本文是为纪念2009年7月16日去世的赵明福而写的。14年过去了，一个年轻有前途的生命就这样被扼杀，我和大多数马来西亚人都无法理解或接受赵明福案中的官方说词。
超过了5000多天，当局还无法或不愿意解决这案件，在大多数守法的民主国家，最多需要数周的时间，就能确定不明原因的死亡案件。当局在拘留一个人时，不能忘了其职责始终是维护法律——即使是那些被指控有不当行为或涉嫌犯罪和违法的人——赵明福的案件让人联想到渗透国家层面的黑暗势力。
任何负责任的政府也许只需要数周或几个月的时间就能解决此案。而且，当案件很可能涉及到暴力致死或谋杀因素时——再加上有意或无意的——在这个特殊案件中，掺合种族和政治因子后，当局更迫切和需要，以快速、完全透明和独立态度来调查此案。
可是，政府的回应令人充满质疑也不透明。公开和透明的回应，有助于确保公正得到伸张，并让人们相信马来西亚不属于国家功能失调、官员腐败横行的失败或落后的国家。
然而，我国和全世界从赵明福案中看到并学到什么？我们看到处理这一敏感案件时，当局的拖拖拉拉、缺乏问责制、透明度，以及专业的精神。甚至，更糟的情况。
我们看到公众、专业机构和非政府组织提出的质问没有得到答复或被忽视。我们看到此案存有他杀疑点和官方掩盖真相的指控，甚至较后才设立的皇家调查委员会，其职权范围也有所限制。
赵明福案并不是第一起马来西亚人和非马来西亚人被当局拘留期间死亡的案件。人权组织──马来西亚人民之声在其2022年报告中透露，仅该年，拘留期间死亡刑事调查组（USJKT）的记录，就有21人在警察拘留期间死亡。
根据内政部在2017年3月28日在国会上的答复，2002年至2016年期间，官方统计数据共有257人在警察拘留期间死亡。根据大马人民之声数据，估计只有其中62起案件获得媒体报导。这意味著只有约1/4的警察拘留期间死亡案件为公众所知，而其馀未被关注。
在官方拘留所外，我们也看到类似事件不断发生，如“神秘”且未解决、很可能是强迫“失踪”案件，这包括乔舒亚牧师、其妻子露芙、许景城牧师和社运份子安里仄末等案件。
冰山一角受害者
到底赵明福、乔舒亚、露芙、许景城和安里仄末案件是孤立事件，抑或这是马来西亚体制内暗势力下的政治、种族和宗教领域的冰山一角受害者，这是一个需要提出和回答的问题 。
一般而言，暗势力定义为一群人，通常是政府机构和安全机关中有影响力的成员，例如警察，参与秘密操纵或左右政府政策，可在马来西亚，暗势力很难识别，因为其由匿名和无组织的个人，以及团体组成并隐秘运作。
即使他们出现在新闻中，通常也会以不同的形式隐藏他们与暗势力关系。暗势力的其他定义也指出，其成员表面上可能持有温和政治立场，但内部却允许极端主义思维和意识形态茁壮成长。
时任外交部长赛夫丁分别于2019年4月和6月提出国家暗势力的存在，引起了公众的关注，当时他指责有股暗势力导致希盟政府未能签署《罗马规约》和消除种族歧视公约《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》。当时，他指，这股暗势力是真实存在的，其目的是破坏希盟的改革和政策。
可以肯定的是，自独立以来，暗势力一直在发挥作用。除了不露面的官僚和私人企业外，其还有来自政治领域和社会高层的参与者，他们保持密切沟通并进行非正式会面，制定战略并策划方法（合法的和法外的），以推进和重新构建“国家”的马来议程。 以及他们的利益。这是通过一个指挥链来完成的，首先由高级官员或知名人士做出决定，然后传达给较低级别的支持者去实施，其中一些人可能不属于这系统一份子。
因此，暗势力得以发展的一个关键因素是国家的公务员制度，尤其高层的官僚几乎由马来人垄断。在马来人主导的官僚机构下，加上巫统和伊党这两个主要的马来政党，重新定义了国家的政治和政策，以确保马来人在生活和社会中的主导地位，并迎来一个完完全全的马来民族国家。
对于暗势力人士和支持者言，通过合法措施和利用合法政府机构来推进马来人议程和建构马来民族国家是不足够的。其会以公开或秘密方式，对被视为威胁或对抗马来统治地位的个人、组织、事件或课题，施以恶意策略、肮脏伎俩、不道德行为、恐吓和非法行径。因此，那些被暗势力视为“国家”（即马来人国家）的敌人，将被锁定为针对、惩罚和消灭的目标。
本文为纪念赵明福逝世14周年的“回顾民主路.书写赵明福”系列文章，由赵明福民主基金会组稿。
林德宜《纪念赵明福：无终止质问》原文：Remembering Teoh Beng Hock: Never Stop Asking
This is written in memory of the death of Teoh Beng Hock on 16 July 2009.
14 years have passed since a young promising life was snuffed out for a reason or purpose that I and a majority of Malaysians cannot comprehend or agree with.
This makes it more than 5,000 days with the authorities unable or unwilling to resolve a case which, in most law abiding and democratic nations, will require at most a few weeks to ascertain an unexplained death. Held in custody by authorities whose role is to uphold the law at all times - even those accused of wrongdoing or for alleged crimes and transgressions of the law - his case reminds of the dark forces that have imposed themselves on the nation's life.
Perhaps no more than a few weeks or months would have been required for any responsible government to resolve the case. And, when confronted with the distinct possibility of a violent death or murder - whether intended or unintended - with race and politics in the mix of this particular case, the need for an expedited and fully transparent and independent investigation was more urgent and necessary.
An open and unhampered response by the government did not happen. It would have helped to assure that impartial justice was being done, and to give confidence that Malaysia does not belong to the category of failing or failed states with officials in dysfunctional and corrupt agencies permitted to engage in wrongful and illegal conduct.
What did the nation, and the rest of the world, see and learn in the Teoh Beng Hock case? We saw foot dragging, the lack of accountability and transparency, and the absence of professionalism in handling this sensitive case. We saw even worse.
We saw questions raised by the public, professional bodies and non-governmental organisations that went unanswered or were ignored. We saw suspicions of foul play and allegations of an official cover up disregarded even by the Royal Commission of Inquiry belatedly convened much later with limited terms of reference to inquire into Beng Hock’s death.
Teoh Beng Hock’s case is not the first unexplained death of Malaysians and non-Malaysians held in custody by the authorities. Human rights watchdog Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) in its report for 2022 revealed that a total of 21 deaths in police custody was recorded by the Criminal Investigation Unit on Deaths in Custody (USJKT) for that year alone. An earlier report noted 257 deaths in police custody between 2002 and 2016, according to official statistics provided by the Home Ministry in a parliamentary reply on March 28, 2017. Based on Suaram’s data, it has been estimated that only 62 of these cases were reported in the media. This means that only about one in four cases of deaths in police custody becomes public knowledge, while the rest go unnoticed.
We have seen similar homicide incidents happening even without the cover of official custody with the‘mysterious’and unresolved, most likely, enforced‘disappearance’cases of Pastor Joshua Hilmy, Ruth Sitepu, Pastor Raymond Koh and activist, Amri Che Mat.
Are Teoh Beng Hock, Joshua Hilmy, Ruth Sitepu, Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat isolated cases or the tip of the iceberg of political, racial and religious victims and casualties of the deep state in Malaysia is a question that needs to be asked and answered.
Defined elsewhere as a group of people, typically influential members of government agencies and the security authorities such as police involved in the secret manipulation or control of government policy, the deep state in Malaysia has been difficult to identify because it consists of anonymous and amorphous individuals and groups that operate beneath and behind the political radar. Should they appear in the news, it is often in a different guise to hide their deep state affiliation. Other definitions of the deep state have noted its proclivity in allowing extremist mindsets and ideologies to flourish though its members may appear to hold outwardly moderate political positions.
The existence of the deep state was first brought into prominence and public attention by Foreign Affairs Minister Saifuddin Abdullah in April and June 2019 when he blamed deep state actors for the Pakatan government’s failure to ratify the Rome Statute and ICERD, the convention to eliminate racial discrimination. According to him, “the deep state is real and it is out to sabotage Pakatan Harapan’s reforms and policies”.
It is certain that deep state forces have been in play since independence. Besides faceless bureaucrats and private entities, it has participants from high levels of politics and society who are in close communication and meet informally to strategize and plot on ways - legal and extra-legal - to advance the Malay agenda reconstituted as 'national' – as well as their own interest. This is done through a chain of command that begins with decisions arrived at by high ranking officials or prominent personages which are then communicated to and implemented by lower rung supporters, some of whom may not be part of the original chain.
A critical catalyst in the development of the deep state is the nation’s civil service which has become an almost exclusive Malay monopoly at the highest ranks. Together the Malay dominated bureaucracy and UMNO and PAS, the two leading Malay parties, have successfully redefined the country’s politics and policies to ensure Malay dominance in life and society and to usher in a full ethnocratic state.
But dominance through law-abiding measures and using the legitimate agencies of government to advance the Malay cause and ethnocratic state are not enough for members of the deep state supporters and actors. It has to be supplemented by malicious tactics, dirty tricks, unscrupulous behaviour, intimidatory and illegal actions - some conducted in the open; others done secretly and targeted at individuals, organisations, events or issues seen as threats or antagonistic to Malay dominance. Thus those perceived to be enemies of the ‘state’, that is the Malay state, are singled out and targeted against, punished and negated.
