Why Daddy chose to stand with the crowd

Da Huang Daddy | Jul 20, 11

Malaysiakini

EYEWITNESS

My dear daughter, Daddy told you this morning that I was travelling to work; in fact, I was travelling to Kuala Lumpur to participate with the so-called “bad” people, as the TV had labelled them.

Early in the morning, after giving you a kiss while you were sleeping, Mummy took Daddy to the airport. Why didn’t I drive? Because I heard that the police uncles had surrounded Kuala Lumpur, and as such, I might not be able to arrive there by driving.

Mummy: “What if you are caught?”

Daddy: “That is why you must stay – to bail me out.”

Daddy has never undertaken any big adventure, so when the plane landed and I took the train to KL Sentral, my heart was beating as fast as what you must have felt when I caught you eating stolen candy.

After getting off the train, Daddy’s friends arrived shortly after. We discussed why we could not exit at our desired stop, but had to get off two stations away. Daddy stayed on board the train for two more stations, not because Daddy wanted to exercise to lose weight (as you know, Daddy has a big belly!), but because the police uncles stopped us from getting off at our desired station!

Daddy met about 10 Malays, and they too were going to the same place as Daddy. It was fortunate that Daddy met them, because Daddy could not recognise the busy, bustling Kuala Lumpur city! Where were all the people and cars? All gone! All blocked by the police uncles.

Suddenly, Daddy heard noises upon our arrival at our destination. Ahead was the famous Masjid Jamek, where we saw a row of vicious FRU men and trucks. You may ask, aren’t the police supposed to protect the people? Baby, this is exactly one of the reasons why Daddy was attending this gathering.

Daddy saw a lot of people running up the hill next to Menara Maybank and followed them. From atop the hill, my God, there must have been around 10,000 people. Before I could overcome my shock, the spicy scent of tear gas engulfed my senses.

It was just like last month, during our BBQ, when you were choked by the smoke. Daddy remembered the small towels packed by Mummy. I quickly wet them with water and covered my nose to make it feel better.

At this juncture, the police uncles rushed towards us. Everyone was anxious and panicked, shouting “Lari! Lari!”. Hundreds of people hurried through a door that could only accommodate one person at a time. Daddy looked back. The police uncles were climbing over the fence to come at us!

Perhaps you may ask, ‘What bad thing has my Daddy done that the police would want to arrest him?’

My daughter, Daddy was with many, many other brothers and sisters, just getting together here. Then the police rushed over, arresting and hitting everyone in sight!

Daddy ran into one of the smaller lanes off Jalan Pudu, as behind me, people were shouting, “Jangan lari! Tangkap!” Finally, I stopped running and some people signalled to me to go quickly to the front. Did I know this person? No, but strangely, we all believed in him and went with him in the same direction.

This time, the choking, spicy scent engulfed us again, one tear gas shot after another, with water cannons spraying people who refused to disband. Daddy’s nose was running and my tears were flowing. I was also having difficulty breathing.

Then I saw a group of people squatting near a water faucet, washing their faces. They looked at Daddy with wry smiles, and gave me some salt. I also washed myself with the tap water, and drank from it. Daddy never knew that tap water could be so delicious! We looked at one another, laughed together, and instantly the tension disappeared!

Helping one another

It then started to rain heavily, and Daddy climbed up a small hill and went into Tung Shin Hospital. Outside the hospital doors, there were many people, men and women, who had come there to avoid the rain and nasty tear gas.

Daddy stood in front of three fully-masked Malay sisters. One seemed to have inhaled too much tear gas, and she was reeling, as though she was going to fall. Her friends kept asking where they could buy drinking water.

At this juncture, a Chinese uncle took a bottle of water from his backpack and handed it to them. I do not think that they knew each other. My daughter, let me tell you, helping one another is not something seen only in textbooks.

The noise was getting louder and louder, and there were calls to all of us who were avoiding the rain to join the march. We were excited and all ready to join the march, when suddenly, there was a rapid burst of desperate people running into the hospital, and so we ran towards the parking lot.

Daddy was following them as well, and then we heard someone yell, “Kejamlah! Ini hospital!” The crowd kept moving back, some tried to climb up the hill, some climbed the wall, and some climbed up the back door of the hospital gate, which was about six-and-a-half-feet high.

Regardless of whether we were Chinese, Malay or Indian, we helped one another. The stronger ones climbed the iron gates and went over while the elderly and infirm climbed over the gate using construction ladders, which seemed to suddenly appeared. Either way, there was someone on the other side of the iron gates to help them down.

No one rushed; there was only humility and patience. Witnessing all this, Daddy felt emotional as I thought about our country and our people.

Meaning of Malaysia

After that, there were about 200-300 people walking along Jalan Alor; no one complained along the way. Although we did not know one another, we all had one goal – Bersih! Bersih!

Suddenly, there were cheers in front, followed by a round of applause. Daddy had returned to the march! Everyone was excited and it was like seeing long-lost family members again. We all danced and shouted “Bersih! Bersih! Hidup Bersih!”

The stretch of people was so long that one could not see where the crowd began, nor where it ended. Everyone was so excited and occupied the empty roads.

Occasionally, vehicles passed by and the drivers would toot their horns, open their windows, stick out their hands and raise their thumbs. Whenever we saw this, we were excited again. There were sounds of whistles and applause. My daughter, this was not the demonstration I had initially envisaged – it was more like a carnival!

The long march gradually made it to KLCC, and we occupied the the whole intersection in front of KLCC. Daddy could not estimate how many people were there, at least 10, 20, perhaps 30 thousand people?

We got together, sat down and rested. As we were taking a break, someone took the lead and started singing the national anthem!

‘Negaraku, tanah tumpah…’

Daddy has sung the national anthem perhaps close to a thousand times since my childhood. But this time, why did the Negara-ku sound so sweet? It was not accompanied by any music, there were different pitches and tones, and even wrong tones with weird accents.

But when I looked to my left, I saw a Malay Pakcik and on my right, an Indian auntie with her daughter. I felt so touched and emotional that tears streamed down my face.

My dear daughter, at this moment, I really wished that you and Mummy were beside me. Right next to me to share this moment of pride and belonging to this country with me! All of a sudden, Daddy understood why so many Pakciks and Makciks brought their whole families, because this moment was something you would never learn from textbooks, nor will you feel it after scoring 10As for an exam.

Daddy has lived in this country for 34 years, and there has not been a moment like that during 709, where I felt the meaning of “Malaysia”.

Regardless of who we were, we helped one another (to escape the tear gas, to avoid the water cannons, to climb the hospital walls), shared (even if it was just a handful of salt), smiled at one another (after the water cannon, while squatting next to a water faucet washing our faces and drinking tap water), and comforted one another (with tears on his face and even suffering breathing difficulty, a Pakcik patted us and said, “Relax, relax, rehat kejap, tak ada hal punya”).

Daddy never knew who they were, never asked their names, but I knew that this was our country – the people of Malaysia.

Perhaps many years later, you can read and understand this letter, written by Daddy who has experienced all of this. It may have already been documented in your history book.

Remember, at this historical moment, Daddy chose to stand with this yellow crowd, not for any other reason, but just to let you have a better country!

I will always love you,

Da Huang Daddy

The writer is a blogger as well and his original, in Chinese, can be found at http://dahuangng.wordpress.com

This series relates eyewitness accounts of the Bersih 2.0 July 9 rally in Kuala Lumpur for clean and fair elections. If you were there and have an interesting story to share, email us at
[email protected]
 by Friday, July 22.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 21 July 2011, 9:27 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is MACC now “Malaysian Ante Chamber of Crime”?

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was the second attempt by Malaysia to establish Malaysia’s version of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) with increased powers, staffing and budgetting.

However, in just two years, MACC had achieved what its predecessor the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) had never done in 41 years from 1967-2008 – two deaths at its premises in circumstances suspected by the majority of reasonable Malaysians as caused by MACC – Teoh Beng Hock in July 2009 and Ahmad Sarbaini Mohamad in April 2011.

There was sheer disbelief when news first broke out yesterday that the James Foong Royal Commission of Inquiry had reported that Teoh Beng Hock was driven to commit suicide by aggressive and continuous questioning by MACC officers – raising the question whether there is such an animal as “forced suicide” which is not homicide or murder.

Other news items yesterday which followed on the contents of the RCI report reveals one consistent picture – of how it is impossible for MACC to disclaim responsibility for causing the death of Teoh Beng Hoch who was totally at the mercy of MACC officers while in MACC custody on the fateful days of July 15 and 16, 2009.

There can be no doubt as to the answer even before the establishment of the RCI when the question is asked: Was MACC responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock. The answer is in the categorical positive.

The RCI report did not give a direct answer to the question but anyone reading the contents can only derive one conclusion – that the RCI would say “Yes” if asked to answer this specific question.

The RCI report is an indictment of the MACC. The picture it gives of MACC is not a law enforcement agency but a lawless organisation housed by criminals who have no qualms to break the law to achieve their misguided objectives and agendas which have nothing to do with the battle against corruption.

The question Malaysians are entitled to ask is whether MACC has become Malaysian Ante Chamber of Crime housed by criminals not to uphold the law but to violate all notions and concepts of law, justice and decency?

MACC announced that it accepts with an open heart the findings of the RCI on the death of Teoh Beng Hock and pledged that appropriate action would be taken on RCI findings and recommendations.

If MACC has accepted the RCI findings and recommendations, have all the MACC officers concerned who had acted with impunity in utter disregard the law resulting in the death of Teoh Beng Hock, and then conspired to cover up the truth and commit the crime of perjury at the Royal Commission of Inquiry public hearings with false evidence, been immediately suspended to be charged in court for various crimes, including the murder of Teoh Beng Hock?

Secondly, is the MACC or the Government prepared to publicly accept responsibility for causing the death of Teoh Beng Hock and make a generous ex-gratia compensation payment to TBH’s family, among other things, to minimise the family’s sufferings and to facilitate a closure of the tragedy?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 July 2011, 4:13 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Press bosses to silently protest against Putrajaya’s media council plan

By
Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Jul 22, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, July 22 — Several media heads are expected to protest against Putrajaya’s proposal to form a Media Consultative Council (MCC) by snubbing a meeting next week to discuss the body’s terms of reference.

The Information, Communication and Culture Ministry has sent letters inviting numerous media organisations to attend the inaugural meeting at the historic Sultan Abdul Samad complex here on Monday afternoon.

But a source told The Malaysian Insider that instead of attending the meeting themselves, several media chiefs have agreed to show their protest by sending junior editors.

It is believed that the heads, including those from Barisan Nasional-controlled media, fear that the council will only impose further restrictions on press freedom.

According to the ministry’s letter, sighted by The Malaysian Insider, the proposed MCC will be jointly chaired by Information, Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Rais Yatim and Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein.

Its members are to include representatives from the government, print, electronic and new media organisations and selected non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

Among those invited are mainstream media organisations such as state news agency Bernama, Utusan Malaysia, Astro TV, Media Prima stations such as TV3, NTV7, TV8, TV9, Hot FM, Fly FM and One FM, AMP Radio Network, AlHijrah Media Corporation, Suara Johor, Star RFM, and Husa Network.

Others include all newspapers under the NSTP group such as New Straits Times, Berita Harian and Harian Metro, Karangkraf media groups like Sinar Harian, The Star newspaper, The Sun, The Edge, Malay Mail, Makkal Osai, Tamil Nesan, Sin Chew Jit Poh, Malaysia Nanban, Kwong Wah Yit Poh, China Press, Nanyang Siang Pau, Sarawak Press, See Hua Daily and United Daily News.

All newspapers have to seek an annual publishing permit while broadcasters are controlled by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).

Blog House Malaysia will be the sole representative for “new media”. The three NGOs are Malaysian Press Institute, National Union of Journalists Malaysia, and Persatuan Penerbit Majalah.

Alternative online news portals such as The Malaysian Insider, Malaysiakini, Free Malaysia Today, Malaysia Today or Merdeka Review have not been invited, although they are accredited by the Information Department.

The ministry’s letter came with a proposal paper for the MCC. It details the council’s terms of reference, to be discussed at the meeting. These include its roles, objectives, functions, membership and activities.

The suggested roles include fostering a “participative and engaging” cooperation between the government and the media; strengthening journalistic ethics, social responsibility and spirit of patriotism; setting the direction for media growth; and development and protecting press freedom “according to the law”.

The key objectives include ensuring all MCC members share the responsibility of “protecting and supporting” all matters of national importance, ensuring that media development grows in tandem with current trends, and ensuring that in protecting its independence, the media must also exercise its duties and responsibilities to the people and the country.

The proposal outlined five functions:

1. To improve the management and sharing of information on government policies, programmes and community activities;

2. To discuss current issues and draw up communication plans to address them in an integrated and organised manner;

3. To improve efforts on educating and strengthening the people’s minds and spirit for the purpose of instilling a sense of patriotism and achieving developed-nation status;

4. To share information and feedback on how to improve the civil service sector;

5. To detect, address and eliminate all negative elements in protecting the Federal and state constitutions as well as the country’s integrity and sovereignty.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 July 2011, 9:40 am and is filed under
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Teoh Beng Hock RCI report (full)

Teoh Beng Hock RCI report –
English (pdf download)
 OR
mirror at Scribd.com
 OR
mirror at Google docs

Teoh Beng Hock RCI report –
Bahasa Malaysia (pdf download)
 OR
mirror at Scribd.com
 OR
mirror at Google docs

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 July 2011, 12:18 pm and is filed under
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What’s really choking investments in Malaysia?

by
Edwin Yapp

The Malaysian Insider

Jul 21, 2011

JULY 21 — In my many years as a journalist, one of the most oft-asked questions I’ve put to interviewees who have business interests here in Malaysia is: “What are some of the factors that have prompted you to invest in Malaysia?”

The answers that I get, though not exactly the same every time, can be summarised into one or more of the following major points: low costs, multilingual workforce, skilled labour, and political stability. This was especially true in the heydays of the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) Malaysia, when multinationals began pouring their investments into Cyberjaya, building their shared services and outsourcing centres there.

Thus, I read with interest an article last week which quoted our deputy minister of international trade and industry as saying that one of the main features that attracted investors to Malaysia was political stability.

He went on to say that it was “unfortunate” his ministry will now have to rely on other “features” in its bid to promote the country, especially coming off the back of last week’s Bersih 2.0 rally.

“The main question we receive is whether this [Bersih 2.0 rally] is a common occurrence,” he was quoted last week in The Malaysian Insider as saying. “Although it was a hiccup last Saturday, we tell investors that it happens only very rarely.”

His responses got me thinking about a couple of things. Firstly, was the Bersih 2.0 rally, which admittedly doesn’t happen frequently, a real cause for concern as the deputy minister claimed? Secondly, what kind of other “features” does he think the government can use to sell Malaysia as an investment destination?

While I think it’s fair to say investors could have been marginally concerned about the one-off street rally that happened last week, I do not think that our position as an investment destination will be affected by the fear of more street rallies in the future.

In fact, I think what’s more worrying to businesses are basic issues affecting the nation’s economy as a whole. There are many fundamental ones that can be highlighted but I think two will suffice.

The first must be the application of equitable and transparent business practices at all levels of investments, especially in deals that involve taxpayers’ monies. Now, there have been many instances when the public has read and heard through the grapevine, and no doubt experienced by businessmen, of how the lowest priced and best submitted tenders aren’t the ones which would eventually get the job.

Case in point: The recent Light Rail Transit (LRT) extension project in a so-called open tender exercise, which witnessed the Finance Ministry committee ordering Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd to award the deal to the Hartasuma Sdn Bhd-Bombardier joint venture, whose RM890 million bid is nearly 50 per cent higher than the lowest bid.

A source told The Malaysian Insider that “all bids are technically the same” but Prasarana had recommended Ingress Corp Bhd-Balfour Beatty Rail Sdn Bhd, which put in a bid of RM610 million, the lowest, against Hartasuma-Bombardier’s bid, which was the highest.

If indeed this were proven to be true, my question would be what happened to the principle that there must be a “level playing field” in order for true competitive practices to thrive and for the owner of the project, in this case, the government, to be ensured of getting the best value for its money on the said project?

Or are these kinds of deals awarded based on the age-old feudalistic principle of, “It’s not what you know, but who you know?” instead of the “May the best man win” principle? This case is just but one of the many stories of how the best, most qualified tender submission, isn’t the one that’s going to get the job.

Now wouldn’t any businesses wanting to deal here in Malaysia be more concerned with a level playing field than street rallies?

The second factor I believe investors are likely to be antsy about is the systemic corruption and wastages that permeate all levels of tenders in the country. For this, we only need to turn to the pages of the Auditor-General’s report for the past few years to see for ourselves how bad the wastages in Malaysia are.

A sample of these occurrences (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/9/9/nation/18832193&sec=nation)  include a set of four screwdrivers costing RM224; technical books consisting 10 titles that had a price tag of RM10,700; a 3.1-megapixel digital camera that was bought for RM8,254.

These figures speak for themselves. Surely this kind of practice can’t inspire confidence in foreign investors to make Malaysia a preferred investment destination, especially with other countries in the region rising to challenge our competitiveness?

One can’t really know what the right honourable deputy minister meant when he noted that we must use other “features” to make us more attractive to investors.

But regardless of what he means, I do not think that there will be any downside to making Malaysia a preferred investment destination if the government begins first by addressing the two aforementioned points before trying to do anything else to convince investors that are already here to stay, or those who are thinking of investing.

Political stability can’t be just about the absence of perceived disturbances and nuisance as a result of one rally. It must encompass much more than just that; it should be about how the government of the day allows free market principles to breed a competitive business landscape through the execution of open and transparent business practices instead of letting a feudalistic mentality continue to reign.

It must be about the eradication of systemic corruption, the plugging of leakages and the elimination of wastages that will always end up disrupting economic progress.

If the government is truly serious about selling Malaysia, start by selling this feature — that it is committed to reform by being transparent for all to see while tackling the hubris that exists in the current system.

Do that, rather than simply making July 9, 2011 a convenient and obvious scapegoat for the flagging inflow of investment into the country.

This would be the best “feature” that will ultimately speak for itself and convince investors to part with their money and park it here in Malaysia.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 July 2011, 12:05 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Economics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bar: Gov’t should apologise for Teoh’s death (updated)

Jul 23, 11 |
MalaysiaKini

Rejecting the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) findings that DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock had committed suicide, the Bar Council says the government and Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) should apologise to Teoh’s family and compensate them for the loss.

“The Malaysian Bar also calls on the government of Malaysia and MACC to consider offering an unqualified written apology to Teoh Beng Hock’s family, and to the citizens of Malaysia, for his death,” said Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee.

He also urged the government to make reasonable compensation to Teoh’s family for his death.

Lim said that the authorities should investigate the relevant MACC officers for possible offences under sections 304 and 304A of the Penal Code, namely for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and for causing Teoh’s death through negligence, respectively.

“It is very clear to the Malaysian Bar that full responsibility for Teoh Beng Hock’s death lies squarely and solely on the MACC, and that immediate action must be taken to hold the culpable officers accountable for their behaviour,” he added.

In a statement today, Lim said the RCI’s finding is unsupported by the facts and the evidence of the case.

He also pointed out that contrary to the statement made by Minister in Prime Minister’s Department Mohd Nazri Aziz during the release of the RCI report, forensic psychiatrist Paul Edward Mullen had not testified that Teoh had a “weak character” that had led him to suicide.

No conclusion of ‘weak character’

“Mullen also did not conclude that Teoh had committed suicide; rather, his testimony stated that ‘in [his] opinion, what we learned of Teoh’s personality and behaviour do not suggest any increased risk of suicide’.

“He further opined that the context of the events that had taken place was not one ‘which, in [his] experience, leads to suicide in custody’, as he had not been made aware of anything ‘to explain panic and distress sufficient to drive (Teoh) to conclude his honour had been irreparably tarnished’,” said Lim.

He also pointed out that Mullen’s testimony does not provide the basis for the RCI’s finding of suicide, such as that described in the section titled ‘Conclusion on forensic psychiatric aspects’ in the RCI’s report.

In that section, the RCI stated that “Teoh experienced a change in his state of mind. And in a matter of hours, this change transformed him from being in the low-risk group for suicide into the high-risk group”.

Lim said that Nazri had made the same statement at the report’s launch, that Teoh had “truly committed suicide based on his character that had changed from a low-risk group to a high-risk group for suicide after undergoing a continuous and aggressive questioning session”.

The Malaysian Bar, whose lawyers had assisted throughout the inquiry, also noted that the joint expert psychiatric report of Dr Badiah Yahya and Dr Nor Hayati Ali had stated that there was a lack of information to determine Teoh’s state of mind.

The report read: “We did not have any evidence on how the investigation was conducted as there were ‘no written questions posted to (Teoh)’ or audio recording as to ascertain the amount of pressure he experienced.

“It is not known whether he had experienced in his mind the effects of being possibly prosecuted on the allegations, whether it would have been devastating for him and/or his organisation. This should require more information on what was said and done in the period taken [sic] into custody until he was found dead.”

Both the experts from Health Ministry were engaged by MACC and present during most of the court proceedings and had interviewed Teoh’s family members, housemate and work colleagues.

That the time of death had been between 7.15am and 11.15am on July 16, 2009;

 That Teoh had not been released at 3.30am and been left alone sitting on a sofa after his statement had been recorded, as the then Selangor MACC deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim had issued a written circular the previous month that “witnesses and visitors in the Selangor MACC office should be accompanied at all times”;

That Teoh had been subjected to a fourth interrogation session after 3.30am by Hishamuddin and his officers, which was aggressive and relentless. In addition, the RCI rejected the evidence of MACC officer Raymond Nion that he had seen Teoh Beng Hock lying down unattended on a sofa at approximately 6am;

That the fourth interrogation session was probably between 3.30am and 7am;

That the window from which Teoh Beng Hock is said to have fallen out was located conspicuously; and,

There was no evidence whatsoever produced at the RCI hearing of Teoh’s whereabouts or movements after 6.15am, and the staff of the Selangor MACC office would have begun arriving by 8.am.

Therefore, to surmise that Teoh had committed suicide between 7.15am and 11.15am, said Lim, requires a leap in logic and an assumption of facts not in evidence.

Despite the disagreement, there are a number of key points on which the Bar Council concurred with the RCI report:

Therefore, to surmise that Teoh had committed suicide between 7.15am and 11.15am, said Lim, requires a leap in logic and an assumption of facts not in evidence.

Despite the disagreement, there are a number of key points on which the Bar Council concurred with the RCI report:

 That the RCI was unable to accept that the alleged suicide note had been written by Teoh, and that the undue delay by the authorities in tendering the alleged suicide note at the first available opportunity could not be taken as mere carelessness or neglect, and therefore the authenticity of the note could not be trusted;

 That Teoh was, at all material times until his untimely death, in the care, custody and control of the MACC officers;

That Teoh was not released from the care, custody and control of the MACC officers after his statement had been recorded at approximately 3.30am, and this failure “amounted to cruel conduct and punishment inflicted on purpose”;

 That Teoh was subjected to “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” and that the recording of his statement was unlawful;

That the majority of the MACC officers exhibited a “total lack of consideration for human sensitivities”, and that the recruitment process of MACC officers should include a “psychological evaluation to assess their suitability for investigative work”;

That most of the MACC officers who were involved in the operations on July 15 and 16, 2009, and who gave evidence as witnesses, were neither truthful nor credible, as they “had the inevitable habit of lying”;

That massive operations launched by MACC Selangor – headed by Hishamuddin – against the Pakatan Rakyat members of the Selangor state assembly were grounded on mere belief of information purportedly received over the telephone, and without proper ground work or verification;

That Hishamuddin was “arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising”, and that he was “just too stubborn [such trait was also displayed when he gave evidence before us] to retreat from his mistake in mounting such a massive operation”;

 That not only was Hishamuddin involved but he also “unleashed his officers to do his bidding in order to get results within that night and morning come hell or high-water”, and that Hishamuddin should be held responsible for the actions taken by him and his officers that led to Teoh’s death; and

That the Selangor MACC had shown an extreme lack of cooperation with the police in the latter’s attempts to investigate complaints of assault and other offences previously made against its officers.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 July 2011, 5:17 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Family demands RCI, new probe into Sarbaini’s death

By
Melissa Chi

July 23, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

PETALING JAYA, July 23 — Dissatisfied with the ongoing inquest into the death Ahmad Sarbaini Mohamed, the Customs officer’s family today again demanded for a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) into his untimely demise during a graft investigation.

The family previously asked for an RCI to be convened immediately, but later relented to the inquest after Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk VK Liew said that it was the first choice, and that there was a “procedure” which needed to be followed.

Today, Sarbaini’s widow Maziah Manap also asked for a fresh investigation over a remark made by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officer Abdul Ghani Ali about those responsible for her husband’s death on April 6.

“Until now the police did not record my statement regarding Encik Ghani’s remark, ‘it wasn’t me, it was my people’, [made] to me when I expressed dissatisfaction of my husband’s death,” she said in the report lodged at the Kelana Jaya police station hear her house.

Abdul Ghani is a MACC investigating officer and the 18th witness to be called in the ongoing inquest into Ahmad Sarbaini’s death.

He had defended his statement and told the coroner’s court that he meant Ahmad Sarbaini had went to see his officers, not him personally, on the day of his death.

Ahmad Sarbaini, the Selangor Customs assistant director, was found dead on April 6 after he was believed to have fallen from the pantry on the third floor of the MACC Kuala Lumpur office on Jalan Cochrane here and landed on a badminton court on the first floor.

The most recent outcome from the inquest was a forensic investigator’s conclusion that Ahmad Sarbaini did not jump to his death nor was he pushed from the KL anti-graft office.

“I am very confident that my husband did not commit suicide but there is foul play in his death based on RPK’s blog and Encik Ghani’s statement,” Maziah stated in her report today.

“RPK” are the initials of Raja Petra Kamarudin, the blogger who alleged on the Malaysia Today website that Ahmad Sarbaini accidentally fell to his death after being forced onto the ledge by a senior MACC investigator.

He further claimed that the MACC investigator convened a “conference” with his colleagues to “brainstorm and concoct the most plausible story” to protect their careers.

Up till today, Raja Petra has written a nine-part series on Malaysia Today alleging that Ahmad Sarbaini death was caused by the anti-graft body’s officers.

“I demand the police to investigate again my husband’s case because Raja Petra’s articles are parallel with (what was said in the coroner’s court),” she told reporters.

Mokhtar Mansor, 53, cousin-in-law to Ahmad Sarbaini, and a former senior deputy public prosecutor, told reporters that the family’s hopes were getting dimmer especially since the findings of the Teoh Beng Hock RCI were made public.

“RCI is much better because the officers will not be under the purview or under the influence of the Attorney General, hopefully we have that.

“At least for Teoh Beng Hock, to some extent, he was given that benefit,” he said.

When asked if the family would want to continue with the inquest, he said they “still believe in the government, believe in the system”, so they will go on with it.

Also present today was Ghazali Mohd Ramli, Maziah’s brother-in-law, who is also the family lawyer, Awtar Singh’s firm partner, as well as Ahmad Sarbaini’s siblings.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 July 2011, 4:50 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Sarbaini
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kit Siang slams inaction over MACC trio

By
Melissa Chi

July 23, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, July 23 — Lim Kit Siang today demanded the Attorney-General and Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) explain why no action has been taken against the three graftbusters implicated by the Teoh Beng Hock royal commission of inquiry (RCI).

“AG and MACC should explain why three MACC officers Hishammuddin (Hashim), Arman (Alies) and (Mohd) Ashraf (Mohd Yunus) have not been suspended and no criminal charges and departmental disciplinary action taken against them despite RCI report holding them responsible for Teoh Beng Hock’s death,” the DAP parliamentary leader said in a statement.

The inquiry into Teoh’s death ruled that the former DAP aide had committed suicide as a result of pressure from aggressive and prolonged questioning by MACC officers.

The officers had wanted to pressure Teoh into becoming a witness in their case against his boss, Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, for alleged abuse of public funds.

Teoh was found dead on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam on July 16, 2009, after being questioned overnight at the then-Selangor MACC headquarters on the 14th floor of the building.

“Clearly MACC and MACC officers were responsible for his death at MACC headquarters at Shah Alam on July 16, 2009 through ‘aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation’.

“What is unacceptable about the TBH RCI report is its failure to clearly and unmistakably state in its conclusion that MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death, although it is clear from the report that the commissioners agree that the MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death,” Lim said.

The RCI found three MACC investigating officers involved in the case to have used “continuous, aggressive and improper questioning tactics on [Teoh] which had breached its existing standard operating procedures”.

It recommended that action be taken specifically against the three MACC officers.

Lim today acknowledged the MACC as one of the most important law enforcement agencies in the country, “but anyone reading the TBH RCI report cannot escape getting the impression that the MACC, particularly in Selangor, was utterly lawless as it had become a den of criminals with MACC officers blatantly subverting the law”.

“Furthermore, the TBH RCI have virtually dismissed the whole cast of MACC witnesses at the RCI (except for two ‘brave’ souls Azeem and Azian) as liars, which means they had all committed perjury.

“Section 193 of Penal Code prescribes seven years jail and fine for giving false evidence at judicial proceeding like the TBH RCI,” he pointed out.

RCI chairman Tan Sri James Foong Cheng Yuen submitted on June 22 the report by the RCI into Teoh’s death two years ago, which was made public yesterday.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 July 2011, 4:46 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Public sees Najib as guilty in Scorpene deal, says Pakatan

By
Clara Chooi

July 23, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, July 23 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders today warned Datuk Seri Najib Razak that the move to deport French lawyer William Bourdon last night has only confirmed his guilt in the eyes of the public.

They told the prime minister that chasing Bourdon out of Malaysia would not absolve him of blame but, instead, would resurrect the ghost of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaaribuu.

Altantuya, who was killed in 2006 and blown up with C4 explosives, has been linked to the government’s controversial RM7 billion Scorpene submarines purchase from French defence company DCNS which is now under probe in France. The purchase was made while Najib headed the Defence Ministry.

Bourdon, who is handling the case in France, was held by immigration officers yesterday morning upon landing at the KLIA in Sepang from Penang where he had briefed an audience on the progress of the probe.

“This strange move would only fuel public suspicion that something is terribly amiss in the Scorpene case… which, of course, is linked to Altantuya’s case.

“Instead of coming clean, he (Najib) is trying to cover up the matter. Everyone knows that Bourdon will be in the country to explain the progress of the case, that he is trying to prise open the layers of secrets surrounding the Scorpene deal, which is related to the murder case,” said DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang.

Lim pointed out that Malaysians were already aware of the RM540 million in commission for the submarine deal paid to Perimeker Sdn Bhd, a company run by Abdul Razak Baginda, and are now demanding answers if the sum was paid as “corruption money”.

Abdul Razak, who was tried for abetting in Altantuya’s murder but was later acquitted, was said to be Najib’s close aide when the deal was made in 2002.

“Najib has committed himself to fighting corruption so this RM540 million must be subject to a public audit. Was it justifiable? How was it spent? All these details must be scrutinised via an independent public inquiry so that Malaysians will know whether it was a genuine above-board deal,” said Lim.

He castigated the prime minister for failing to address the matter and said that the government should not wait to be exposed in a foreign country but should initiate its own proceedings.

“The French prosecution is trying to decide if there is a case to go to trial but why wait? Najib has the responsibility to answer to Malaysians. Establish a commission and give the full details of the procurement,” said Lim.

PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar agreed with Lim that Bourdon’s deportation last night would return soon to haunt the Najib administration.

She however warned that any information revealed in the French courts would eventually reach Malaysia and could not be swept under the carpet.

“They (Najib administration) prefer to sweet dirt under the carpet… deport possible whistleblowers and gag such exposes through their control over the mainstream media. The fact that information is globally obtainable stops them dead in their tracks,” she told The Malaysian Insider via SMS today.

The Lembah Pantai MP pointed out that if it were to be proven that DCNS had paid kickbacks to Malaysian officials for the Scorpene deal, they would be compelled to pay compensation.

“Sadly, Malaysia under Najib rejects this clear mechanism to hold the government accountable to transparent procurement practices,” she said.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 July 2011, 5:11 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Defence
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Suspend and charge three  MACC officers responsible for Teoh Beng Hock’s death

The Teoh Beng Hock Royal Commission of Inquiry  Report, in Para 119, pronounced its finding on Teoh Beng Hock’s death, as follows:

“119. Having considered all the evidence in its entirety, we found that TBH was driven to commit suicide by the aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation to which he was subjected by certain officers of the MACC who were involved in the ongoing operation by the Selangor MACC on the night of the 15th and into the morning of the 16th.”

Malaysians cannot accept the RCI’s verdict of “forced suicide” as the cause of Beng Hock’s death.

Clearly MACC and MACC officers were responsible for his death at MACC headquarters at Shah Alam on July 16, 2009 through “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” – leaving to everybody’s imagination of the unlawful and even lawless torture Beng Hock was subjected to when he was entirely at the mercy of the “oppressive and unscrupulous” MACC officers for 12 hours on those fateful hours on the night of July 15 and the early hours of July 16, 2009.

What is unacceptable about the TBH RCI report is its failure to clearly and unmistakably state in its conclusion that MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death, although it is clear from the report that the commissioners agree that the MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death.

This is evident from two paragraphs in the TBH RCI report referring to the testimony of one MACC officer Raymond who had testified that he saw Beng Hock at 6 am on the 16th July 2009 “lying on the sofa outside Nadzri’s room”.

Expressing “grave reservations” over Raymond’s evidence, the TBH RCI said (Para 198):

“In our opinion, he was not a reliable witness and was used by those responsible for TBN’s death to distance them from their wrongdoings by creating an impression that TBH was not only alive at 6am on the 16th but was also resting comfortably and peacefully on the sofa outside Nadzri’s room.”

In Para 201, the TBH RCI said:

“ As it become obvious to us that Raymond’s evidence was tailored  to fit certain objectives which in this case dovetailed those of the MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death, we rejected his evidence as being unworthy of any weight or consideration in respect of the time he claimed to have seen TBH at 6am on the 16th.”

From both these paragraphs, referring to “MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death”, it is crystal clear that the TBH Royal Commission of Inquiry is quite unanimous about who the MACC officers who caused Beng Hock’s death, but the question is why the TBH RCI did not specifically name these “MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death” and spoke instead about “forced suicide”?

Who are these “MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death”?  Although the RCI report did not specifically name such persons, their identities are quite clear from Para 225 which said:

“During his interrogation, TBH had to face MACC interrogation heavyweights like Arman and bully [who would manipulate his witness to obtain evidence], Ashraf the abuser [who was Machiavellian in his method to secure evidence] and HH the arrogant leader [who would have no qualms in lying as long as his ends were achieved, regardless of the means employed].”

The “credentials” of Asraf “the abuser” is to be found in Para 158, which said:

“From police records tendered in this inquiry by one DSP Kamaruddin Awang from the Selangor police criminal investigation section, out of the twenty cases reported against the Selangor MACC officers for assault, Ashraf was involved in fourteen of them and was positively identified by a majority of those who had made the reports against him.”

What about “HH” (Hishammuddin Hashim, at the relevant time the deputy director of Selangor MACC and “mastermind” of the operation resulting in Beng Hock’s death)?

Read Para 176 on TBH RCI’s indictment on “HH”:

“We found him to be arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising in his stand. His falsehoods, particularly of his non-active involvement in the entire operation at the material time, were exposed from the contradictory statements he made before us. But more compelling was the confirmation from two of his own officers, namely, Azeem and Azian who were brave enough to reveal towards the later part of our proceedings the actual role of HH in this operation despite the fact that HH was their superior and still holds a senior position in the MACC as director of the MACC Negeri Sembilan.”

The MACC is one of the most important law enforcement agencies in the country to uphold the law, but anyone reading the TBH RCI report cannot escape getting the impression that the MACC, particularly in Selangor, was utterly lawless as it had become a den of criminals with MACC officers blatantly subverting the law.

MACC and MACC officers not only caused Beng Hock’s death through “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” and unlawful misconduct, they  broke law after law in the  massive MACC operation “masterminded” by Hishammuddin without proper basis, followed by a conspiracy of lies and perjury about what happened – all the way up to the Royal Commission of Inquiry public hearings.

MACC has announced that it accepts with an open heart the findings of the TBH RCI and pledged that appropriate action would be taken on RCI findings and recommendations.

The Attorney-General and MACC should explain why the  three  MACC officers Hishammuddin, Arman and Arshraf  have not been suspended and no criminal charges and departmental disciplinary action taken against them despite RCI report holding them responsible for Teoh Beng Hock’s death.

Furthermore, the TBH RCI have virtually dismissed the whole cast of MACC witnesses at the RCI (except for two “brave” souls Azeem and Azian) as liars, which means they had all committed perjury.

Section 193 of Penal Code prescribes seven years jail and fine for giving false evidence at judicial proceeding like the TBH RCI.

Will the whole lot of MACC witnesses (except for Azeem and Azian) be charged for perjury at the TBH RCI?

** Media Conference Statement at  Kampong Simee DAP Service Centre after Kg Simee market walkabout

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 July 2011, 12:59 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


EU mulls observer group as EC ‘not credible’, say diplomats

By
Jahabar Sadiq

Editor

The Malaysian Insider

Jul 24, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, July 24 — Despite Putrajaya’s strident defence of the Election Commission (EC), European Union (EU) diplomats are looking into proposals to send observer groups for the next general election as they found the commission “not credible” after a recent briefing here.

Several diplomats told The Malaysian Insider that EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof’s briefing weeks before the Bersih rally on July 9 did not convince them of the commission’s neutrality as he kept referring to being part of the government.

“They are not credible. Abdul Aziz kept repeating ‘us’ and ‘we in the government’ during the briefing,” a European diplomat told The Malaysian Insider.

Abdul Aziz was the secretary-general of the Home Ministry before his appointment as the EC chairman on December 31, 2008, after his extension contract ended.

A diplomat from another European nation confirmed the briefing and their conclusions.

“It is sensitive but we are thinking of recommending observer groups to watch the next general election,” he said, recalling that the Commonwealth Observer Mission had observed the 1990 general elections.

The ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) government has kept out international election watch groups since then and had refused to make public the report from the Commonwealth Observer Mission. Several local election watch groups have sprouted but receive minimal cooperation from the EC.

An EU diplomat said they had also met with Bersih 2.0 leaders to get a briefing on their eight-point demands calling for free and fair elections that culminated with a rally on July 9 that was dispersed by riot police despite locking down the capital city.

“We had a briefing from Bersih 2.0 chair Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan about their cause,” he said, declining to give specific details of the meeting.

Bersih 2.0 estimated up to 50,000 people turned up at the rally after the Najib administration reneged on a promise for a stadium but city police say only 6,000 people made it through the barricades. Nearly 1,700 were arrested while scores were injured and one man died of a heart attack in the rally.

The government had also outlawed Bersih 2.0, a coalition of 62 organisations, saying that it had not registered the movement. The movement’s illegal status was also cited as a reason for not getting a stadium booking or a police permit for a gathering.

Despite that, Bersih 2.0 has called its supporters and the public to wear something yellow every Saturday until the government looks into and implements its eight demands. The EC had said it was willing to discuss the points if Bersih dropped its plans for a rally.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced yesterday Putrajaya will provide allocations for a biometric voter verification system requested by the EC to stamp out phantom voters, in what is seen as a concession to one key demand from Bersih 2.0

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz also said this week that government would not object to non-governmental organisations (NGO) joining the EC if the commission wanted their participation to assure the public about their impartiality.

“We are open to any suggestions . . . I mean it is for the commission, the SPR’s decision. As you know, SPR is an independent body. If it’s okay with them, then they can negotiate with the government, as long as they promise there will not be anymore street demonstrations,” he said, calling the EC by its Bahasa Malaysia acronym.

The EC has a chairman, a deputy chairman and five members, all retired civil servants, and are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong after consulting the Conference of Rulers.

The appointments to the commission are made with the advice of the prime minister.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 July 2011, 9:32 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Habeas corpus made meaningless!

P Ramakrishnan

President

Aliran

22 July 2011

Aliran is deeply disillusioned with the judiciary. Instead of depending on technicalities and loopholes in the law, it should focus on fairness and justice.

It should be prominently and predominantly concerned with freedom and human rights of the citizens. When the freedom of individuals is deprived by dubious means, the judiciary should be uncompromising in defending that freedom.

Dr Jeyakumar and his five companions have been incarcerated since 2 July 2011. Nobody believes the accusations levelled against them. The whole exercise has turned into farcical nonsense.

They were initially accused of “waging war against the King”. But that accusation has been dropped now. What does this suggest with regard to the integrity of the police? It only means that they cooked up an excuse to detain them.

Then they were accused of reviving communism in this country. Images of past communists leaders printed on T-shirts in their possession do not support this theory.

It is now no longer the contentious issue. What does this prove? The police are grasping at straws in desperation to justify their action. But it won’t do them any good.

Then the six were detained under the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 under the false pretence that they were a threat to public security.

These six citizens are no goons or gangsters to pose any such threat. Nevertheless, they are accused of being a threat to national security. What does it prove? It only means that any flimsy grounds would suffice to detain any individual under this anti-democratic and draconic law, which blatantly denies a person his natural justice, including the right to defend himself or herself. But it won’t win support for the police.

Ridiculously, the six are now projected as the prime movers of Bersih 2.0, when the entire country is aware that it is the coalition of 62 NGOs headed by Dato’ Dr. Ambiga Sreenevasan that was the sole mover of Bersih 2.0. These six are members of a political party and therefore had no role to play in Bersih 2.0, which excluded political parties from the Steering Committee of Bersih 2.0. What does it prove? It means that there is no respect for truth and the rule of law. But it is not going to help the police to shore up support for the Barisan Nasional.

It is under these circumstances that an application was made for a habeas corpus hearing to question the conduct of the police in detaining these six PSM members. After much haggling, 22 July was fixed for hearing. But now this hearing has been postponed to 5 August.

Any application under habeas corpus should – and must – deserve priority to ensure that it is heard almost immediately. There is an urgency that cannot be ignored. There is the question of justice that has to be addressed at the earliest possible time without any undue delay. This urgency is no longer there.

Whatever the reason for justifying this frustrating postponement, it will not look good for the judiciary. Its battered image – from previous absurd judicial pronouncements that had discredited the judiciary – will suffer a further ignominious blow. It appears that there is no saving grace for the judiciary!

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 July 2011, 9:51 am and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Jeyakumar
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Suspension of 3 officers held responsible by RCI for death of TBH too little too late

Too little and too late – that’s the general public reaction to the news yesterday evening that the MACC had finally succumbed after 48 hours of public outrage and increasing public pressure and suspended three officers held responsible by the James Foong Royal Commission of Inquiry for the death of Teoh Beng Hock at the MACC headquarters in Shah Alam on July 16, 2009 from further investigation duties pending an internal probe.

According to press reports, the three MACC officers suspended are:

1. Hishammuddin Hashim [“HH”]– Negri Sembilan MACC director who was at the relevant time Deputy Director Selangor MACC and “mastermind” of the 33-officer operation based “on a mere belief and without supporting facts” (RCI report Para 184) resulting in Beng Hock’s death.

This is what the RCI has to say about Hishammuddin:

“We found him to be arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising in his stand. His falsehoods, particularly of his non-active involvement in the entire operation at the material time, were exposed from the contradictory statements he made before us. But more compelling was the confirmation from two of his own officers, namely Azeem and Aziah who were brave enough to reveal towards the later part of our proceedings the actual role of HH in this operation despite the fact that HH was their superior and still holds a senior position in the MACC as director of the MACC Negri Sembilan” – Para 176;

2. Anuar Ismail [“Anuar”] – appointed by Hishammuddin as the investigation officer [“the IO”] of the operation which resulted in Beng Hock’s death;

3. Ashraf Mohd Yunus [“Ashraf”] – described as “Ashraf the abuser [who was Machiavellian in his method to secure evidence” (Para 226) and also in Para 158, viz: “From police records tendered in this inquiry by one DSP Kamaruddin Awang from the Selangor police criminal section, out of the twenty cases reported against the Selangor MACC officers for assault, Ashraf was involved in fourteen of them and was positively identified by a majority of those who had made the reports against him”.

The many questions demanding answers from the MACC include:

1. Why were only these three MACC officers suspended, when the RCI report named many more MACC officers who were responsible for Beng Hock’s death as well as guilty of a whole series of illegal and unlawful acts. Furthermore, they were also guilty of lying to the Royal Commission of Inquiry (which would mean that they had committed similar perjuries at the earlier Teoh Beng Hock inquest before Coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas). Why hasn’t action been taken against all the MACC officers implicated in the death of Teoh Beng Hock and for committing crimes and perjuries before judicial proceedings like the inquest and the royal commission of inquiry?

2. Why were these three MACC offficers only suspended from investigations duties, which means they remain MACC officers enjoying all the perks and privileges apart from being taken off investigation duties?

3. MACC is neither serious nor genuine when it declares that it accepts the RCI report with “open heart”, or it would have taken to heart the indictment of the MACC contained in the RCI report presenting a picture of utter lawlessness reigning in the MACC, particularly in Selangor, with MACC “law enforcement officers” themselves committing heinous crimes and not batting an eye lid telling lies after lies at the Royal Commission of Inquiry. Why hasn’t MACC immediately suspended these MACC officers from all duties as well as push for their arrest and prosecution for a host of crimes, including violating Section 193 of Penal Code which prescribe seven years’ jail and fine for giving false evidence at judicial proceedings i.e. Teoh Beng Hock RCI and TBH inquest!

This is why the MACC suspension of 3 officers held responsible by RCI for death of Teoh Beng Hock from investigation duties is “too little too late” – gravely inadequate and total mockery of the commission of heinous crimes by MACC officers described in RCI report.

The TBH RCI report was officially handed over to the Yang di Pertuan Agong on 22nd June, which means that the Attorney-General had over a month to study what follow-up action he should institute in discharge of his constitutional duties to prosecute MACC officers for commission of grave offences by a major law enforcement agency which should be upholding the law.

Why is there total silence from the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 July 2011, 2:10 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Teoh’s ‘suicide’ — fact or fantasy?

By
Kim Quek

July 24, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

JULY 24 — The Royal Commission of Inquiry on Teoh Beng Hock’s death (RCI) says that Teoh had committed suicide.

And what had driven this promising young political aide to take his own life?

RCI provides the answer in the concluding paragraph on its probe (para 232 of RCI Report), which refers to the supposed final stage of the all-night grilling of Teoh in the MACC office on July 15, 2009:

“TBH experienced a change in his state of mind. And in a matter of hours, this change transformed him from being in the low-risk group for suicide into the high-risk group. The doubts, extreme emotional conflict and the immense feeling of guilt were all intolerable . . . Finding no viable strategies to surmount the hurdle of accusations levelled, he found himself unable to escape from the suffocating quagmire in which he was trapped. Losing all hope, TBH would have felt trapped and succumbed to despair . . . TBH would have found that the only way for escape from the torment he was undergoing was by jumping out of the window, even though it meant taking his own life.”

Judging from the severity of anguish described by RCI, one would have thought Teoh must have been cornered for improprieties over millions of public funds, and now was the moment of reckoning when he had to face the terrible shame of having to dishonour himself, his loved ones, his party and his government.

Not at all the case.

Petty and dubious allegation

Teoh was in fact only brought in by MACC as a witness to assist in the investigation of an unfounded allegation against his political boss of having abused a mere RM2,400 of public funds — allegedly claiming the money to buy flags that were not delivered.

If you are a novice to the case, you would certainly have expressed shock and disbelief that such a trivial matter could have driven a seasoned political activist to commit suicide. But RCI thinks otherwise, for which they have come up with a host of reasons, the main ones of which are summed up in para 230 of the report, which I quote in full:

“These intense stages of interrogation must have created serious doubts in TBH’s mind as regards his action in relation to his duties as YB Ean’s political secretary. Signing his name but affixing YB Ean’s seal, the absence of at least three quotations before the awarding of a project or programme, the alleged kickbacks to the DAP, the direct awards of projects, and fixing prices to goods required for projects also weighed heavily on his mind.”

RCI has earlier explained in its report that MACC officers had bullied Teoh with all sorts of false accusations of wrongdoing. These included Teoh signing on documents with boss Ean’s rubber stamp (though Teoh was actually blameless as his own name was clearly written on the document, indicating he was signing on behalf of his boss), awarding contracts without calling at least 3 quotations (though this rule was superceded by a new Selangor government directive allowing direct awards for projects under RM20,000, but Teoh apparently was not familiar with these rules).

Other events that had compounded the distress of Teoh, in the opinion of RCI, were the removal of his hand phone to which Teoh was addicted, and the disclosure of the password to his email account, which would have enabled an invasion into his privacy.

Teoh and boss’s integrity intact

However, in RCI’s laborious weaving of the picture of gradual doom that was supposedly experienced by Teoh that had eventually reduced him “to almost a mental and physical wreck” (para 229 of the RCI Report), RCI had forgotten the cardinal fact of the case — that the integrity of Teoh and his boss was intact and Teoh was well aware of that. In fact, when Teoh was taken in, he was already familiar with MACC’s witch-hunting against Selangor’s Pakatan leaders that had been going on for some time — it was part of BN’s strategy to destabilise the Selangor state government.

Under the circumstances, even if MACC had succeeded in creating self-doubt in Teoh through the false accusations as outlined in para 230, these are all technical in nature. There was no element of dishonesty, as neither Teoh nor YB Ean had illegally pocketed any money. How is it then that RCI can make the conclusion that such dubious allegation of minor technical misconduct had plunged Teoh into a state of “extreme emotional conflict”, “immense feeling of guilt”, “losing all hope” and “succumbed to despair”?

In reaching these bizarre conclusions, hasn’t RCI made a giant leap in fantasy land?

By all accounts, Teoh was a bright young man of integrity and cheerful disposition, looking forward to his imminent marriage to his lover who was then conceived with his child. Will such a person jump from the 14th floor of the building just because he was unjustly and unfairly interrogated by government officers?

Professor Paul Edward Mullen, emeritus professor of forensic psychiatry of Monash University, who was brought in by the Malaysian Bar to prepare a report, seems to have provided the answer when he stated (quoting from para 209 of RCI Report):

“TBH was firmly in the lowest risk group for suicide when he was taken into MACC custody. And if TBH . . . did kill himself, things were likely to have occurred both to undermine his psychological stability and to frighten him literally to death . . .”

Could Teoh have been frightened to death by the interrogation antics, albeit cruel, waged by MACC officers over such minor and dubious accusations?

Isn’t the answer obvious?

Psychiatric reports quoted out of context

On the subject of psychiatrists’ reports, it is regrettable that RCI has resorted to quoting these out of context to make them appear as if these psychiatrists support its postulation of suicide. This is decidedly not the case.

The press release of the Malaysian Bar has quoted from these reports showing that none has supported the suicide theory.

On Professor Mullen’s report, the Malaysian Bar says: “He further opined that the contest of the events that had taken place was not one ‘which in [his] experience, leads to suicide in custody’, as he had not been made aware of anything ‘to explain panic and distress sufficient to drive [Teoh Beng Hock] to conclude his honour had been irreparably tarnished.”

And the joint report of Dr Badiah Yahya and Dr Nor Hayati Ali, who were present in the court proceedings and had interviewed people close to Teoh, apart from confirming Teoh’s status as low risk for suicide, states:

“We did not have any evidence on how the investigation was conducted as there were ‘no written questions posted to [Teoh Beng Hock]’ or audio recording as to ascertain the amount of pressure that he experienced. It is not known whether he had experienced in his mind the effects of being possibly prosecuted on the allegations, whether it would have been devastating for him and/or his organisation.”

Despite these two psychiatrists’ clear stand that there were no evidence that suggested Teoh’s suicidal move, RCI persisted in using part of these psychiatrists’ observation to buttress its suicide postulation. The psychiatrists observed that Teoh was subjected to emotional stress over these two events prior to his questioning by MACC:

•    Teoh had to bring forward his wedding after discovering that his fiancée was pregnant.

•    The gathering of documents by MACC from District and Land Office insinuating misappropriation of allocation by his boss YB Ean.

That RCI has to resort to using these two rather tame events to support its conclusion of suicide only exposes that RCI is actually scraping the bottom of the barrel to convince a sceptical public.

Bringing forward a marriage due to unplanned pregnancy is already a common and accepted occurrence in local society and, hence, it is not supposed to raise any eyebrow, not to mention causing any emotional crisis.

MACC officers visiting government offices to fish for evidence to incriminate Pakatan leaders has long been recognised as BN’s modus operandi to sabotage the Selangor state government, and should therefore be no big deal to a seasoned politician like Teoh.

Spinnig suicide will damage BN more

However, despite RCI’s unconvincing attempt to spin a suicide, it has nevertheless done a good job in exposing the deplorable state of lawlessness and abuse prevailing in MACC, which, like almost all other institutions, has been depraved through the long reign of a corrupted political leadership.

If only RCI has applied the same measure of honesty on the cause of Teoh’s death, as it has done in criticising MACC’s mismanagement, it would have done its political masters a great favour, as nothing will reassure the electorate more than the moral courage to own up to an ugly truth.

As it turned out, Teoh Beng Hock in his death will continue to take his pound of flesh from the political masters who were ultimately responsible for his tragic death.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 July 2011, 2:07 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Utusan defends MACC, holds DAP responsible for Teoh’s death

By
Clara Chooi

July 24, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, July 24 — Utusan Malaysia expressed sympathy for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) for bearing the brunt of the blame for Teoh Beng Hock’s death, saying today it was DAP and its adviser Lim Kit Siang who should be held responsible.

The Umno-owned daily’s editors, writing under the pseudonym Awang Selamat, accused the opposition party of tricking Malaysians into forgetting the corruption allegation against its leaders by drawing focus to Teoh’s death.

“Malaysians have been dragged too deep into this issue (Teoh’s death) until we have strayed from the actual path. The real issue — corruption — has been buried.

“This is DAP’s success… all this time, their actual intention is to hide the many shortcomings of its leaders in this case,” Awang said in Mingguan Malaysia, the Malay daily’s Sunday paper.

Awang added that if the just-released Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) report on Teoh’s death is studied carefully, it could be surmised that there were elements of cronyism, corruption and financial manipulation in the case.

As such, Awang said that DAP should be held responsible for Teoh’s death as through his death, the youth had helped the party save its image from being further tarnished.

“Awang agrees with the view from several parties that DAP should be held responsible. Its key leader Lim Kit Siang should apologise to all Malaysians, the government, the MACC and Teoh’s family.

“Awang hope that no one will question the cause of Teoh’s death again, or even worse, continue to use it as a political tool,” he wrote.

Awang also urged MACC officers not to lose morale in their jobs and encouraging them to proceed with their “noble roles”.

“There is no need to be shaky if there are contents in the report that seem unpleasant and do not reflect reality.

“Awang understands that the interrogation process is not easy,” he said.

The RCI report, which was released on Thursday, ruled that the former DAP aide had committed suicide as a result of “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” by MACC officers, particularly the then deputy director for Selangor MACC Hishammuddin Hashim and enforcement officers Arman Alies and Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yunus.

The officers, described in the RCI as “Arman the bully, Ashraf the abuser and HH the arrogant leader”, had wanted to pressure Teoh into becoming a witness in their case against his boss, Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, for alleged abuse of public funds.

The RCI had also found fault with the MACC’s techniques, saying that the graft officers on Teoh’s case were not only brutal during interrogation but also had poor interview skills and viewed witnesses and suspects as “the enemy”.

Despite this, Utusan Malaysia came to MACC’s defence today, saying that “one or two incidents” do not reflect the the weakness or failure of the entire commission.

“Awang hopes the morale of the MACC officers and workers will not be affected by this. Furthermore, MACC’s decision to suspend the three officers proves that it is open-minded,” the paper’s editors wrote.

The MACC announced yesterday the suspension of the three officers named in the RCI report, pending an internal probe on the royal panel’s findings.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 July 2011, 1:54 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Media
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Utusan Malaysia says normal for corruption witnesses to commit suicide

By
 Clara Chooi

July 24, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, July 24 — Utusan Malaysia today downplayed the cause of Teoh Beng Hock’s death, saying that it is common for witnesses in corruption cases to commit suicide to avoid shaming their families or organisation.

“Awang does not understand it has been made such a major issue whether a person commits suicide during or after interrogation,” Awang Selamat wrote today in Mingguan Malaysia, the Malay daily’s Sunday edition. “In many other countries, the act of sacrificing oneself is not something alien to a corruption case.”

Awang Selamat is a pseudonym under which editors of Utusan Malaysia write.

Teoh was found dead on July 16, 2009, on the fifth-floor corridor of Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam after he was questioned overnight by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers at their then-Selangor headquarters on the 14th floor.

The Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) report on Teoh’s death ruled that the former DAP aide had committed suicide as a result of “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” by MACC officers.

Despite the suicide conclusion, Teoh’s family members and opposition leaders are holding the MACC responsible for the youth’s death, saying that forced suicide amounts to homicide.

To illustrate how suicide is common in corruption cases, Awang cited the example of how several civil servants in China were reported to have killed themselves last year out of depression. Many, he said, were linked to corruption scandals.

In another example, Awang related how the key witness in the corruption trial of the wife of former Taiwan president Chen Sui Bian had attempted suicide barely hours after she testified in December 2008.

In Japan, he wrote, several senior public servants and LDP party members took their lives during the investigation of a high-profile corruption scandal in 1989.

In the Philippines, former army chief General (rtd) Angelo Reyes committed suicide during the investigation on the misappropriation of army funds, said Awang.

“There are many more cases of those committing suicide or attempting to commit suicide when their deeds are exposed or are being investigated by graft busters or the police,” he said.

“What more when it involves a cartel, when the situation is even more complex. Although most of these other cases do not involve death in the premises of the authorities, the issue is the same — the accused or witness is embarrassed, stressed and depressed enough to find their own escape route.”

In a possible reference to Teoh, Awang said that there were also many cases of those who were prepared to take their lives to avoid betraying their bosses or their organisations.

Teoh was called in for questioning by the MACC as the commission had reportedly wanted to pressure him into becoming a witness in their case against his boss, Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, for alleged abuse of public funds.

“Many experts, including Dr Alex Lickerman from the University of Chicago, who is also the columnist for Psychology Today, view that many of these cases result from the psychological vulnerability of the individual,” he said.

Awang also referred to a case in Malaysia when a Form 6 Chinese school student, who was accused of taunting a female student, jumped off a building after receiving advice from a counsellor.

“This student too had a bright future ahead and his family lost its most valued asset — a child. But in understanding his suicide, should the counsellor be faulted?” said Awang.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 July 2011, 1:56 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Media
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


AirAsia Moves Corporate HQ from KL to Jakarta

By
Asia Sentinel

23 July 2011

With all the troubles he has had over the last two months, the confirmation Friday that AirAsia, arguably Malaysia’s most vibrant private company, is moving its headquarters out of the country to Indonesia is one more blow.

Tony Fernandes, AirAsia’s group chief executive, confirmed the decision in Tokyo Thursday, saying the move is an effort to upgrade his company’s image as a regional Southeast Asian airline rather than just a Malaysian carrier.

“I don’t know whether Najib has been told or not,” said a business associate of Fernandes in Kuala Lumpur. “But why should Tony care? There are solid business reasons for moving to Jakarta.”

Najib has been on a whirlwind trip to foreign capitals to try and mend the country’s image in the wake of a violent police crackdown on peaceful marchers seeking to present a petition to the country’s king on July 9, asking for election reform. In a throwback to the 1980s, Malaysian censors blacked out details of a report about the march carried in The Economist.

That was followed on July 23 with the results of a royal commission of inquiry that concluded that a young aide to an opposition politician had been hounded so badly during a marathon interrogation over office spending that he threw himself out of a window and killed himself.

Then on Friday, immigration officials took William Bourdon, the leader of a team seeking to ferret out the details of a massive scandal involving defense procurement, off a plane in Kuala Lumpur, held him for several hours and ordered him deported via a flight back to Paris.

Fernandes characterized the move of the headquarters as a simple business decision to take advantage of Indonesia’s vastly larger economy and population, which is nearly 10 times that of Malaysia’s, although Malaysian annual per-capita gross domestic product of US$14,700 by purchasing power parity is much higher currently than Indonesia’s at US$4,200. The size of the country, however, meant that the Indonesian economy was estimated by the CIA Factbook for 2010 at US$1.03 trillion against Malaysia’s US$414.4 billion.

AirAsia’s decision to move the headquarters is a serious negative propaganda blow for Najib’s 1Malaysia Plan, an intensive effort to lure foreign direct investment to Malaysia. In September 2010, the Malaysian government announced ambitious plans to mobilize hundreds of billions of dollars in private investment in an effort to move the country out of the so-called middle income trap, and double per capita income to push Malaysia into the ranks of developed nations by 2020.

AirAsia may well be the only Malaysian company besides the state-owned energy giant Petronas to have made an international impact – and Petronas does it by advertising intensively during Formula 1 races and by sponsoring a car – which Fernandes does as well. Launched in 2002 as a regional no-frills carrier with just two planes, AirAsia now flies 93 planes all over Asia. In addition, a long-haul service, AirAsia X, flies to Europe, Japan and Korea. The company earlier ordered 300 Airbus A320neos.to expand its routes across Asia and beyond.

It isn’t just the publicity damage. In the past 10 years, according to a report by the news agency Reuters, private companies invested just RM535 billion (US$172.4 billion), according to official data. Malaysia’s private investment rate of about 10 percent of GDP is among the lowest in Asia and a third of what it was before the 1998 Asian financial crisis. The government, according to Reuters, contributes around half the investment in Malaysia.

In addition, Malaysia has long been plagued by capital flight, which has been generally regarded as an indication of lack of faith in the country on the part of its businessmen, although in Malaysia’s case the bulk may well be from stolen timber leaving the country from Sarawak and Sabah. Nonetheless, the US-based financial watchdog Global Financial Integrity estimated in a 2010 report that as much as RM888 billion (US$298.3 billion at current exchange rates) had left the country between 2000 and 2008. Illicit financial flows generally involve the transfer of money earned through illegal activities such as corruption, transactions involving contraband goods, criminal activities and efforts to shelter wealth from tax authorities.

AirAsia said the move is a bid to take advantage of access to the Asean secretariat, which is based in Jakarta, in advance of an open skies agreement expected to go into effect in 2015 and which is designed to lower barriers for air travel between the region’s capitals.

Asked why he chose to move the fast-growing airline’s principal corporate base to Jakarta from Kuala Lumpur, Fernandes said: “Asean is based in Jakarta, and Indonesia will be the largest economy in Asean in times to come … And I like it there” – enough, he said, to have impelled him to have already bought a home in Jakarta.

The Indonesia National Air Carriers Association forecasts passenger growth at 10 percent to 15 percent this year. Indonesia’s Central Statistics Agency reported that domestic air traffic grew 22 percent to 53.4 million passengers in 2010 on growing demand from the middle class for domestic flights. That is higher than the 9 percent average increase recorded by Asia-Pacific carriers, according to data from the International Air Transport Association.

“Indonesia is among very few countries that managed to record strong growth in air traffic last year,” said an analyst quoted by the Jakarta Globe. “The lack of available airlines compared to population and geographic conditions is only a sign that there’s a lot of opportunity here.”

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 July 2011, 5:26 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Angry Malaysians

—
CL Tang

The Malaysian Insider

Jul 24, 2011

24 JULY — Wong Chun Wai says, “Can we stop being angry people and try to make sense of the issues affecting the nation instead? Or better still, laugh at them?”; in his Sunday column, Of Angry Birds and Angry Malaysians: Sunday Star 24 July 2011.

A young man, about to become a father and a husband, saw his life tragically ended after being subjected to near inhumane interrogation by a government institution. Teoh Beng Hock was under such duress that, according to the RCI, it drove him to commit suicide. And this is someone who is apparently innocent of any wrongdoings.

An elderly lady, drenched as a result of the water cannons, walks away from a brigade of riot police, eyes stinging from tear gas. All she did was to take part in a peaceful march for electoral reforms with thousand others who suffered the same fate.

A mainstream newspaper and a so-called NGO with its bellicose leader is allowed to spew out racist rants; fan religious tensions; and spread fantastic conspiracy theories (Jewish/Communist/Christian domination, take your pick) to divert attention away from the failings of the government, with barely a murmur of disapproval from those whom we look to for protection of our shared values.

Blatant corruption are not investigated or treated with the customary “tak cukup bukti”; a government that ask its people to tighten our belts but barely able to contain its own bloated spending; and public institutions such as the police and MACC that spend more time defending its obvious masters rather than the public.

Last but not least, our mainstream media that appeals to the lowest journalistic denominator — substituting real, unbiased reporting for a shameless, one-sided politicized news and opinions that stretches the truth or manufacture controversies to hide the real issues.

And we are wondering why Malaysians are angry? What is anger, if not a mix of frustration and passion for the subject matter? When we are angry with someone, it is usually with the people we love or care about.

When we are angry with certain events, it is because the events affect us personally, directly or indirectly. Yes, we are angry. We are absolutely livid with the current leadership that have virtually stripped our public institutions of their independence, dignity and best traditions. We are enraged by so-called leaders that preaches 1Malaysia on the one hand and turns around to defend those that rubbish it.

We are furious with politicians who think that we, voters, are smart enough to vote them into office but clueless to think of ourselves that they see fit to contaminate our minds with half-truths, spins and censorship. We are furious when we see this country of plenty being plundered by those who were supposed to protect it.

Being angry shows we care. Being angry shows we still love Malaysia. Being angry shows we are hopeful. Hopeful that Malaysia may yet be redeemed by leaders who possessed the real conviction to steer this country to its full potential, for the betterment of our children and not their own well-being; leaders who serve the people with humility and not with arrogance and sense of entitlement.

Anger is good. Anger is fuel for change. WCW shouldn’t worry about angry Malaysians. He should instead worry the day Malaysians stop being angry. When that day comes, it won’t be replaced by laughter, as he suggest, but in most likelihood, by tears and resignation. I pray that the day won’t come.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 July 2011, 12:45 am and is filed under
Media
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Christian plot: What have police uncovered?

By
Hawkeye

July 25, 2011 | Free Malaysia Today

BUTTERWORTH: DAP has demanded that police reveal the outcome of their investigation into an alleged conspiracy to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia.

Penang DAP chairman Chow Kon Yeow said police wrapped up the investigation some time ago and should have informed the public what they had found out.

The seriousness of the allegation and the uproar it caused warranted the public disclosure, he added.

The allegation surfaced on the Internet early last May and went largely unnoticed until Utusan Malaysia reported it on its front page under the headline “Malaysia a Christian nation?”

The Umno-owned daily alleged that Christians at a closed-door gathering in Penang had spoken about Christianity replacing Islam as the official religion and the possibility of Malaysia being led by a Christian prime minister.

Christian leaders denied the allegation, but pro-Umno groups, including the far right Perkasa, lodged police reports demanding an investigation into what they alleged was a threat to Islam.

Jelutong MP and DAP member Jeff Ooi, who said he was at the gathering, also lodged a police report, stating that the report was a fabrication.

However, the controversy took a surprising turn when Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman, another DAP member who said he too was at the meeting, lodged another report, claiming that there was some truth to the allegation.

DAP subsequently expelled Razali for refusing to clarify his stand and for working against the party’s interest.

Razali captured public attention again yesterday when he submitted an application to join Perkasa, accusing DAP of being a Chinese chauvinist party with an agenda to sideline the Malays. He said he would expose the party secrets.

Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa, a prominent PAS leader in Penang, said he doubted that Razali would create political ripples in Penang.

He described him as someone with a dubious background, noting that he quit Umno to join PKR and then quit that party to join DAP.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 July 2011, 6:18 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Islam
,
Media
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP says RCI report tarnished party image

By
Shazwan Mustafa Kamal

July 25, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, July 25 — The DAP today continued criticising the results of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into Teoh Beng Hock’s death, claiming that the report was “inconsistent” and had affected the party’s political image.

The late Teoh’s boss, Ean Yong Hian Wah, charged that the RCI report had failed to include the fact that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigation on him and Teoh had concluded that there were no “elements of corruption and abuse of power”.

“This is misleading, not according to the facts, and has tarnished the DAP’s reputation,” he told reporters today.

Teoh died in 2009 while being under MACC care, which the RCI surmised the anti-graft body was complicit in forcing the DAP aide to suicide.

Ean Yong, who is DAP Seri Kembangan assemblyman, said that he could not accept the RCI’s conclusion that Teoh had committed suicide, and charged that he and Teoh had been exonerated of any wrongdoing by the MACC investigators.

He pointed out that he had testified during RCI hearings that there were no advance payments from the DAP Serdang Aman branch to fund any infrastructure projects in the Seri Kembangan constituency, and that the branch had acted as programmes co-organiser and “footed some of the bills”.

“But unfortunately the RCI did not recognise the facts and came out with different statements in the report . . . if we look at the written testimony by Acting Superintendent Ahmad Shafik Abdul Rahman from MACC during the RCI hearings, it is totally a different scenario.

“IO Shafik told the RCI that his investigating results show the reimbursement and the receipts were matched with the projects carried out,” said Ean Yong, who pointed out a paragraph in the RCI report, which stated that “none of the receipts was an exact match to the amount reimbursed to the DAP”.

Ean Yong provided excerpt copies of the RCI hearing that quoted Shafik as saying so.

He lamented that the RCI had only “contributed” to more questions and uncertainties surrounding Teoh’s death, and that forensic psychiatric reports stated that there was a “lack of information to determine Teoh’s state of mind”.

“The unconvincing attempt by the RCI to spin a suicide will further convince Malaysians that the Barisan Nasional (BN) government is not interested to go for justice but to cover up the truth,” he added.

Teoh’s family has indicated they may request a judicial review of the suicide verdict delivered by the RCI.

The MACC has set up a panel to initiate reforms about its investigative methods stemming from findings of the Teoh RCI.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 July 2011, 3:36 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
DAP
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Jaundiced justice

By
Martin Jalleh

July 23, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

JULY 23 — In the midst of a packed courtroom of members and supporters of the Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM) many of whom wore red T-shirts, the Kuala Lumpur High Court of Justice Su Geok Yiam turned “yellow” yesterday.

Justice was compromised, as a cowed Court caved in and allowed the application by the government, police and home minister to adjourn hearing the habeas corpus applications of six PSM leaders who have been held under the Emergency Ordinance since July 2.

The detainees are Dr Michael Jeyakumar, PSM deputy chairman M. Sarasvathy, central committee members Choo Chon Kai and M. Sukumaran, Sungai Siput branch secretary A. Letchumanan and national Youth chief R. Sarat Babu.

With the continued “unlawful” detention for a further two weeks, justice was further delayed again today. The urgency of determining on the detention (and freedom) of the six, did not seem to matter much to the judge during today’s hearing.

Justice was further denied to those unjustly detained. It was public perception that what seemed to be of greater importance to the judge was that the government was not denied the opportunity to extend the injustice!

The flimsy and frivolous excuse given by Senior Federal Counsel (SFC) Othman Yusof, who represented the inspector-general of police, the government and the minister of home affairs (the Respondents), for the application for an adjournment was that they needed to respond to 15 additional affidavits filed by the six detainees.

Lead counsel, Haji Sulaiman Abdullah objected to the request for the adjournment. He said that the six could not file the additional affidavits earlier because the respondents had delayed in providing the lawyers access to the detainees.

“It was a situation of their very own making… The respondents would not be in a predicament to request for an adjournment, had they allowed the detainees access to their lawyers earlier.”

Sulaiman also argued that the sole ground advanced by the respondents for the continued detention of the applicants in their earlier affidavits was that the six were detained because the police were investigating them for their role in the Bersih rally of July 9.

Since the rally is over, there are no further grounds for their continued detention. He raised the ridiculousness of the issue: “How do you justify the detention after July 9? None of the (respondents’) affidavits addressed that point!”

He told the court: “The respondents should not be rewarded by asking for an adjournment to put in further affidavits.”

Alas, the Attorney-General’s Chambers has been so predictable and even pathetic in the case. A few days before the hearing, one of lawyers of the PSM 6, Edmund Bon, was even able to predict (very accurately) that the lawyers for the respondents would seek for an adjournment.

“They will probably try to drag it past the 30 days so that they have more time to get the minister’s order. Once the minister’s order is filed we have to get a new habeas corpus application,” he said, adding that this was how many EO cases were handled but go unreported because the detainees were not as prominent as the PSM 6.

(An order by the Home Minister would enable a person to be detained for two years, and the order can be renewed indefinitely.)

Su’s decision to grant an adjournment to the habeas corpus applications was met with shock, sighs of disgust that it was a “kangaroo court”, exasperation, and comments about Su being so supine, and some which are not so suitable to mention here!

Several lawyers who were also in the gallery and who were standing in front of me asked aloud: “How can they do it… how can they face themselves at the end of the day… how can the judiciary come up with something as ridiculous as this?”

After the decision by Su to adjourn the hearing, Sulaiman referred to an earlier question posed by the judge on whether they would agree to abandon the 15 additional affidavits, with a view of proceeding with the habeas corpus application.

The senior counsel said that, in the interest of his clients, he was prepared to forego the 15 additional affidavits so that the Court could get on with hearing the habeas corpus applications for the liberty of his clients were at stake!

SFC Othman objected, as a ruling has been made. A lively exchanged ensued. Su proceeded to give directions on the filing of the affidavits and outline submissions. She eventually postponed the hearing of the PSM 6’s habeas corpus application to August 5.

“Su-preme” injustice was done by Su today! She gave in to the superficial arguments of the lawyers for the government, inspector-general of police and home minister.

To postpone the hearing of the habeas corpus applications by the PSM six who have been detained under the Emergency Ordinance 1969 was the most inordinate thing to do.

The countless who came to show their solidarity for their six brave comrades and patriots were no doubt disappointed but they did not despair. They were more determined. Their chant of “Bebas, bebas! Bebas PSM-6” rang loud and clear in the corridors and halls of the Kuala Lumpur High Court.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 July 2011, 1:13 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Jeyakumar
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.