The court has sentenced two former police commandos Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar to death for the gruesome murder. But arguments continue to rage in the court of public opinion over their motive.

 

Responding to criticism for saying the motive would never be known, Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Khalid Abu Bakar said murder probes cover all angles, including establishing the reasons behind the action and securing the necessary evidence for a prosecution.

“These would then be recorded in the Investigation Papers which are submitted to the Attorney-General's Chambers for further action.

“During the prosecution, the prosecutor would again determine what or which evidences available are to be adduced to prove the case,” he told Malaysiakini .

Khalid said the same standard operating procedure would have applied in the investigation into the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, which took place under his predecessor Musa Hassan’s watch.

He also stressed that it was not the police’s role to question the prosecutor or courts for not delving into the motive during the hearing process.

“Nor are we empowered to reveal the motive post-conviction and sentencing when the court chose not to explore that aspect and was satisfied that the evidence had revealed beyond a reasonable doubt that the two had killed her,” he said.

 

‘Lim barking up wrong tree’

Khalid explained that his earlier statement in response to Abdul Razak Baginda , which courted flak from veteran opposition politician Lim Kit Siang, was premised on the fact that since the court did not establish a motive, the reasons for the murder would remain shrouded.

Razak Baginda ( left ), a close associate of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, was initially charged with abetting the murder, but was later acquitted.

He had irked Khalid with his remarks in an interview last week citing cases of custodial deaths to strengthen his argument that “rogue policemen” were capable of killing without a reason.

In the report Khalid was quoted saying since the courts had decided without delving into the motive, “Hence, I suppose we will never know why the ‘rogue policemen’ acted as such.”

The police chief’s response prompted Lim to argue that Khalid is duty-bound to get to the truth behind the murder and failure to do so would amount to a “ dereliction of duty ”.

However, Khalid pointed out that the DAP lawmaker ( below ) was barking up the wrong tree.

“As to why a motive was not established in court - that question is for the judiciary to answer and not the police.

 

“After all, there have been cited murder cases where motive was not necessary for conviction.

“As to the issue of dereliction of duty on my part, it does not arise at all. The case has gone through three levels of hearing, the High Court, the Appeal Court and finally the Federal Court.

“Never during any of these trials did the court find that there has been a serious omission of responsibilities by the police.

 

“Who would be the best party to rule on dereliction of duty on the part of the police, if not the judges.

“In this regard, I believe Lim is directing his guns at the wrong target,” he said.

Khalid reiterated the highest court has already made its decision on the Altantuya case and there is nothing more to add.