They were also unanimous in the call for a royal commission of inquiry to look into Teoh’s death.
Human rights organisation Suaram said it was concerned that magistrates attached to the Attorney-General’s Chambers lacked the qualification, experience as well as independence and impartiality in making sure law enforcement agencies were accountable.
“The current inquest process is lacking in independence and credibility as the procedure of an independent investigation and the qualification of the coroners are in question,” said Suaram coordinator E Nalini, who voiced the organisation’s disappointment with the decision as it failed to shed light on Teoh’s death.
Nalini said the inquest process in Malaysia needed critical reform especially in the pre-inquest and preliminary investigation stages and access to independent post-mortem.
She said that in 2006, the Parliamentary Select Committee on The Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code recommended the formulation of the Coroners Act in Malaysia to enable better procedures for investigation and inquests into deaths in custody.
“It also asked for a Coroner’s Court to be established. It is now critical that the government implements this Act,” she said, adding that the Enforcement Agencies Integrity Commission Act (EAIC) should be immediately implemented.
The EAIC Bill was tabled in 2009 and passed as an Act of Parliament by the Dewan Rakyat but yet to be brought to force.
Suaram also called for a royal commission to investigate all other cases of death in custody, and to address gaps in the current law enforcement system to ensure that human rights were protected.
It’s a strange decision
Lawyer N Surendran said Malaysia should emulate having a Coroner’s Court similar to what the UK had.
“What happens here is that a civil or criminal magistrate sits as coroner. Whether a magistrate is qualified or not is not the point. But it is good to have judicial officers who are concentrated on inquests, rather than having ‘part timers’,” he said.
Surendran said currently magistrates had to double up in doing their own cases which might cause delays in inquests, which were supposed to be heard and completed quickly.
“The credibility of the entire judiciary, including magistrates, are also in question and people don’t have confidence in the system anymore. For example, remands where the magistrate tends to favour the police. The authorities are behaving like ostriches and ignoring this problem,” he said.
On the Teoh inquest verdict, Surendran said it was a strange decision.
“If it is not suicide and not homicide, then what is it? If he says he doesn’t know, then he should not be so authoritative in saying it’s not homicide,” he said.
Another criminal lawyer, Akberdin Abdul Kader, however, said a Coroner’s Court could be considered but such a move should not be made too hastily.
“We should appreciate the verdict and let the matter run its course at the High Court,” he said, adding that he was also puzzled about the “open verdict”.
Akberdin, a former magistrate himself, said he disagreed that the ability of magistrates should be questioned as an inquest was merely a fact-finding mission.
“The law on inquests has been there for a long time, and in this case the inquest was given to a senior magistrate. There was a case around 1996 where the chief justice had instructed that a Sessions Court judge hear the case,” he said, adding that several policemen were charged in the death in custody case.
Lawyer Edmund Bon said he was also disappointed with the coroner’s verdict, although it was not an uncommon one.
“An open verdict is so common in Malaysia partly because our law enforcement agencies are so poorly run and crime scene investigations are inadequate and therefore the coroner cannot answer many questions.
“But he should have directed further investigations before he came to his verdict. The coroner erred in this aspect. The High Court, in appeal, should direct the coroner for the same questions to be answered,” he said.
Bon said that he felt that the coroner in this case, Azmil Muntapha Abas, did not reach the stage where he had exhausted all avenues.
“The coroner is part of an investigative process, so he cannot simply say there are things left unanswered; he must try his best to call all evidence and there is still a chance for him to do that if the attorney-general or High Court judge calls for the inquest to be re-opened,” he said.
Grave doubts cast
Former Transparency International president Ramon Navaratnam said the family could take consolation in the fact that the coroner ruled out suicide as a cause of death.
“But I wish it was more decisive and clear-cut as to whether he was killed or not,” he said.
“Maybe a royal commission could help. I support having a commission with a wider term of reference, then the public would be satisfied, ” he added.
Bar Council president Regunath Kesavan said that the indecisive findings cast grave doubts on the effectiveness of the inquest mechanism and rendered the whole process meaningless.
“While it is heartening that the coroner ruled out suicide, the inability to make a definitive finding is unsatisfactory, and leaves many issues unresolved in this matter of great public interest,” he said.
He said the coroner failed to consider the vital aspect that Teoh was under the custody of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) when he died.
“This invariably places the burden on MACC to account for his death. The coroner ought to have reprimanded the conduct of the investigating officer for introducing the handwritten note midway through the inquest and should have ordered further investigation into his conduct,” he said.
He added that the Bar Council reaffirmed its call for a royal commission to be given a wide ambit to investigate the circumstances and cause of Teoh’s death.
Meanwhile, Human Rights Party secretary-general P Uthayakumar said that he was disappointed with the verdict.
“As always, the inquest is an open verdict. There has been no history of the court ordering a charge of murder or at least of manslaughter. Only an independent verdict by an independent court will end brutal and ruthless police killings.
“Teoh’s death is just the tip of the iceberg, the other 90% are Indian youths,” he added.
No comments:
Post a Comment