KUALA LUMPUR: A senior criminologist says the public must be confident in the police, particularly the Special Branch, for the effective use of preventive detention laws, such as the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma).

Datuk Dr P. Sundramoorthy said it is crucial that there is public trust in the professionalism of the police.

“In this context, public trust in the professionalism, oversight and accountability of the police, particularly the Special Branch, is crucial,” he told the New Sunday Times.

However, he said, trust should not be misunderstood as unquestioning acceptance.

“Trust does not mean blind acceptance but confidence that these powers are exercised judiciously, proportionately and within the bounds of the law to safeguard national security and public order,” he said.

Sundramoorthy said preventive detention laws, such as the repealed Internal Security Act , and the in-force Sosma, operate on intelligence-led assessments.

“Full public disclosure is often neither practical nor responsible,” he said.

He added that intelligence work depends on protecting sources, methods and ongoing operations.

“Premature or partial disclosure can compromise investigations, endanger lives and unintentionally create public panic,” he added.

Sundramoorthy was asked to comment on Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ayob Khan Mydin Pitchay’s criticism of politicians, lawyers and rights groups who focus on the legal procedures of laws such as Sosma and ISA.

Sundramoorthy said Ayob Khan’s remarks were timely as these threats have become more complex and harder to detect in the age of social media.

“In recent years, there has been a noticeable shift in the profile of individuals drawn to extremist or militant movements, particularly due to social media’s reach and adaptability,” he said.

He added that online spaces have blurred traditional ideological boundaries.

“This fragmentation makes radicalisation more difficult to detect, as individuals may not fit the stereotype of an extremist,” he said, adding that many are self-radicalised by consuming extremist propaganda independently without formal recruitment.

Sundramoorthy said extremist propaganda often exploits personal grievances.

He highlighted warning signs of a radicalised person, such as changes in language, the frequent use of dehumanising labels, the glorification of violence, or the justification of attacks carried out elsewhere.

He said effective countermeasures must go beyond enforcement.

“Families, educators, religious leaders and civil society play a crucial role in countering extremist narratives by offering credible alternatives grounded in empathy, critical thinking and lawful civic engagement,” he said.

This article first appeared on NST.