Awaludin Jadid, a former principal assistant director of the SB’s Social Extremism Division (E2), was earlier shown a report on a 2016 ceramah where he spoke on Shia Islam.
According to the Suhakam report, the main focus of his speech was to warn against Shia activities, adding that there was an urgent need to address the rise of Shiaism in the country.
It said Awaludin had also complained about the stripping of police powers and the confusion within the administration on supervision of religious organisations.
“In the face of this overwhelming threat and the lack of cohesive action to deal with it, he called on the participants and the largest Muslim community to unite and to eradicate the problem posed by Shias,” the report on the missing Amri Che Mat had said.
But Awaludin was unhappy with Suhakam for raising the issue at today’s inquiry.
“I have already given the same answer, just refer to the transcript of the proceedings.
“You keep asking me the same thing (and) arriving at the same answer. (It’s) unfair to call me out of retirement. I feel like walking out of this room,” he said, before he was asked by the inquiry panel to calm down.
He also told the panel he respected the law.
The human rights commission is holding the inquiry into the disappearance of Joshua, a Malay who had converted to Christianity, and his wife Ruth Sitepu. Both have been missing since November 2016.
Earlier, Awaludin said both Joshua and Ruth were not monitored by his department as they were not considered extremists.
He said his 2016 speech was just to remind Muslims to strengthen their faith.
Awaludin said his department could not take action against organisations and individuals after the Internal Security Act (ISA) was repealed.
“Before, we could detain them. Now, we could only monitor (and) no other action (is taken). We passed information (on those who had converted) to the Islamic affairs department. We worked with them,” he said.
He said E2 monitored deviant teachings, threats to Muslims, and those who had left Islam. But it could only take action “if the society reacted on conversions”.
“Conversion is none of our business. The reaction of the public towards conversion is,” he said, adding that public reaction could create unrest within the society.
Furthermore, he said, it was a security issue.
Asked why those who had converted were detained and those who were reacting to the conversions were not, Awaludin said there was political turmoil in 2016 and “we wanted it to mellow down”.
He said the issue of conversion could cause extremism among narrow-minded people. “We wanted to eliminate (the unrest) at an early stage.”
The inquiry continues.