Catch 22@PJ: Too Harsh For Good

Stringent or lenient enforcement when it comes to wrong doings? For many, the choice is varied depending on whom, where and when. We will appeal for lighter punishment if we are the one who will pay for it even though at any price, small or big. We will show our suspicious if someone else is getting light penalty although the offender might be in similar situation as we did. The enforcers might be suspected of on the take. This is a common response as we will only concern if it is directly affected ourselves. So, when the by-laws allowed enforcer to impose higher penalty, the affected parties complained that it is too harsh whereas others who are not penalised yet will keep watching without much concerns. The offenders, many of them are repeat offenders will start out crying and claiming innocent, start appealing to those in power for help, shout at enforcers for being too heartless. Is that wrong for being too harsh if plenty of warnings have been given and the offenders have got the compounds more than once before?

We are in the Catch 22 situation now. On one hand many cannot tolerate with the offences committed and ask for heavy penalty, but when they themselves are getting the compound, complain of too harsh when the enforcers adhere to the book will be forthcoming.

Perhaps the solution is to communicate with all the stakeholders and finding acceptable terms and conditions for all type of penalties. For example, if the RM1,000 per compound is too heavy for the hawkers, then what is the accepted amount? The Authority should discuss and create consensus with all stakeholders on rewards and penalties system. In this respect, informal sector development is not a matter between the Local Authority and the small traders, but also the consumers and community. When consumers and community are involved, their aspirations and expectation from the small traders can be communicated. For example, standard for hygiene, cleanliness, fair pricing, service quality, food quality, social responsibility etc will become a shared responsibility. After all, community which pays assessment tax is contributing towards the provision of trading premises for the small traders. The community should have a say in return for their money spent, i believe.