Police report is mightier than pen or sword. Just ask Dr Pornthip.
Read the news on MACC officers making police reports against a PKR publication and Thai pathologist, Dr Pornthip.
See anything wrong with it?
Thai pathologist, tabloid face probe
Sunday, 03 January 2010
SHAH ALAM: Two Malaysian Anti- Corruption Commission officers lodged police reports against Thai pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan and Suara Keadilan yesterday for allegedly attempting to undermine the ongoing inquest into the death of Selangor political aide Teoh Beng Hock.
Hisham Mohd Yusoff, 30, and Raub Ghani, 41, of the Putrajaya MACC investigation branch, lodged the reports about 10.30am at the Shah Alam district police headquarters here over an article in the Parti Keadilan Rakyat newspaper which confirmed as murder the death of Teoh, who had been called for questioning by MACC.
Hisham said that according to the article, Teoh, who was found dead on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam on July 16 last year, was confirmed to have been murdered based on the second post-mortem conducted at Sungai Buloh Hospital on Nov 22 last year.
“As an MACC officer, I ask the police to conduct a thorough investigation in connection with the article by Suara Keadilan because I feel that what was circulated is sub judice and contrary to the ongoing inquest (into Teoh’s death).
“It is also in keeping with a reminder by the Selangor police chief prohibiting anyone from discussing the Teoh case,” Bernama quoted him as saying.
In the other police report, Raub said he lodged it against Dr Pornthip because he suspected that she had leaked the information on the forensic report to unauthorised people.
“This (police) report is made because every action of Dr Pornthip was contrary to the court’s decision and would further undermine MACC ’s image,” he said in the report.
MACC chief commissioner Datuk Abu Kassim Mohamed, when contacted, said he had just resumed work after his leave and would ask for a report from his officers on the article as well as copies of the police reports.
“If they have lodged police reports, let the police conduct their investigation,” he said.
Selangor police chief Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar confirmed that two police reports had been made and that the police would call the persons implicated in the police reports and would decide if these people should be cited under the Sedition Act, and if so it would be for the court to decide if they had committed contempt of court.
Sunday, 03 January 2010
SHAH ALAM: Two Malaysian Anti- Corruption Commission officers lodged police reports against Thai pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan and Suara Keadilan yesterday for allegedly attempting to undermine the ongoing inquest into the death of Selangor political aide Teoh Beng Hock.
Hisham Mohd Yusoff, 30, and Raub Ghani, 41, of the Putrajaya MACC investigation branch, lodged the reports about 10.30am at the Shah Alam district police headquarters here over an article in the Parti Keadilan Rakyat newspaper which confirmed as murder the death of Teoh, who had been called for questioning by MACC.
Hisham said that according to the article, Teoh, who was found dead on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam on July 16 last year, was confirmed to have been murdered based on the second post-mortem conducted at Sungai Buloh Hospital on Nov 22 last year.
“As an MACC officer, I ask the police to conduct a thorough investigation in connection with the article by Suara Keadilan because I feel that what was circulated is sub judice and contrary to the ongoing inquest (into Teoh’s death).
“It is also in keeping with a reminder by the Selangor police chief prohibiting anyone from discussing the Teoh case,” Bernama quoted him as saying.
In the other police report, Raub said he lodged it against Dr Pornthip because he suspected that she had leaked the information on the forensic report to unauthorised people.
“This (police) report is made because every action of Dr Pornthip was contrary to the court’s decision and would further undermine MACC ’s image,” he said in the report.
MACC chief commissioner Datuk Abu Kassim Mohamed, when contacted, said he had just resumed work after his leave and would ask for a report from his officers on the article as well as copies of the police reports.
“If they have lodged police reports, let the police conduct their investigation,” he said.
Selangor police chief Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar confirmed that two police reports had been made and that the police would call the persons implicated in the police reports and would decide if these people should be cited under the Sedition Act, and if so it would be for the court to decide if they had committed contempt of court.
There are 4 issues, I reckon, with all this.
“As an MACC officer, I (Hisham) ask the police to conduct a thorough investigation in connection with the article by Suara Keadilan because I feel that what was circulated is sub judice and contrary to the ongoing inquest.1. "He said." "He feel." Who the hell are these guys to interfere in an ongoing coroner's court inquest? Are they entitled to say or feel anything? In short, do they have any legal standing (locus standi) to throw a charge of subjudice or contempt of court?
In the other police report, Raub said he lodged it against Dr Pornthip because he suspected that she had leaked the information on the forensic report to unauthorised people.
“This (police) report is made because every action of Dr Pornthip was contrary to the court’s decision and would further undermine MACC ’s image,” he said in the report.
As an interested party participating in the inquest, the MACC is possibly entitled to raise such a charge. But are these 2 chaps formally representing the MACC? I thought the MACC was being represented by their lawyers. If the MACC has such concerns, why are they not asking their lawyers to raise it to the presiding coroner? Is that not the proper channel? We Malaysians are sticklers for proper channels, are we not?
Can I then make a police report that these 2 buffoons are being subjudice in turn and are therefore also in contempt of court? I have the same legal standing as they do... I may not be employed by the MACC but my tax dollars are paying their salary.
MACC chief commissioner Datuk Abu Kassim Mohamed, when contacted, said “If they have lodged police reports, let the police conduct their investigation,” he said.2. Shouldn't any complaints of contempt of court be made to the court, not the police? And then, shouldn't the court first decide whether it feels it's being dissed... ie. the complaint has merit before it instructs the relevant enforcement agency to investigate or act?
Selangor police chief Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar confirmed that two police reports had been made and that the police would call the persons implicated in the police reports and would decide if these people should be cited under the Sedition Act, and if so it would be for the court to decide if they had committed contempt of court
Why is the police jumping the gun? Why is the police acting immediately on account of 2 individuals who have no legal standing or legal training/knowledge to make such a complaint, rather than wait to be instructed by the court?
The reports are charging contempt of court.., not contempt of MACC officers. The police should not put the cart before the horse by bringing the cowboy in for investigation without being told.
3. The PDRM is the one Malaysian enforcement organisation which has a worse record than the MACC for detainees being hurt or killed during "investigation". Just ask Anwar, or A. Kugan.
No wonder Dr Pornthip's lawyers expressed worries about her being "questioned" by the police. In these dark times, we can't blame her and her lawyers for thinking that the Selangor police chief's statement that the police intends to "investigate" and "call" her - is nothing short of a barely veiled warning to Dr Pornthip not to set foot in this country... or else.
4. This last one's the most worrying. The lodging of police reports have long been used as an excuse to intimidate. Members of the public are detained against their will "for questioning" (interrogation) for no better reason than that someone made a police report.
It doesn't matter if the report is baseless or based on an individual's personal opinion or based on a charge made by a person who has no business or learning to make such a charge in the first place. The police's position is that they "have to investigate" as long as a report is lodged... even if the report reads like a children's fairy tale or cerita dongeng.
Now... having said that, if the police actually investigate ALL reports, that would be fair... in a sense. At least everybody on both sides gets interrogated, beaten up or killed. Nobody's left out. But the fact that these reports seem to be selectively "investigated" gives rise to the argument that it is being used as a weapon by some people against other people. I'll leave it to you to guess who these people are and whether this argument holds water.
Additional reading for armchair lawyers:
Who is the Coroner: Wikipedia
What is a Coroner's Court: The subordinate courts of Singapore
What is an Inquest: Wikipedia
What is subjudice: Wikipedia, The subordinate courts of Singapore (Media Guide sections 7.3.5 - 7.3.9)
What is Contempt of Court: Malaysian Bar, Crown Prosecution Service (UK), Ministry of Justice (UK), Scottish Courts.
No comments:
Post a Comment