: It provides standard operating procedures for the police and military to manage civil unrest, riots, and the maintenance of public safety within Malaysia.
Following significant civil disturbances in the late 1960s, notably the events of 1969, the Malaysian government recognized the need for a comprehensive, unified approach to public order. The POMAN 1971 was established to:
The meticulous nature of the manual's content suggests that training would have involved both classroom instruction and rigorous field exercises to practice the procedures. public order manual poman 1971
What is indisputable is that it professionalized chaos. Before POMAN, crowd control was a street brawl. After POMAN, it became a science. For better or worse, the geometry of the protest line—the space between the badge and the sign—is still drawn according to the angles and edges of that 1971 manual.
: Using coordinated, non-lethal physical tactics—such as baton line advances—to split or move a crowd. : It provides standard operating procedures for the
In many post-colonial settings, the manual's strategies for suppressing dissent were adopted wholesale by new regimes. Unfortunately, without the stringent checks, balances, and judicial oversight present in mature democracies, the rigid tactical formations of POMAN 1971 were occasionally used to stifle legitimate political opposition and democratic protests, leading to systemic human rights concerns. Modern Critiques and Evolution
Originally compiled by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D) in 1971, the first edition of POMAN was intended as a technical reference for crowd control, riot management, and handling of unlawful assemblies under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was a routine, albeit comprehensive, administrative document. What is indisputable is that it professionalized chaos
The Poman manual has not been without criticism and controversy. Some have argued that the manual's approach to public order management prioritizes the interests of the state over those of the individual, while others have expressed concerns about the use of certain tactics and techniques, such as water cannon and less lethal weapons.
Its authors were a secretive committee of senior police officers, military liaison officers (with counter-insurgency experience), and Home Office civil servants. Their goal was brutally simple:
Crucially, the manual included intricate footwork diagrams (like dance choreography for riot control) and whistle commands. A single long blast followed by two shorts meant “seal the cordon.” A siren wail with alternating pitch meant “prepare for gas” (though CS gas was rarely deployed in mainland Britain at this time).