A Malaysian serial rapist has been deported back to the country after serving his 24-year jail sentence in Canada. News of his return has sparked widespread restlessness and anxiety in society to an intensity not less to that of the threat of the Zika virus.

The public’s response is understandable. Selva Kumar was once labeled the most dangerous rapist in Canada’s history by that country’s media. Some claimed he had raped between 500 and 1,000 women, some of whom were as young as 14.

While the number may be a little exaggerated, when he was arrested in 1991, the police found a log book with the records of 170 women, each having her own grade.

Upon investigation, the police managed to find 75 of the victims, leading to his 18-year jail sentence, extended after more victims and evidence were subsequently found.

No one knows exactly how many women were victimised by him, as not all were willing to come forward and testify against him.

Now that he is back in Malaysia, will he be on the hunt again for women to satisfy his lust? Will more fall prey to his sexual perversion?

How should he be treated by our society? Will he be accepted into society again or should he be isolated from the rest of us?

How should the police put him under closer surveillance? Should he be left alone and his personal freedom respected?

How are Malaysian laws going to handle former convicts like him? Make him wear an ankle bracelet? Or register him for real-time tracking as practiced in some countries?

Restlessness at the return of a serial rapist has exposed the various blind spots we have towards sex offenders, from the lack of social cognition to a dearth of preparedness on the part of our enforcement authorities and legislation, as well as the basis of corresponding legal responses.

Did the Canadian prison authorities reform him during his 24 years behind bars so that Selva Kumar could turn over a new leaf again upon his release? Or was he given mental and psychological therapy to rectify his psychological and behavioural lapses?

The Malaysian authorities should seek further clarification from their Canadian counterparts to get a better picture of Selva Kumar as a basis of judging his possible return to criminality.

Debatable

A criminologist said during a media interview that former convicts like Selva Kumar are categorised as highly dangerous individuals akin to walking time bombs, as if any woman crossing their paths on the road could get abused.

But, it remains debatable whether such an assumption holds. Criminological records show that reversion to criminal activities by a former sex offender is substantially lower than that of a burglar or other offenders.

I’m not trying to hint that we should just lay our guard down in the face of a convicted sex offender, but that we must treat the case in a more scientific and logical manner.

We must never reject any opportunity for this kind of people to be assimilated into our society once again merely out of fear and panic.

After a criminal comes under legal sanctions and serves his jail sentence, this should serve as a conclusion to his criminal past judging from the functionalities of prison re-education and the punishment meted out to him.

Any additional punishment imposed on him or rejecting his return to society is not the right thing to do in any normal society.

Sure enough, he will still come under police monitoring and surveillance owing to the severity of his earlier sins.

In Western countries, former sex convicts are legally required to register themselves and have their risk assessment done and varying degrees of surveillance instituted based on the severity of their offenses.

Perhaps this is what the Malaysian government and legislative authorities need to look into.

Instead of being overcome by irrational phobia and alarm, why not respond to such former convicts with a more rational attitude and more comprehensive system?

As for Selva Kumar, I personally feel that the 24 years he spent behind bars should be enough to make him repent. His remaining years are for his own moral redemption and to turn over a new leaf.

Tay Tian Yan writes for Sin Chew Daily.

With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s (or organisation’s) personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.