to fight crimes and ensure safety of the community.
The Chairman of the Resident Association replied in his letter that, in his capacity as Chairman, he appointed the private security company because "majority of the residents wanted private security services". He also indicated that the private security scheme is voluntary. He "encouraged" the residents to enroll with the private security company so as to "keep the housing estate safe, clean, and green".
My frank opinion is, most resident associations in Malaysia are basically social clubs formed by a few active residents. These self appointed Resident Committee members are not representatives of the majority of the residents in the various housing estates. The question is, is the "Chairman of the Resident Association" mandated by the majority of the residents to appoint Private Security Company to conduct security patrolling in the housing estate ? Is it the charter of the resident association to provide security service ? I would like to believe that, most likely, the so called Resident Association acted in a haste and self righteous manner. The second question is, has the private security firm been vetted by the local police department and the Domestic Affairs Ministry ? When the Chairman of the Resident Association claimed that majority of the residents wanted the private security services, can he substantiate it transparently with a list of the residents who wanted the service ?
Personally speaking, when the Chairman of the particular resident association said that residents are "encouraged" to subscribe to the private security services, I have problem with the semantic of the word. moreover, I also find it illogical for the Chairman to claim that "Private Security Service" can help to keep the housing estate "clean and green". Aren't these assessment related services supposed to be provided by the local municipal council ?
The right thing to do is to let the professional police force handle peace and security of the housing estate. As a social club, the resident association should confined its role to only organizing the dialogs between the police department and the local resident on how to work hand-in-hand to promote peace and security.
Let me relate my own experiences with "Private Security Services" in my housing estate about a year ago. I was approached by a group of Indian youths wearing uniform and riding cubchai ( small motorcycles) to pay monthly security fee. They also claimed that they have been appointed by the Chairman of the resident association in my housing estate. In no uncertain term, they told me that, the only way to ensure the safety of my family members is to pay up the monthly subscription fees. They also told that they are licensed to carry weapons. When I refused to pay, for a few nights in a row, the Indian youths passed by my house and intentional create loud engine noises in the middle of the nights to indirectly harassed me. For the first time, all my shoes were also stolen. After I threatened to report them to the local Police, the "harassments" stopped. All these sounds like a bunch of gangster legitimizing themselves to collect protection money by wearing uniforms and using the name of local resident association.
I also like to highlight my personal awareness of "safety and security" in one small housing estate. There is a small segment of a housing estate in USJ where a few residents are very active. They formed the USJxx Resident Association, and start implementing private security services and as well as vigilante patrol. Sad to note that, the security is that area actually degrade. A friend of mine who live in that segment of the housing estate told me his personal horror story about security and safety in his neighbourhood. In his own word, "Every resident here have a tale to tell !"
The point here is, all Resident Associations, are by themselves not necessarily mandated by majority of the local residents. Most likely, each resident association consists of probably less than 50 members who gathered together to form a "club" for social and welfare activities. Therefore, the Chairman or Committee Members, should not take liberty to decide on the welfare of the majority of the residents. What is good for Ah Kow, may not be good for Ahmad, or Sammy ! The local resident association should confined its activities as a social club. In their extended roles, maybe they should also organize gathering or dialogue with the police department or professional security consultants. The peace and security of the housing estate should be left to the local police to manage.
To me, this sounds like a typical case of a group of moral minority imposing themselves to dictate how the silent majority should conformed to their misguided honest intentions. I called on the local police to take control of the street of housing estates and flush out all "dubious" private security companies. I also called on the Housing and Local Government Ministry to provide a standard charter and guideline in the constitution of all local resident associations to ensure their office bearers do not misbehave or over step their roles and responsibilities.
The Chairman of the local netizen association appointed me to conduct daily rantings and musings, however, it is a voluntary choice of yours to listen to my nonsense. But, to keep your peace of mind, the Chairman encouraged you to listen to my daily rants.
No comments:
Post a Comment