Ramkarpal urges AG to justify Beng Hock’s case for not being homicide

MEDIA STATEMENT

The disappointment expressed by the Teoh Beng Hock Trust For Democracy in the police now investigating Teoh’s death for wrongful confinement under section 342 of the Penal Code instead of homicide is justified and warrants an explanation by the authorities as to how this could arise, especially in light of the Court of Appeal’s findings surrounding Teoh’s death.

I can confirm having spoken to the Investigating Officer (on behalf of Teoh’s family) who informed me that the case is now being investigated under the said section and that Teoh’s sister was required to provide a statement for the said purpose.

It is utterly disappointing for the matter to be now investigated for a much lesser offence of wrongful confinement when the Court of Appeal had clearly indicated in its judgement that there was evidence of homicide surrounding Teoh’s death.

One of the judges of the Court of Appeal concluded as follows,

“As all the evidence pointed to a verdict of homicide, the correct verdict to be returned by the magistrate in the inquiry and by the judge on revision was a verdict of death caused by a person or persons unknown.”

Another of the judges held,

“The injury to the neck prima facie must have been caused in the MACC premises before his fall more so when there was expert evidence to support the conclusion…The fact that the injury had been identified was sufficient to attract some level of criminal liability against the MACC officers who were involved and a proper police investigation would have been warranted under the CPC, taking into consideration that MACC officers are not immune to such investigation under the law of Federal Constitution.”

It must be emphasised that the findings of the said Court of Appeal were based on the evidence established in the inquiry into Teoh’s death.

As such, there can be no doubt that such findings were as a result of the testimonies of various witnesses and expert opinions, particularly in relation to injuries noted on Teoh’s body, from the said inquiry that was considered by the court.

If the Court of Appeal found evidence of homicide, how is it that the Attorney General’s Chambers did not?

After all, the evidence considered by the Court of Appeal was the same as that considered by the AGC.

In the circumstances, the AG must explain why investigations are now being done under section 342 and not homicide and I will formally write to him on behalf of Teoh’s family for same.

It is hoped that an explanation is given urgently to shed light on the matter.

Dated this 25th June, 2019.

RAMKARPAL SINGH
MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT
BUKIT GELUGOR
CHAIRMAN NATIONAL LEGAL BUREAU
DEMOCRATIC ACTION PARTY

Scroll to Top