T

he series of attacks on police officers in a number of regions in the country over the past three months '€“ by as yet unidentified assailants '€“ has apparently left the force in the dark about not only who the perpetrators are, but most importantly, their motives.

The first incident this year occurred on July 4 when First Brig. Ratijo of the Seragi police precinct was seriously injured after he was shot in southern Lampung while chasing motorcycle thieves. Later that same month Adj. Second Insp. Patah Saktiyono was shot and wounded on Jl. Cirendeu Raya in South Tangerang.

Three separate incidents took place in August, leaving three officers dead. Adj. First Insp. Dwiyatno died after he was shot in Ciputat, South Tangerang, on Aug. 7. A week later, a house in Cipondoh, South Tangerang, owned by Adj. Comr. Andreastulam, a detective with the Jakarta Police'€™s narcotics unit, was shot up by unidentified gunmen. In the third incident in August Second Brig. Maulana and Adj. Second Insp. Kus Hendratma died after they were shot in Pondok Aren, also in South Tangerang, on Aug. 16.

The latest two incidents occurred this month in the capital city. First Brig. Dading Bagus Martimbang was stabbed in Central Jakarta on Monday evening, while the shooting which took place on Jl. Rasuna Said in South Jakarta on Tuesday evening claimed the life of Second Brig. Sukardi. Dading suffered injuries, while Sukardi died after being shot four times.

The attacks have aroused widespread concern among the general public as they have targeted members of the police, the institution solely responsible for providing domestic security, establishing order and protecting the people.

A large number of people from various walks of life have expressed their discontent and anxiety about the police'€™s inability to uncover the truth behind the incidents, particularly as to who the perpetrators are and their motives. The latest and most prominent expression of anxiety was that made by chief justice Constitutional Court Akil Mochtar.

Such discontent and anxiety are understandable as people have started to worry about their safety, especially upon learning that the police have made little progress in their investigation into the attacks, let alone uncover the identity of the perpetrators and their motives.

Most of the incidents have been difficult to investigate as the police have had limited evidence or supporting witness testimony from which to draw conclusions. In most cases, the perpetrators have succeeded in fleeing the crime scenes undetected, leaving little evidence.

However, such difficulties should not provide the police with an excuse for failing to thoroughly investigate the incidents.

A failure to uncover the truth behind the serial attacks on police officers will create a backlash from the general public due to the continuing public distrust of the police'€™s capability and credibility.

Such a failure would also encourage speculation and conspiracy theories, most of which might be wild speculation, although some might have a degree of validity.

While the shooting in Lampung in early July obviously involved motorcycle thieves, the subsequent attacks in Greater Jakarta have led to speculation that the attacks were committed by terrorists in revenge for the killings of their comrades by the police.

In July, the police shot dead two suspected terrorists in Tulungagung regency, East Java. The two suspects were believed to have been involved in a plot to bomb the Myanmar Embassy in Jakarta.

The latest incident in Jakarta, however, has led to a serious question about moonlighting practices by members of the security forces, particularly police officers. The revelation by Jakarta Police spokesman Sr. Comr. Rikwanto that officer Sukardi was moonlighting, escorting six trucks carrying elevator parts from Tanjung Priok Port in North Jakarta to a construction site on Jl. Rasuna Said, Central Jakarta, when he was shot, merely confirmed the practice does exist.

Such practices will thus invite more serious questioning of the police'€™s professionalism and also its officers'€™ welfare and remuneration system, despite the fact that there have been improvements in their salaries. The police will have to answer, for example, whether officer Sukardi was moonlighting on his own or with the knowledge and approval of his superiors.

A concrete answer is essential so as to determine whether these moonlighting practices are individualistic or systemic in nature. It is also necessary as part of the efforts to identify the perpetrators of the attack on Sukardi and their motives, to ascertain whether there might be some form of rivalry in the organization of such escorting services, either within the police force itself or between the police and other security institutions.

Another aspect of equally serious concern is the use of guns in most of the incidents. It is apparent that the perpetrators have easy access to firearms and use them in their criminal acts, such as in the attacks on the police officers. It therefore leads to another question as to the effectiveness of gun control in the country.

While members of the police and the military '€” the two state institutions authorized to carry and use weapons, including guns, on duty '€” are obviously the lawful users of such weapons, authorized institutions responsible for the screening and issuing of licenses for civilians eligible to carry weapons need to tighten their screening systems so as not to allow the weapons to fall into the wrong hands.

Those authorized institutions must also ensure that the illegal production of homemade weapons, which have been used in many crimes, is brought to an end.

The investigation into the incidents remains underway. The police'€™s credibility and capacity are at stake. The police therefore need to be transparent when it comes to the results of their investigation.