NGO calls for inquest into killing of 4 suspected robbers by cops
PETALING JAYA: A human rights NGO has called for an inquest into the death of four suspected robbers who were shot by police after a chase in Sungai Buloh yesterday.
Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) said the killing of the four by the police ought to be independently investigated to determine if there was no wrongdoing involved.
“Madpet demands speedy independent investigations and inquiries into all ‘police shot dead’ incidents, which is necessary to clear doubts about police wrongdoings and/or abuse of power.
“An open inquest by a judicial officer should also be held for all such police shooting incidents. Madpet also urges police to arrest suspects, and try their very best to avoid killing them,” it said in a statement.
Madpet pointed out that Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial, at which he has all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
The NGO also said Section 15(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that if a person forcibly resists arrest or attempts to evade it, a police officer may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.
“The primary objective is to effect arrest, not to kill the suspects. Were the police shooting to effect arrest or to kill?
“Could they have not shot and injured these suspects, in their 20s,
and arrested them? If one of the four suspects accidentally died, and
the others were shot and arrested, it may be reasonable.
“But all four suspects were shot dead – and not even one was arrested or injured. So, no suspect can tell us their version of what happened.”
The NGO also questioned a report by Bernama in which the police stated that the suspects were members of a masked robbery gang they were looking for, going on to ask why the suspects were not arrested or brought in for questioning prior to yesterday’s alleged robbery.
Touching on the police’s statement where they said the suspects were involved in 50 robberies in Selangor, and that several machetes, jewellery, cash, helmets and black clothes were found in their car, Madpet questioned whether such information was seen as justification for their deaths.
Stressing that past convictions of crimes is irrelevant in determining whether one is guilty of a new or different crime, the NGO said any determination of a person’s guilt had to be done in court.
“Are the now reported ‘beliefs’ of the police true, or is it simply an attempted justification for the deaths?
“The dead, obviously, do not have the capacity to now defend (themselves) against these possibly ‘false’ allegations. Maybe an independent inquiry will reveal the truth.
“Would these deaths now mean that all cases like the ‘50 robberies in Selangor’ are considered closed? Is it possible that the four were innocent, and the real perpetrators are still at large?”
Now that a trial had been avoided, it asked if this meant the police and prosecutors would be freed of having the burden of proving the guilt of the accused. - FMT, 26/12/2020
Media Statement – 26/12/2020
Police Must Arrest Suspects, Not shoot them dead.
Inquest or Independent Inquiry for all police shot to death incidents
MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is appalled that 4 persons were shot dead on Christmas day by the Malaysian police, and they were allegedly not even armed with guns firing at the police.(Malay Mail, 25/12/2020).
This is yet another case of extrajudicial killing by the Malaysian police that ought to be independently investigated to determine that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the police.
The national news agency, BERNAMA, provides us with the police version of what happened, but this is simply not right.
It is best that an INQUEST be held by a Judicial Officer, the Magistrate. The police should not be investigating cases where its own officers are the alleged killers or perpetrators of crime.
A police officer is duty bound to only arrest suspects of crimes, who then will be investigated. If investigations reveal they have committed a crime, then suspects will be charged in court and the accused is accorded the right to a fair trial.
One is only guilty of any crime after the courts, after trial, finds the accused person guilty.
If the person to be arrested tries to avoid arrest or use force, then the law in section 15(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that, ‘If such person forcibly resist the endeavors to arrest him or attempt to evade the arrest such officer or other person may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.’
The primary objective is to effect arrest, not to kill the suspects.
Were the police shooting to effect arrest or to kill? Could they have not shot and injured these suspects, in their 20s, and arrested them? If one of the 4 suspect accidently died, and the others were shot and arrested, it may be reasonable. But, yet again, all 4 suspects were shot dead – and not even one was arrested injured. So, no suspect can tell us their version of what happened.
Article 11(1) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that ‘Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.’
In extrajudicial killings as in this case, at the very most they are but suspects – and as such they must always be presumed innocent.
As in some previous cases in Malaysia, after the killings, the police is quick to, maybe wrongly, ‘defame’ the dead, by making assertions like ‘..Checks revealed that all the suspects, in their 20s, were members of a masked robbery gang that the police had been looking for. “We believe all the suspects had been involved in more than 50 robberies in Selangor since the beginning of this year and two of them had criminal records…’
In the determination of guilt, police suspicions and beliefs are irrelevant. It is for the court to determine whether a person is guilty or not.
It also is common for some of these news reports of police shooting that resulted in deaths to say that arms and valuables are found in the vehicle. “Inside the car, police found several machetes, jewellery, cash, some helmets and black clothes believed to be used by the suspects to carry out robbery,”(BERNAMA)
If they were previously long identified suspects, the question that arises is why were they earlier not arrested or even brought in for questioning? Were there arrest warrants issued before or in existence when they were killed?
Are the now reported ‘beliefs’ of the police true, or is it simply an attempted justification for the deaths?
The dead, obviously, do not have the capacity to now defend against these possibly ‘false’ allegations. Maybe, an independent inquiry will reveal the truth.
Would these deaths now mean that all these cases like the ’50 robberies in Selangor’ be considered closed. Is it possible that the 4 were innocent, and the real perpetrators are still at large? Now that a trial is avoided, the police and prosecutors will also be freed of having the burden of proving the guilt of the accused?
One other disturbing concern, is the speed about the police suspicions of the involvement of the dead in past crimes gets reported, hours after they have been shot dead. If, the police came out with a statement of these past suspicions several days later, after spending some time investigating, it may be more plausible or believable.
It must be noted that past convictions of crimes is really irrelevant in determining whether one is guilty of a new and/or different crime.
The other possible justification for the police action in this BERNAMA report ‘…The policemen gave a chase and as they caught up, the suspect’s car rammed into a female GrabFood rider and dragged her for about a few metres.“After running into the rider, the car could not go forward. The driver tried to ram the rider again prompting the police to fire several shots at the suspect’s car to save the victim,” he[Selangor Police acting chief Datuk Arjunaidi Mohamed] told reporters at the scene. ‘ The said female rider seem to have ‘…suffered injuries on several parts of her body and was taken to the Sungai Buloh Hospital for treatment…’
Would a speeding car that crashed into a motorbike caused more serious injuries or even death? The testimony of the GrabFood women rider is important to determine the truth? Did the car try to ‘ram the rider again’? An independent inquiry is much needed to determine the truth.
MADPET demands speedy independent investigations and inquiries into all ‘police shot dead’ incidents, which is necessary to clear doubts of police wrongdoings and/or abuse of power. An open inquest by a judicial officer should also be held for all such police shooting incidents.
MADPET also urges police to arrest suspects, and try the very best to avoid killing them.
Malaysia must end all forms of extrajudicial killings, and ensure every person is accorded the right to a fair trial. Until found guilty by a court of law, everyone must be presumed innocent.
The right to a fair trial, and the presumption of innocence principle also calls for the abolition of all Detention Without Trial Laws, where persons not tried or found guilty by court are detained/restricted without even the ability to challenge in court the reasons used by the administration to detain/restrict them.
Charles Hector
For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
See related post for even more information
Police Must Arrest Suspects, Not shoot them dead (MADPET)
No comments:
Post a Comment