Independence days are vital commemorations in any nation; celebrations not only of identity and unity, but of the hard-won freedoms and civil rights bestowed upon us by our founding fathers.
Such occasions, while rightly joyous and proud, should also present an opportunity for each citizen to reflect on these precious gifts—and whether their promise continues to be fulfilled for all segments of our society.
The period between our 68th Merdeka and 62nd Malaysia Day has already given us one such pause for thought, at the Perak state-level National Day celebrations.
Marred by a dangerous and now-viral public disturbance, it is the incident’s aftermath that is perhaps just as noteworthy. What transpired later that day was not merely unfortunate but should raise serious concerns about privacy and confidentiality in relation to police procedure, as well as the equality of treatment under the law for all persons, including those with mental illness.
Despite the distressing nature of the incident, it was equally disturbing that the alleged perpetrator was subject to her close personal details being circulated via social media channels, in what resembled a leaked police incident report.
The individual (who according to media reports, has since been assessed as having schizophrenia and ordered by the court to undergo psychiatric treatment) was disparaged and ridiculed publicly for her behaviour by netizens, with alleged explicit details about her family and mental health challenges being shared publicly.
There is no suggestion that any of this information was voluntarily and publicly disclosed by the individual or her family.
Such detailed disclosure to the public appears both unusual and unnecessary (given the security situation had already been stabilised). Regardless of intentions, such action is difficult to condone, especially as it appears to have been conducted without important due process.
Malaysian law explicitly protects the right of the individual to privacy, including in matters of police statements and disclosure. The process of taking statements is governed by the Criminal Procedure Code, and the confidentiality of such documents is protected, with the leaking of official reports constituting possible offence under the Official Secrets Act 1972.
Furthermore, the rights of persons with mental illness are protected internationally by the United Nations Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness, and in Malaysia by legislation such as the Mental Health Act 2001 and the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008, all of which affirm their right to be treated as equal citizens under the law.
It is also well established in medical literature that individuals suffering mental illness (who are already extremely vulnerable to maltreatment) are in fact, more likely to be the victim of crimes than to commit them.
Having her personal information circulated thus, is therefore not merely a violation of this particular woman’s personal and legal rights as a citizen, but raises the possibility of selectively discriminatory treatment of her on the basis of having a severe mental illness.
Such outcomes could be deeply shameful, distressing and damaging in the long run to the individual involved (especially if she had committed her offence when mentally unwell) as well as her family and friends.
It should be both ironic and sobering that this should take place on a day when we celebrate the inviolable civil rights and freedoms given to us at our own birth, as well as that of our nation.
Public discourse must be handled with responsibility and civility, as described clearly in the recent press statement on online harassment from the College of Physicians, Malaysia.
Authorities and the public alike should be encouraged to exercise restraint, sensitivity, and diligence in preserving and protecting the legal rights of persons with mental illness.
This is particularly relevant in situations involving heightened public scrutiny. Only with such equal treatment can the civil rights of all Malaysians be rendered meaningful—truths that are not merely held to be self-evident (as influentially phrased in the Declaration of Independence), but actively practised and defended in a law-abiding society.
Dr Thinesh Rajasingam is a consultant psychiatrist, senior lecturer and member of the Psychiatry Chapter of College of Physicians, Academy of Medicine Malaysia.
- This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of CodeBlue.
