Reflections on the Teoh Beng Hock RCI

COMMENT We live life only once. And that is why life must be respected, protected and an environment facilitated for everyone in our society.

The highest responsibility is given to the state, to the government to uphold, respect and protect the right to life, especially when that life is left in the custody of the state.

In Malaysia, a royal commission of inquiry is established when there are sufficient grounds for a strong violation of rights that has not been met with justice and truth in the due process of the law.

This commission must be completely independent, where the commissioners act without fear or favour to arrive at the truth on the issue at hand.

If we look back at two notable royal commissions, like the commission on the black eye Anwar Ibrahim suffered while in detention, or the commission on the Royal Malaysian Police force, we can see that a number of untold facts were revealed, witnesses were grilled in a manner that they were able to give information much more clearly and recommendations for greater accountability were clear and ensured greater protection of the rights of the individuals, as in the case of Anwar or on the rights of Malaysians and the accountability of the police force to the country with clear oversight.

As we look at the royal commission of inquiry into the death of a young, industrious and committed person to the cause of change, Teoh Beng Hock, it has been riddled with uncertainities, of questions of being independent and even on the membership of the inquiry panel. There has been no experience of current judges sitting as inquiry commissioners.

These questions arise particularly when the key pillar of democracy, the judiciary, has been deemed to have lost its independence in Malaysia.

Two major concerns

But two major concerns were evident that raised strong objections to its independence in its process of inquiry. One issue was the appeal by the AG’s Chambers on the open verdict of suicide or homicide by the coroner’s court running parallel to the inquiry. There is a justifiable fear on how the appeal can influence the inquiry.

The second concern was the “support” given by the AG’s office, which could vary from evidence, previous documentation, or other forms of information.

The involvement of the AG's office definitely raises not only one’s eyebrow but questions the fundamentals of what an independent commission is all about. Rightly so, the family of Teoh Beng Hock withdrew their cooperation.  

The mobilisation of public support towards such a process was important for the people to know and understand the process and for the commissioners to recognise that at all times and in all decisions, they must remain independent, acting only to ensure that the truth is uncovered for justice to be realised.

As the inquiry progresses, I look back at the inquest and wonder why some fundamental weaknesses were not addressed in the inquest.

The MACC officer Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yunus (left) already had nine complaints related to his aggressive form of investigations, and yet this did not surface except now.  

The MACC using Mohd Ashraf, despite knowing his behaviour, to verify just four invoices seems to raise questions of using unnecessary force on Teoh, particularly knowing that he was a political aide to a political leader in the Selangor state, controlled by the opposition.

Was the intention malicious or to arrive at truth? It does give rise to speculation that Mohd Ashraf may have had the  silent consent of his superiors for his interrogation techniques, especially late into the night.

Another shocking discovery was Muhammad Shafee Abdullah (right), the lawyer for MACC, explaining to the commission that he could not produce the diaries of investigations and that the books had been destroyed.

The explanation given was that the notes were typed out into a 119 statement as provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code, where superiors would endorse handwritten notes.

How do we know that the notes typed out remain the same and were not manipulated? Could the notes be changed quickly, if an incident like death in custody happens before an inquest takes place? What guarantees are in place to ensure the facts remain the same?

The commission of inquiry does raise a number of questions to processes, procedures and methods used by MACC in its investigations and into its attitudes of the investigators.

But will these revelations help us to arrive at the truth and bring justice to Teoh Beng Hock and his family?

---

IRENE FERNANDEZ is director and co-founder of Tenaganita, an NGO which promotes the rights of migrant workers.