KUALA LUMPUR: People with extensive criminal history, particularly those linked to violence, firearms or organised crime, should remain on law enforcement authorities’ radar, but without violating their constitutional rights or imposing arbitrary surveillance.

Senior criminologist Datuk Dr P. Sundramoorthy said Malaysia must have a rigorous, intelligence-led and ethically grounded monitoring framework for high-risk individuals to prevent incidents like the recent shootings at a petrol station in Klang and in Sendayan, Negri Sembilan, where the victims had an extensive criminal record.

“The debate should not focus on why such people were allowed to roam freely. Freedom of movement is a fundamental principle in any civil and democratic society.

“Offenders who have completed their sentence, whether through the courts or under laws such as the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act, are legally and morally entitled to reintegrate and move freely within the community.

“This is a core tenet of the rule of law and a necessary foundation for rehabilitation.”

In the Sendayan incident on Wednesday, a man was gunned down and attacked with parang by a group of assailants. Police found that the victim had a criminal record involving 42 offences, including robbery, causing hurt and housebreaking.

On Nov 7, an unemployed man was shot dead at a petrol station in Bukit Tinggi in Klang. Police found that he was a wanted man, had a criminal record with multiple offences and was previously detained under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act.

Sundramoorthy said the cases underlined the state’s obligation to protect public safety and that high-risk individuals should remain on the radar of law enforcement, but without violating their constitutional rights.

“Modern policing relies on discreet intelligence collection, behavioural analysis, data integration and ongoing risk assessment.

“These methods allow police to detect behavioural shifts that may indicate an elevated threat without imposing punitive measures on those who have served time.”

He said criminological research shows that risk is dynamic, not static as a person’s past is a strong predictor of future behaviour, but it is not determinative.

“Evidence-based monitoring supported by inter-agency information sharing, community intelligence and early-warning indicators are far more effective than relying solely on past records.

“Preventive policing mechanisms must be continually refined to balance public safety with individual rights.”

He said some transparency from the police was justified when serious incidents occur as the public had a right to understand the nature of the threat and whether systemic gaps existed.

“Transparency strengthens credibility and reassures the community that law enforcement is acting responsibly.

“In recent cases like Klang and Sendayan, it is reasonable for the police to share key facts, such as the criminal history, severity of previous offences and known risk factors, as long as the information is factual, proportionate and compliant with legal and ethical standards.

“When handled responsibly, transparency promotes accountability, enhances public confidence and supports evidence-based policing.”

Crime analyst Datuk Seri Dr Akhbar Satar said police must increase vigilance over individuals with extensive criminal records.

He said this was because the incidents could be linked to organised crime.

“These are not isolated events. When people with extensive criminal histories are involved in violent incidents, there is often a wider criminal context that must be considered.

“Monitoring should be intelligence-led and proactive, rather than relying solely on past records. It’s not just about responding to incidents. Early detection and preventive measures are key to keeping the community safe.”

He said human governance and ethical management of enforcement personnel were crucial in handling high-risk individuals.

“Human governance ensures decisions are made responsibly, respecting individual rights while prioritising public safety.”

He said structural governance must work hand in hand with human governance through robust systems, inter-agency coordination and clear protocols.

“The combination of vigilant personnel and robust structures provides a framework to manage high-risk individuals and reduce the likelihood of such violent incidents recurring.”

This article first appeared on NST.