'Americk, Deepak new evidence aplenty for AG'
Published: Mar 30, 2013 6:29 PM | Updated: Mar 30, 2013 7:08 PM
The attorney-general has more than enough new evidence in the form of recent revelations, to re-open investigations into the Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu, said the Malaysian Bar president Christopher Leong.
Bar president Christopher Leong points out that their recent claims have never been revealed before, and is as 'fresh' as it gets.
The attorney-general has more than enough new evidence in the form of recent revelations, to re-open investigations into the Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu, said the Malaysian Bar president Christopher Leong.
Leong said public statements made by businessman Deepak Jaikishan, the late private detective P Balasubramaniam and his lawyer Americk Sidhu have never been revealed before.
“The Malaysian Bar is of the view that the revelations in the public domain ... provide sufficient cause for the authorities to re-open investigations or to conduct further investigations,” said Leong (right) in a statement this morning.
These, he said, include Deepak’s statements on his role in coercing Balasubramaniam into retracting his first statutory declaration (SD) that links then defence minister Najib Abdul Razak to the case, which has not revealed before.
“Taken at face value, such revelations may speak to the possible motive for the events that led to the demise of Altantuya Shaariibuu.
“Such further investigations may or may not lead to anything new, but we would only know if additional investigations are in fact undertaken,” he said.
He was responding to attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail’s statement on Tuesday that he would need fresh evidence before reopening the case.
Motive indeed important
Leong, who assumed the Bar president early this month, added that a previous High Court ruling that found the two police officers guilty of the murder has been criticised for not dealing with the motive of the murder satisfactorily.
He argued that while it was ruled that the motive was not critical in establishing if an offence had been committed, in Altantuya’s case there were important implications.
“Motive may be important in cases where there is doubt as to the mens rea (whether a person had the intention to commit a crime), or where there are questions as to whether there may be more people connected with or involved in the crime, and the nature or extent of such connection or involvement,” he said.
During the Bar annual general meeting on March 16 Balasubramaniam's lawyer Americk Sidhu dropped a bombshell that senior lawyer Cecil Abraham had admitted to being instructed by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to draft the second SD.
The explosive revelation has prompted for calls for the government to act, but the AG has passed the buck on the probe into Abraham’s claims to the Bar Council, and has shrugged off any move to reopen the murder case for a lack of “new evidence”.
Leong said public statements made by businessman Deepak Jaikishan, the late private detective P Balasubramaniam and his lawyer Americk Sidhu have never been revealed before.
“The Malaysian Bar is of the view that the revelations in the public domain ... provide sufficient cause for the authorities to re-open investigations or to conduct further investigations,” said Leong (right) in a statement this morning.These, he said, include Deepak’s statements on his role in coercing Balasubramaniam into retracting his first statutory declaration (SD) that links then defence minister Najib Abdul Razak to the case, which has not revealed before.
“Taken at face value, such revelations may speak to the possible motive for the events that led to the demise of Altantuya Shaariibuu.
“Such further investigations may or may not lead to anything new, but we would only know if additional investigations are in fact undertaken,” he said.
He was responding to attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail’s statement on Tuesday that he would need fresh evidence before reopening the case.
Motive indeed important
Leong, who assumed the Bar president early this month, added that a previous High Court ruling that found the two police officers guilty of the murder has been criticised for not dealing with the motive of the murder satisfactorily.
He argued that while it was ruled that the motive was not critical in establishing if an offence had been committed, in Altantuya’s case there were important implications.“Motive may be important in cases where there is doubt as to the mens rea (whether a person had the intention to commit a crime), or where there are questions as to whether there may be more people connected with or involved in the crime, and the nature or extent of such connection or involvement,” he said.
During the Bar annual general meeting on March 16 Balasubramaniam's lawyer Americk Sidhu dropped a bombshell that senior lawyer Cecil Abraham had admitted to being instructed by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to draft the second SD.
The explosive revelation has prompted for calls for the government to act, but the AG has passed the buck on the probe into Abraham’s claims to the Bar Council, and has shrugged off any move to reopen the murder case for a lack of “new evidence”.
View Comments0