Kampung Sungai Baru clash signals cracks in Malaysian society

By Nehru Sathiamoorthy

People in Malaysia are not the sort who clash with the police.

In some other countries this might be normal. But in Malaysia, to hear that some people rioted against the police to the point that an assistant commissioner of police – an ACP is a high-ranking officer, you know – ended up with a bloodied face, was certainly not normal. It was disturbing.

It was disturbing enough that even Prime Minister Anwar and Deputy PM Zahid Hamidi have been compelled to address it.

So, what was the event that caused the commotion?

Well, for context, the event involved the eviction of Kampung Sungai Baru residents from their homes.

According to the police, they were just following a court order and blamed “outsiders” for provoking unrest and causing chaos during the eviction process. That might indeed have been what happened.

But even if this description is accurate, the government and authorities would do well to put themselves in the shoes of the public, to understand how the event might be perceived differently.

The public, unlike the authorities, might be conflating this with other events, and forming a whole different perception of the commotion.

As it stands, it might be the case that some segments might feel there are two sets of rules in Malaysia – one that treats the elite with velvet gloves and lets them off the hook with nothing more than a slap on the wrist even if they commit extraordinary crimes. The other deals harshly with ordinary people, even when all they are doing is something natural like defending their homes.

Let’s look at two recent cases to suggest why the public might be conflating the Kampung Sungai Baru eviction incident with other events.

The first is the case of Segambut Bersatu deputy division chief Adam Radlan Adam Muhammad, who was freed of 12 corruption and money-laundering charges after paying a ‘compound’.

Even Rafizi Ramli, who is part of the ruling government, was disturbed enough to describe it as another troubling example of how high-profile corruption cases can be settled with money rather than decided in court through trial and punishment.

“This is the most profitable business – you are accused of getting RM6.7m, pay a RM4.1m compound and you still have RM2.6m. That’s a profit margin of 39% without having to do anything,” he said.

He added: “If a regular person steals milk, the sentence is six months in prison. But if a VIP’s relatives are accused of corruption, as long as they pay back, they can be released.”

Rafizi’s comments echo how many people are seeing the situation in the nation.

Another recent case was the seizure of RM169m belonging to former Prime Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob. Although the authorities seized such an extraordinary amount, they still haven’t charged him with anything.

When the authorities seize assets of a member of the elite but fail to charge him, even though the seizure itself indicates wrongdoing, can they really blame people for thinking that the elite won’t be punished even if they pilfer millions? Meanwhile, the ordinary people are punished even for stealing milk packets or for defending their homes?

The government and the authorities would do well to reflect on the events that occurred in Nepal and Indonesia recently, to appreciate how people are perceiving their relationship with their leaders, not only in Malaysia, but across the world.

In Nepal, protests that began over a temporary ban on Facebook, X and YouTube spiralled into deadly unrest. Demonstrators, angry at corruption and nepotism, torched the homes of senior leaders. The wife of a former prime minister was even killed after protesters set fire to her house. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s residence was also attacked, and videos circulated apparently of his finance minister being beaten in the streets. Nineteen lives were lost before Oli was forced to resign.

In Indonesia, the death of a motorcycle deliver rider – run over by police during protests against MPs’ financial perks – sparked the largest demonstrations of President Prabowo Subianto’s young presidency. Public anger was so high that protesters looted the home of Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati, alongside several other elected representatives.

Malaysia might not be anywhere close to that level of unrest, but the incident in Kampung Sungai Baru should serve as a reminder of how fragile stability can be when the people’s perception of fairness erodes – especially at a time of increasing economic pressure.

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was right to condemn the attack as “heinous” and call for swift justice.

But rather than only viewing the incident through a law-and-order lens, it might be prudent for him to use the occasion to measure the pulse of ordinary people in Malaysia.

People might be having a harder time than the government believes. While we are struggling, we also see some members of the elite flouting the law, pilfering national wealth, and walking away without suffering serious consequences.

So when police enforce a court order that favours a wealthy, well-connected developer to evict ordinary families, yes, from a law-and-order perspective everything may be in order.

But in terms of perception, something far deeper may be developing in the hearts and minds of the people.

The government would do well to study the reaction to the Kampung Sungai Baru incident.

If the majority see the attack as shameful and condemn it outright, then it shows that the hearts of the people and the will of the authorities are still aligned.

But if the silence is deafening, it may reflect something more troubling – that many ordinary people are quietly sympathising with the frustrations behind such acts. That silence, if it exists, should serve as a warning.

Nehru Sathiamoorthy follows the Aliran website.