With regards the case where the police shooting resulted in the death of a teenager, what we need to be investigating is:-
Was the use of firearms in this case reasonable and justified, for police only have the power to arrest persons....and in certain cases, the use of necessary force for the purposes of affecting arrests is permitted? Note also that the law very clearly states :- "... Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life. - section 15, Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593).(See also earlier post:- Police's duty to arrest - not kill. Judicial Inquiry Needed for all police 'shoot to kill' incidents
If the police officers went beyond their powers, as provided for law, action must be taken against them. Maybe, they should be charged for killing....murder???
And, in these cases the victim's family must also be compensated?
Would an ordinary inquest deal with all these elements? Not really - and thus we need another body to deal with this - and the answer have been given to the UMNO-led BN government of Malaysia by 2 different Royal Commissions - Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).
A Royal Commission is the King's Commission (the Yang Di-Pertuan Agung's Commission), and a refusal to carry out the recommendations of that 2 Royal Commissions is a demonstration of disrespect to the King by the UMNO-led BN government - this is what I think. What do you think?
Can the police themselves be responsible for investigating cases where the perpetrators of the wrong are police themselves? Can they be independent? I do not think so.... we need an independent body to do this, and this would be the IPCMC (as originally proposed by 2 Royal Commissions) - not any watered-down body, that the government is trying to push. Someone needs to police the police - and it must be the IPCMC. Look at how they have called the teenage civilian witness so many times for questioning.... and I wonder whether it is the same with the police officers involved. It is natural, that we protect one of own ...and that is why we need another totally independent (not police) body to investigate matters where the police are involved, and are the alleged perpetrators of the wrongdoing, in this case the killing of a young Malaysian.
Setting up a special panel to investigate every 'shoot to kill' incident - not necessary, and in fact there is, I believe, no law providing for the setting up for such investigation panels. There is on the other hand laws that provide for the setting up of such a panel - unlike a Commission of Enquiry (which is provided for in the COMMISSIONS OF ENQUIRY ACT 1950 (REVISED 1973)
2. Issue of Commissions.(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may, where it appears to him to be expedient so to do, issue a Commission appointing one or more Commissioners and authorizing the Commissioners to enquire into -(a) the conduct of any federal officer;
(b) the conduct or management of any department of the public service of Malaysia;
(c) the conduct or management of any public institution which is not solely maintained by State funds; or
(d) any other matter in which an enquiry would, in the opinion of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, be for the public welfare, not being -
(i) a matter involving any question relating to the Islamic religion or the Malay custom; or
(ii) in relation to Sabah or Sarawak, a matter specified in item 10 of the State List:Provided that where any federal officer into whose conduct it is proposed to enquire, was, at the time of committing such conduct, serving in a department of the public service of a State, such commission shall only be issued with the concurrence of the State Authority.
(2) (Repealed).
(3) The State Authority of any State other than Sabah or Sarawak may, where it appears to him to be expedient so to do, issue a Commission appointing one or more Commissioners and authorizing the Commissioners to enquire into -(a) the conduct of any State officer;
(b) the conduct or management of any department of the public service of that State;
(c) the conduct or management of any public institution which is solely maintained by State funds; or
(d) any other matter in which an enquiry would, in the opinion of the State Authority, be for the public welfare of the State and which does not directly concern the public welfare of any other State:Provided that where any State officer, into whose conduct it is proposed to enquire, was, at the time of committing such conduct serving in a department of the Federal Government or of the public service of another State, the Commission shall only be issued with the concurrence of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the State Authority of such other State, as the case may be.....
The time is here for Malaysians to once again call upon our government to do the needful and set up the the IPCMC (as originally proposed by 2 Royal Commissions)
While police procedures allow them to “use all necessary action to affect an arrest” on a suspect, they have overstepped their bounds in firing the shot that killed 14-year-old Aminulrasyid Amzah in Shah Alam last month, said a legal expert.
Universiti Islam Antarabangsa law professor Raja Badrol Hisham Raja Mohd Ali explained that the Inspector General's Standing Orders (IGSO) allows for the use of firearms in 'extreme situations.'
The IGSO is a set of guidelines on police procedures, including the permissible use of firearms, issued to, and to be complied with, all district police chiefs.“In Aminulrasyid's case, the pertinent question is, was (the situation) 'extreme' enough to justify the firearm being drawn and fired?” he asked.
The answer, in the academician's expert opinion, is no.
Badrol Hisham (right), who lectures in criminal procedure law, said this to around 120 students, politicians, activists and reporters during last night's forum demanding justice for the fatal shooting of teenager Aminulrasyid.
“Let's revisit the facts without any emotional baggage. Aminulrasyid was driving very fast and he ran a red light. We can say that this exhibits criminal behaviour: he was fleeing from police, he did not stop when allegedly ordered to.”
“The Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) allows the police to overpower suspicious individuals from fleeing and arrest the person or persons. They can also use their firearms, but there are limits.”
He said that under the CPC, shoot to kill is only allowed if the suspects are:
1. Involved in a crime punishable by death
2. Involved in a crime punishable by life imprisonment
By both these standards, Badrol Hisham contends that the police officers have failed to follow proper procedures, because they shot to kill despite the victim not presenting a threat to the police and not suspected of a serious crime.
He also alleged that the police may be attempting to distract the public from this truth, with the 'discovery' of the machete in the car and the questionable story of the deceased 'reversing' the car towards the police.
First of all, said Badrol Hisham, with the machete being in the trunk, it was never a threat to the officers, unless it was being waved around by the victim. Even then the police should have shot to disable and not to kill.
More importantly, the machete was only discovered afterwards, making its use as a justification to shoot irrelevant, as police would not have known about its existence at the point of shooting.
As for the deceased allegedly reversing the car, he said that according to witness Azammuddin Omar, Aminulrasyid was already dead when the car crashed and there were no skid marks to indicate a sudden reverse at the scene of the shooting.
'Police ignorant of guidelines'
“The death of Aminulrasyid could have been avoided if the police understood the IGSO. I don't know why only OCPDs are issued with the document. It should be given to everyone in the police,” he said.He added that more importantly, police could have shown more prudence before jumping to conclusions.
“They could have checked the number plate of the car to see if it is linked to known criminals. All patrol cars nowadays are in constant communication with their control centres, have radios, and some are even equipped with computers,” he said.
“On a more serious note, almost all the OCPDs are unaware that the CPC has been amended. In 2007, there were substantial revisions to the code. But they mostly don't know about it. I found this out when I sent my students to interview OCPDs,” said the law professor.
Badrol Hisham said that it is disturbing for law enforcers not to know about the law.
“How can we put our lives and safety in their hands?” he asked.
The forum, organised by National Union of Malaysia Muslim Students (PKPIM) at the Selangor and Kuala Lumpur Chinese Assembly Hall featured a panel comprising Badrol Hisham, civil activist Wong Chin Huat and lawyer for the late Aminulrasyid's family N Surendran.- Malaysiakini, 6/5/2010, Teen's fatal shooting: Police overstepped bounds
No comments:
Post a Comment