16th Death In Police Custody in 2022, and disclosure of Coroner’s investigation and status of reform implementation to reduce deaths, and facilitate investigation needed..(MADPET)

 

Media Statement – 10/5/2022

16^th Death In Police Custody in 2022, and disclosure of Coroner’s investigation and status of reform implementation to reduce deaths, and facilitate investigation needed

Pre-detention medical check-up, CCTV/Body Cams, Coroners

16^th death in police custody in Malaysia in 2022, and this does not include other deaths in custody at other government facilities. This time, it was a 48-year-old man who was temporarily placed at the Seri Alam lock-up while awaiting imprisonment after being sentenced to a five-month jail term from April 27 for drug-related offenses.(FMT, 8/5/2022). Why was he placed in a police lock-up, when he really ought to have immediately been sent to prison?

It must be pointed out that persons held in police lock-ups are persons or suspects arrested, who need to be placed in police custody, including detained in a police lock-up, for the purposes of police completing their investigations. Other persons should be detained in the appropriate detention facility.

With so many deaths in police custody, one needs to be reminded, amongst others, of rights of persons arrested, the right of police to detain further to complete investigations, the status of the needed reforms to ensure proper behavior of police and reduce police responsibility for deaths and whether our Coroners are effectively carrying out their responsibilities.

Detention in police lock-ups unnecessary for all police investigations

After the cases of of former Prime Minister Najib, his spouse Rosmah, the current UMNO President Zahid Hamidi and several others, Malaysians now know that police need not detain any suspect for the purposes of completing police investigation. Persons arrested can be immediately released, requiring them to turn up at the police station at particular times for police to continue their investigations.

If a detainee elects ‘silence’, is further detention a ‘torture’?

A suspect or a person investigated have the right to silence, in that he/she ‘…may refuse to answer any question the answer to which would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or penalty or forfeiture…’(Section 112, Criminal Procedure Code). Today, in Malaysia, a ‘confession’ given by an accused person whilst in police custody can no longer be used by the prosecution – a right move as such confession may have been as a result of torture, lies, etc. Section 113 (3) states that, ‘Where the accused had made a statement during the course of a police investigation, such statement may be admitted in evidence in support of his defence during the course of the trial.’, which means that such statements can be used by the accused person, but not the prosecution. This is the general rule.

Section 28A(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that, ‘Where the person arrested has requested for a legal practitioner to be consulted, the police officer shall allow a reasonable time- (a) for the legal practitioner to be present to meet the person arrested at his place of detention; and (b) for the consultation to take place.’ The police officer shall defer any questioning or recording of any statement from the person arrested for a reasonable time until the communication or attempted communication with the lawyer happens.

If a suspect and/or witness take the option to remain silent, what really is the purpose of keeping a suspect in police detention? All that police investigation entails then would be the taking of one’s photograph, fingerprints and maybe in some cases, DNA evidence. A person may need to be detained maybe if the police, as part of its investigation, wanted to do an identification parade. As such, how much time does a suspect really need to be detained – and during his/her detention, how much time did he/she spend with the investigation officer. How many hours did he/she simply spend in the lock-up, and would this not be considered ‘torture’, noting that the police in Malaysia is prohibited from using torture as part of their investigations.

Another problem could be the insufficiency of qualified investigation officers in the police, and the available few is burdened with simply having to investigate too many cases at the same time – so suspects awaiting their turn to be investigated languish unnecessarily in police detention.

Immediate Medical check-up for arrestees who will be detained

Death in police custody have been a concern for a long time, and in fact, the Malaysian government is in the process of making sure that every person arrested, and to be detained ought to immediately be inspected by a medical practitioner – this would determine the health/medical condition of such detainee, and will also ensure speedy healthcare if needed to prevent any deterioration of health and/or death. As government healthcare facilities and doctors are available in most places, implementation of this practice should not have been delayed. A medical examination will also help determine whether a person who later dies, did not die by reason of matters that happened post arrest and/or police custody.

The Minister, In a Parliamentary Reply on 16/12/2021, informed us about the set-up of Custodial Medical Unit (CMU), which will also do a medical examination of detainees before they are placed in police lock-ups. This, according to the Minister, will start as pilot projects in 5 police lock-ups. This is not acceptable, and it must be implemented immediately nationwide, and until then persons arrested must undergo medical examinations by government doctors before being detained. This is rather easy to be done, and must be a standard operating procedure for all arrested, who will be detained in police custody.

CCTV and body-cams

CCTV at police stations has also been on the agenda for some time. If there are CCTV recordings that documents what happens to a person from the point of arrest and for the times one is in police custody, it would be evidence that the police is not responsible for the causing of the death of a detainee, and that the police conducted themselves in accordance with Malaysian law including the fact that there was no torture.

In Hong Kong, it has been the practice for several decades now, that the suspect and/or lawyer is provided with a copy of CCTV recording proving that the law was complied with by the police.

In Malaysia, the problem that has arisen before even in inquests was the fact that there were no CCTV recordings – sometimes because there were no CCTV installed, the CCTV was not functioning or there is simply no CCTV recordings as the CCTV installed does not have recordings and/or storage capacity.

The government recently talked about body-cams and cameras on police vehicles, which would help ensure the available of documentary evidence right from the point of arrest, and MADPET urges immediate disclosure on the current status of these CCTVs and body-cams.

Coroner – has he been informed, and has he begun inquiries?

There is still a disturbing silence on the part of the Coroners in Malaysia regarding the status of their inquiries into these deaths in custody, and media reports have mostly been about police investigation and findings. The Coroner must announce what is happening on their inquiries of the now 15 deaths in custody in Malaysia. What are the Coroner’s findings? Will there be public inquest, or not?

It will be good if the name of the Coroner responsible for each death be informed, so members of the public with relevant information may be able to forward such information directly to the Coroner, as many may be unwilling to disclose such information, more so if the information indicates possible police responsibility in the deaths.

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) urges the Malaysian government to prioritize the elimination and the investigation of the deaths in custody in Malaysia. Post arrest pre-detention medical examination, CCTV and body-cams and other things that need to be done must be expedited. Lives matter, even those of suspected and convicted criminals.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) 

MADPET is also happy that ‘the government will allocate RM73mil to install CCTV cameras in all police lockups nationwide, says Law Minister Datuk Seri Liew Vui Keong.’ (Star, 20/9/2019)

In November 2020, in Parliament, Home Minister of the current government, Hamzah Zainuddin said the government will implement the proposal on the use of body cameras by police officers, amongst others to prevent the accusation and imputation brought against the security personnel while performing their duties.(Malaysiakini, 19/11/2020)

In December, the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador said that the police were in the process of acquiring body-worn cameras (BWC) to be used by officers, and also equipping all police cars with cameras.(Malay Mail, 14/12/2020).

The Minister also informed about the set-up of Custodial Medical Unit (CMU), which will also do a medical examination of detainees before they are placed in police lock-ups. [Q.331].  Parliamentary Reply on 16/12/2021, [Q.331],

see some earlier relevant posts:-

13th Death in Police Custody only..Bar Resolution on the Coroner and Inquests - Coroner tell us how he/she died?

2022 2nd Death in Police Custody(16th Jan) - Pengkalan Chepa. Coroner - Tell us how he died?

If proper procedure followed, 63 year old accused will be alive today, and not died in a police lock-up

Contempt Proceedings Against Home Minister and Others for failure to complete inquest in death in custody cases as directed by the Judiciary?

3rd Death in Police Custody in 2022 - at this rate, for 2022 we will get 36? All police lockups have CCTV by end 2021

4th death in police custody in 2022...Where is the Coroner - has he seen the body, started investigations,...??

 

6th Death in Police Custody of 2022 > Has the Coroner(the Sessions Court Judge) already viewed the body, at site of death, started investigation? 

It is the CORONER and not the police that determines whether there was a criminal element in custodial deaths - Police must respect the law and keep quiet until Coroner decides?

 

CCTVs, body cams for cops good but recording is key - rights group(Malaysiakini)

 

Another death in custody, 16th this year

FMT Reporters

-

May 8, 2022 9:59 PM

A man awaiting imprisonment died in a lock-up at Seri Alam, Johor, this morning.

PETALING JAYA: Another man has died in custody – the 16th case this year – this time at a police station in Johor.

The deceased was a 48-year-old man who was temporarily placed at the Seri Alam lock-up while awaiting imprisonment after being sentenced to a five-month jail term from April 27 for drug-related offenses.

Bukit Aman’s integrity and standards compliance department director Azri Ahmad said the man was found in a weak condition at the lock-up this morning.

A doctor from Masai health clinic conducted a checkup and confirmed his death at 9.35am.

Fifteen custodial deaths have been reported this year alone before the latest incident.

The last case was reported on April 14, when a 45-year-old male detainee at the lock-up of Kajang police station died on the way to hospital on April 13, after he was “seen to be having seizures” by personnel on duty. - FMT, 8/5/2022

Wow - 456 Death In Custody in 2020 - Was there inquest so that an independent coroner can tell us why the person died,...?

 

456 Death in custody in 2020 is just too much - Persons sentenced to prison must serve their time and come out alive..

34 Death in Police Custody - but still no INQUESTS for every death in custody..

An inquest can be a short process, where an independent Coroner makes a finding on the cause of death, whether any criminality involved..

So, why is Malaysian government against a reasonable request - not just reasonable but a LEGAL REQUIREMENT..

Suhakam: 456 deaths in custody across 2020

Friday, 22 Oct 2021 04:58 PM MYT

BY RADZI RAZAK

Suhakam commissioner Jerald Joseph speaks during a press conference in Kuala Lumpur October 22, 2021. ― Picture by Firdaus Latif

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our Telegram channel for the latest updates.

---

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 22 ― The Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) said several agencies reported as many as 456 deaths in their custody for 2020, the majority of which involved prisoners.

According to Suhakam commissioner Jerald Joseph, the Prison Department reported 363 deaths, followed by the Immigration Department (50), police (34), and the National Anti-Drug Agency (AADK) that reported nine.

“Health factors were still listed as the main cause of death.

“In 2020, Covid-19 pandemic also contributed to the number of deaths,” he said in a press conference today.

Jerald said Suhakam has reiterated its suggestion for the Ministry of Health to establish a Custodial Health Unit to have a specific role to manage health services in detention centres.

Suhakam Commissioner Datuk Mah Weng Kwai also called for the government to implement a law as proposed by the Bar Council to empower inquiries into such custodial deaths.

“One death in custody is one too many. If the coroner rules it as natural causes, it will be acceptable but if anything other than it, it should not be happening,” he said. - Malay Mail, 22/10/2021

Muhammad Afis Ahmad - Did Police cause blunt force trauma that caused his death? - A MADPET media statement 6/2/2021

 

Media Statement – 6/2/2021

Independent Investigation using also CCTV recordings for Death in Police Custody cases

Muhammad Afis Ahmad - Did Police cause blunt force trauma that caused his death?

A review of body-cam and CCTV footages would help proving the police’s innocence in the murder/killing of Muhammad Afis Ahmad.

At 12.30 am on January 28, Muhamad Afis was found unconscious in the lockup of Yan Police headquarters and was sent to the Yan Hospital. At 1.10 am on the same day, he was pronounced dead.(Sun Daily, 4/2/2021).

He was arrested on January 27 under Section 379 and 170 of the Penal Code in connection with theft and impersonating as a policeman.

Died Due To Blunt Force Trauma To The Head

A post-mortem conducted the following day revealed that Muhammad Afis had died due to blunt force trauma to the head.

Kedah Police chief Datuk Hasanuddin Hassan ‘…said during the arrest, the deceased had put up a struggle which caused him to suffer injuries to the face, ear and forehead…’(BERNAMA report)

Murder Investigation Not Simply Investigation To Clear Police Of Wrongdoings

The police chief ‘…said the investigation was to determine whether there were elements of violence, negligence or misconduct by police personnel as well as possibility of injury during the arrest.’ Statements of about 47 persons have already been recorded.

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty) is of the opinion that a murder investigation ought to be conducted, noting that the cause of death was blunt force trauma to the head. If someone struck his head, and that ultimately caused the death, then the said person could still be charged for murder or some killing offence.

It must be pointed out that there is a possibility that the blunt force trauma on the head that killed could have also been caused by some other – not the police. So, narrowly investigating only to ensure no police wrongdoing is just not right.

As such, it is essential that it be a murder or killing crime investigation under the Penal Code. If it was a police officer who caused it, then ensure that the perpetrator is charged in court just like every one else, and not simply dealt with quietly through some internal disciplinary action.

For not getting the deceased speedily inspected by a medical professional, the possibility of another crime, being section 304A Penal Code - causing death by negligence.

All Arrested Who Are Injured Or Sick Must Be Given Immediate Medical Examination

After arrest, there were obvious injuries to the head of Muhammad Afis, and a relevant question was whether he was taken to the hospital for treatment and checkup, or examined by a doctor. If this was done, there is a possibility that Muhammad Afis may still be alive today.

Immediate medical examination soon after arrest will also prevent unfounded accusations of police violence post arrest or whilst in police custody.

When Police Are Possible Suspects, Investigations Must Be Done By Independent Coroner – Not The Police

In cases of death in police custody or death caused by police shooting, it is best that the investigations be conducted by the Coroner or some other independent body.

Police investigating their fellow police officer/s, more so within the same police district or station may lead to improper investigation and may not lead to justice.  

We note that some earlier Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) inquiries into deaths in police custody has found police involvement in covering up the truth, including destroying and/or tampering with evidence.

In the case of Syed Mohd Azlan Syed Mohamed Nur, for example, it was reported that, ‘…The use of physical violence by police during arrest and questioning was the cause of Syed Mohd Azlan Syed Mohamed Nur’s 2014 death in custody, the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) said today….“There was an element of crime in the attacks involving common intent or abetment by PDRM officers, including the arresting team, to intentionally use physical violence on the deceased to cause death or injury,” the EAIC said in a statement today.

The EAIC, in that inquiry, also said that, ‘...its investigations also found attempts to obscure evidence from the 25-year-old’s interrogation that resulted in 61 separate injuries on various parts of his body...’(Malay Mail,30/10/2015)

As such, as soon as a death happens in police custody or where police are suspected, the Coroner, being usually a Magistrate, who is not a police officer should lead the inquiry and/or investigation to reveal the truth, and ensure that justice be done.  Alternatively, it could be a Deputy Public Prosecutor or the EAIC.

Body-Worn Cams And CCTV Which Records Long Overdue

In September 2019, the then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said the government was looking at equipping selected enforcement personnel with body cameras as part of its efforts to combat corruption and other alleged abuses of power.

In November 2020, in Parliament, Home Minister of the current government, Hamzah Zainuddin said the government will implement the proposal on the use of body cameras by police officers, amongst others to prevent the accusation and imputation brought against the security personnel while performing their duties.(Malaysiakini, 19/11/2020)

In December, the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador said that the police were in the process of acquiring body-worn cameras (BWC) to be used by officers, and also equipping all police cars with cameras.(Malay Mail, 14/12/2020).

If the body-cams, vehicle cameras and CCTV with recording capacity are still not there, MADPET urges that it be made a PRIORITY, as this will certainly deter police from breaking the law or violating rights of others.

Some Malaysian lock-ups do have CCTV, but alas when the recordings are needed as evidence for inquests, it is revealed that these CCTVs do not have recording capacity, or that they were not working at the time.

What is needed are CCTV, body cams and cameras on police vehicles that have recording capacity, where the recording is stored safely to prevent tampering or deletion by any police officer or station.

In some jurisdictions like Hong Kong, for the last few decades, CCTV recordings are there from the point of arrest and throughout the suspect’s stay in police facilities, and lawyers of suspects are given CDs of these recordings on request. Such good practice ensures that there is no abuse or wrongdoings on the part of the police, that the law is complied with and that the arrested is not denied any of his/her rights.

Malaysia yearns for a more trustworthy police force to restore and/or enhance public confidence in our police and the administration of criminal justice in Malaysia. We need police officers that will not hesitate to report, investigate or even charge a fellow police officer if he/she commits a crime.

 

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

 

 

Thorough investigation into death in police custody in Yan

05 Feb 2021 / 10:00 H.

ALOR SETAR, Feb 4: Police are conducting a thorough investigation into the death of a detainee in the lockup of Yan Police headquarters on Jan 28.

Kedah Police chief Datuk Hasanuddin Hassan said the investigation was to determine whether there were elements of violence, negligence or misconduct by police personnel as well as possibility of injury during the arrest.

“To date, a total of 47 witnesses have had their statements taken. They are family members as well as police personnel involved in the arrest and the ones manning the lockup.

“Others are the detainees who were in same the lockup as well as medical officers from Yan Hospital and Sultanah Bahiyah Hospital here,“ he said in a statement tonight.

He said the detainee, Muhammad Afis Ahmad, was arrested on Jan 27 under Section 379 and 170 of the Penal Code in connection with theft and impersonating as a policeman.

ADVERTISEMENT

Hasanuddin said during the arrest, the deceased had put up a struggle which caused him to suffer injuries to the face, ear and forehead.

The deceased was later taken to his house in Kampung Kilang Papan, Gurun for further investigation and the police conducted an inspection at the house which was also witnessed by his family members.

“No seizures were made during the inspection and the deceased was handed over to the Yan IPD for further action and was subsequently taken to the lockup for remand the next day.

“At 12.30 am on Jan 28, he was found unconscious and was sent to the Yan Hospital. At 1.10 am on the same day, he was pronounced dead.

Hasanuddin said a post-mortem conducted the following day revealed that Muhammad Afis had died due to blunt force trauma to the head.

He said the deceased used to serve as a volunteer police at the Kuala Muda IPD between 2013 and 2014 but was dismissed for his alleged involvement in drugs.

“The deceased had also been detained eight times for drug and criminal offences and sentenced by the court,“ he said.- Bernama - The Sun Daily, 4/2/2021

NEWS

51 Shares

Police to use body cameras to prevent misconduct, corruption - Hamzah

Published 19 Nov 2020, 12:17 pm

Modified 19 Nov 2020, 12:22 pm

The government will implement the proposal made during the Pakatan Harapan administration on the use of body cameras by police officers.

In a parliamentary written reply, Home Minister Hamzah Zainuddin (above) said the move will prevent the accusation and imputation brought against the security personnel while performing their duties.

The first phase procurement for 2,168 units of 4G body cameras will be made under the 12th Malaysia Plan in 2021, he said.

"The government is concerned about the integrity level of the members of the police force. The use of body camera can improve the positive perception of the people on the police," Hamzah added.

"The procurement will be implemented in 2021," he told Oscar Ling (Harapan-Sibu), who asked if the Perikatan Nasional government plans to use body cameras to prevent abuse of power and corruption.

Hamzah said the government is committed to implementing the project by taking into account the positive outcome of reducing complaints, wrongdoing and corruption among the police personnel while performing their duties.

"On top of that, the transparency of the delivery of services can be strengthened while at the same time improve the relationship between the police and the community," he added.

In September 2019, the then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said the government was looking at equipping selected enforcement personnel with body cameras as part of its efforts to combat corruption and other alleged abuses of power. 

Other measures included installing more CCTVs at strategic locations, including police lock-ups.

Inspector-General of Police Abdul Hamid Bador also welcomed the proposal.

However, Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Karim had decried the proposal, saying it would be akin to treating the enforcement personnel as criminals. - Malaysiakini, 19/11/2020

IGP: Home Ministry still evaluating body cameras for police use

Monday, 14 Dec 2020 06:21 PM MYT

IGP Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador speaks to reporters during the Op Bersepadu Khazanah press conference in Selangor August 19, 2020. ― Picture by Shafwan Zaidon

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 14 — The Home Ministry (KDN) is still examining several types of body cameras, or body-worn cameras (BWC) offered by equipment firms for use by the police, says Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador.

“We are still waiting for the (approval of the) allocation to get the equipment (body cameras).

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

“I understand that some companies have already offered several types of body cameras. The ministry (is also) is looking at which is the best one for the police,” he said in a media conference after the signing of the Ops Benteng permanent procedures for operations at Wisma Perwira ATM here today.

In July, Abdul Hamid was reported to have said that the police were in the process of acquiring the equipment to be used by officers during patrols, especially in urban areas.

He said besides the BWC, all police patrol cars would also be equipped with cameras. — Bernama - Malay Mail, 14/12/2020

 EAIC says Johor man’s 2014 death in custody was murder 

Friday October 30, 2015
11:49 PM GMT+8

 

















File picture of lawyer Gobind Singh Deo (right) holding up a copy of Syed Mohd Azlan’s autopsy report while accompanying the victim’s parents, Sharifah Halilah Syed Sylaiman, 57, and Syed Muhamad Nur Ali, 67, at a news conference at the former’s office in Kuala Lumpur.

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 30 — The use of physical violence by police during arrest and questioning was the cause of Syed Mohd Azlan Syed Mohamed Nur’s 2014 death in custody, the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) said today.

According to the enforcement watchdog, its investigations also found attempts to obscure evidence from the 25-year-old’s interrogation that resulted in 61 separate injuries on various parts of his body.

The police officers involved also engaged in a “serious breach” of standard operating procedures concerning the handling of detainees, material seizure, and the integrity of statements.
 

“There was an element of crime in the attacks involving common intent or abetment by PDRM officers, including the arresting team, to intentionally use physical violence on the deceased to cause death or injury,” the EAIC said in a statement today.

It added that the action was a criminal offence, specifically under Section 302 and 325 of the Penal Code read with Section 34 of the same Act.

Section 302 pertains to murder while Section 325 involves voluntarily causing grievous bodily harm; Section 34 deals with voluntarily causing hurt.

The EAIC then recommended that the Attorney-General’s Chambers to prosecute the officers involved for the crimes identified in the agency’s investigations.

It added that it was regrettable that custodial deaths continue to occur repeatedly in the country, saying that the matter should be viewed seriously.

According to the EAIC’s investigations, Syed Mohd Azlan had been arrested on November 3, 2014 near Pengerang, Johor over possible involvement in an armed altercation involving two groups on September 14 the same year.

He had been detained by a team of 13 police officers and held at the Sungai Rengit police station, where he had been interrogated over the attack.

Syed Mohd Azlan was later transferred to the Kota Tinggi district police headquarters to be remanded, but died while in transit.

A post-mortem determined the cause of death to be blunt force trauma to his chest, while 61 defensive wounds were discovered on his face, torso, and both legs. -Malay Mail, 30/10/2015

 

See also 

 

Police officers that tortured and killed detainee - what will the AG and the Malaysian government do?

 

Cepat tindakan kes bunuh lelaki korea, kenapa lambat tuduh polis/pembunuh Syed Mohd Azlan?

Police officers that killed Syed Mohd Azlan, and tried to hide a crime? What happened?

KENYATAAN MEDIA

MAKLUMAN SIASATANSURUHANJAYA INTEGRITI AGENSI PENGUATKUASAAN (EAIC)  KE ATAS KEMATIAN SYED MOHD AZLAN BIN SYED MOHAMED NUR SEMASA DI DALAM TAHANAN POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA (PDRM) 

Putrajaya – 30 Oktober 2015 - Suruhanjaya Integriti Agensi Penguatkuasaan atau Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) ingin mengumumkan kepada orang awam mengenai dapatan (findings) siasatan oleh Suruhanjaya ini ke ataskematian Syed Mohd Azlan bin Syed Mohamed Nur semasa dalam tahanan PDRM. 

Dalam hal ini, EAIC melalui Pasukan Petugas yang dibentuk telah menjalankan siasatan yang merangkumi terma-terma rujukan yang berikut: Terma-terma rujukan (terms of reference) Pasukan Petugas adalah seperti berikut: 

(i) Untuk mengenal pasti sama ada terdapat sebarang salah laku seperti yang diperuntukkan di bawah seksyen 24 Akta 700 oleh pegawai/ anggota PDRM semasa mengendalikan tahanan tersebut; 

(ii) Sekiranya terdapat salah laku dizahirkan, untuk menentukan dan mengenal pasti: 

(a) bagaimana dan mengapa salah laku itu terjadi;

(b) apakah peraturan-peraturan, kaedah-kaedah, Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) atau mekanisme yang menyebabkan atau mendorong kepada berlakunya salah laku tersebut; dan 

(c) siapakah individu yang bertanggungjawab ke atas salah laku tersebut. 

(iii) Untuk melakukan semua perkara yang suai manfaat atau yang semunasabahnya perlu bagi, atau yang bersampingan dengan, pelaksanaan fungsinya dalam menyiasat kes kematian tahanan tersebut selaras dengan peruntukan Akta 700; 

(iv) Untuk mengesyorkan apa-apa penambahbaikan atau penggubalan semula peraturan-peraturan, kaedah-kaedah, SOP atau mekanisme bagi memastikan salah laku tersebut tidak berulang; dan 

(v) Untuk menyedia dan mengedarkan laporan mengenai hasil dan dapatan siasatan dan syor-syor terhadapnya.

Sehubungan dengan pembentukan Pasukan Petugas tersebut, Pasukan Petugas yang telah mengambil tindakan berikut: 

(a) mengambil keterangan daripada 35 orang saksi (termasuk anggota polis berkaitan penangkapan dan tahanan Syed Mohd Azlan (si mati), pegawai perubatan, orang awam dan juga ahli keluarga si mati); 

(b) melawat dan memeriksa tempat kejadian di mana Syed Mohd Azlan telah ditangkap;

(c) meneliti dan mengkaji dokumen-dokumen yang berkaitan termasuk laporan polis berkenaan tangkapan, catatan Buku Perharian Balai, laporan bedah siasat dan laporan kimia beserta gambar-gambar berkaitan;

Latar belakang kejadian tangkapan dan kematian si mati adalah seperti berikut: 

(i) Pada 19 September, 2014 lebih kurang jam 1.00 pagi, pengadu iaitu seorang lelaki Melayu bersama beberapa rakannya termasuk seorang teman wanita pengadu telah pergi ke rumah di alamat No. 53, Kampung Dato’ Abdul Ghani untuk berjumpa dengan Syed Mohd Azlan bin Syed Mohamed Nur (si mati). Mereka diberitahu oleh bapa si mati bahawa si mati tiada di rumah pada ketika itu. 

(ii) Lebih kurang 30 minit kemudian, si mati pulang ke rumah bersama beberapa rakan si mati dengan menaiki kereta jenis Proton Saga berwarna perak serta sebuah lagi kereta jenis Honda berwarna hitam. Setiba di situ, si mati dan rakan-rakan si mati dikatakan telah keluar daripada kereta dengan bersenjatakan senjata berbentuk sepucuk pistol dan sebilah pedang samurai lalu menyerang pengadu dan rakan-rakan pengadu sehingga mendatangkan kecederaan ke atas pengadu dan rakan pengadu. Pengadu berjaya melarikan diri dari terus diserang. 

(iii) Satu laporan polis telah dibuat oleh pengadu di Balai Polis Sungai Rengit (Sg Rengit Rpt: 816/2014) bersabit dengan kejadian tersebut pada 19 September 2014 jam 4.45 pagi. Satu kertas siasatan telah dibuka oleh pihak polis untuk disiasat di bawah seksyen 148 Kanun Keseksaan, iaitu memiliki senjata di dalam rusuhan. 

(iv) Pada 3 November 2014, jam lebih kurang 3.30 pagi, bertindak di atas maklumat, sepasukan polis seramai 13 orang anggota yang diketuai oleh seorang pegawai berpangkat Inspektor telah membuat serbuan ke atas sebuah bilik sewa di rumah bernombor 62, Kampung Simon, Teluk Ramunia, Sungai Rengit, Pengerang, Johor dan telah menangkap si mati. Tiada apa-apa senjata api dijumpai dari si mati. 

(v) Selepas ditangkap, si mati telah dibawa balik ke Balai Polis Sungai Rengit untuk disoal siasat berkaitan kejadian pergaduhan dan penyimpanan senjata api. Bagaimana pun masih tiada senjata api ditemui walau pun pihak polis telah membuat penggeledahan di rumah bapa si mati. 

(vi) Pada jam lebih kurang 7.10 pagi pada hari yang sama, si mati telah dibawa oleh pihak polis menaiki kenderaan polis dari Balai Polis Sungai Rengit untuk pergi ke Ibu Pejabat Polis Daerah (IPD) Kota Tinggi bagi tujuan menguruskan permohonan reman ke atas si mati berkaitan kes di mana si mati di tangkap yang disiasat di bawah seksyen 148 Kanun Keseksaan bersabit Sg. Rengit Rpt: 816/2014. 

(vii) Semasa di dalam perjalanan ke IPD Kota Tinggi, anggota polis yang mengiringi si mati mendapati si mati berada di dalam keadaan yang lemah dan tidak bermaya serta tidak memberikan sebarang respon kepada panggilan/pertanyaan yang dibuat oleh anggota pengiring tersebut. Anggota pengiring tersebut sertamerta memaklumkan keadaan si mati kepada pegawai tangkapan yang ikut sama di dalam kereta tersebut. 

(viii) Di atas arahan pegawai tersebut, mereka terus menuju ke klinik berdekatan iaitu Klinik Kesihatan Bandar Penawar. Setibanya mereka di Klinik Kesihatan Bandar Penawar pada jam lebih kurang 8.30 pagi, pegawai perubatan bertugas iaitu Dr. Mohd Mahdzan Bin Mazelan telah melakukan pemeriksaan ke atas si mati dan mengesahkan bahawa si mati telah meninggal dunia. 

(ix) Satu laporan polis tentang kematian si mati telah dibuat oleh pegawai iaitu ketua pasukan tangkapan pada 3 November 2014, jam 10.15 pagi (hari yang sama) melalui Bandar Penawar Report No. 002169/14. 

(x) Pada 4 November 2014, bedah siasat (post mortem) telah dijalankan ke atas mayat si mati oleh Dr. Rohayu binti Shahar Adnan di Hospital Sultan Ismail, Johor Bahru yang mengesahkan punca kematian adalah akibat daripada trauma hentakan tumpul pada dada (blunt force trauma to chest). Pemeriksaan juga mendapati si mati mengalami 61 jenis kesan luka/lebam/calaran (bruises) pada tubuh badan termasuk pada bahagian muka, badan dan kedua-dua belah kaki si mati. Satu laporan post mortem telah disediakan oleh doktor pakar tersebut.

Siasatan kes kematian si mati tersebut telah selesai dijalankan oleh Pasukan Petugas EAIC dan diterima oleh EAIC selari dengan terma-terma rujukan siasatan. Dapatan (findings) siasatan adalah seperti berikut: 

1. Kematian Syed Mohd Azlan Bin Syed Mohamed Nur (si mati) mempunyai kaitan dengan penggunaan kekerasan secara fizikal oleh pihak polis yang menjalankan tangkapan dan soal siasat ke atas si mati; 

2. Pakar Perunding dan Ketua Jabatan, Jabatan Perubatan Forensik, Hospital Sultan Ismail, Johor Bahru, yang menjalankan bedah siasat ke atas mayat si mati mendapati kematian Syed Mohd Azlan disebabkan oleh trauma hentakan tumpul (blunt force trauma to the chest) ke atas dada si mati tersebut. Pemeriksaan juga mendapati si mati mengalami 61 jenis kecederaan di bahagian muka, badan dan kedua-dua belah kaki. Sebahagian daripada kecederaan yang dialami oleh si mati konsisten dengan kecederaan semasa berusaha mempertahankan diri daripada kekerasan fizikal yang dilakukan ke atasnya oleh anggota-anggota polis. 

3. Terdapat perlakuan gangguan bahan bukti yang material oleh anggota PDRMiaitu, 

(i) membersihkan tempat kejadian sebelum dilawati dan diperiksa oleh pegawai perubatan,

(ii) melupuskan tikar getah dan karpet yang dipercayai mempunyai kesan darah si mati di tempat kejadian tangkapan, dan 

(iii) perlakuanmenyembunyikan/menghilangkan saksi mata (eye witness) yang melihat kejadian tangkapan si mati; 

4. Terdapat anggota tangkapan yang menggunakan gari milik persendirian anggota tersebut yang bukan dibekalkan oleh PDRM bagi menggari si mati selepas ditangkap yang telah menyumbang kepada berlakunya kecederaan di pergelangan tangan si mati.

5. Terdapat beberapa pemecahan serius (serious breach) ke atas StandardOperating Procedure (SOP) PDRM berkaitan tatacara tangkapan dan pengendalian orang tangkapan, sitaan barang kes dan integriti keterangan (SOP Tangkapan Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah PDRM); SOP Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah (Prosedur Penggeledahan dan Rampasan) telah dilakukan oleh pegawai dan anggota pasukan serbuan yang dikenalpasti oleh siasatan ini; 

6. Terdapat perlakuan serangan bersifat jenayah yang melibatkan unsur niat bersama atau pensubahatan (abetment) oleh anggota PDRM yang terdiri daripada anggota pasukan tangkapan bagi melakukan kekerasan fizikal secara sengaja ke atas si matiyang telah mengakibatkan kecederaan dan kematian ke atas si mati, dan perlakuan ini adalah merupakan jeniskesalahan bersifat jenayah di bawah undang-undang, khususnya kesalahan di bawah seksyen 302 dan seksyen 325 Kanun Keseksaan dibaca bersama seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan atau secara alternatif seksyen 107 Kanun yang sama; 

7. Selaras dengan peruntukan seksyen 30(1)(b) Akta Suruhanjaya Integriti Agensi Penguatkuasaan 2009 [Akta 700], Suruhanjaya mengesyorkan kepada Pihak Berkuasa Patatertib (PBT) PDRM untuk tindakan tatatatertibdibawa terhadap pegawai dan anggota-anggota yang dikenalpasti di dalam laporan penuh Suruhanjaya yang didapati telah melakukan salah laku seperti mana skop salah laku yang diberikan di bawah seksyen 24 Akta 700; 

8. Selaras dengan peruntukan seksyen 30(1)(c) Akta Suruhanjaya Integriti Agensi Penguatkuasaan 2009 [Akta 700], EAIC mengesyorkan kepadaPendakwa Raya (Peguam Negara) bagi pendakwaan jenayah dibawa terhadap pegawai dan anggota PDRM yang didapati telah melakukan salah laku bersifat kesalahan jenayah seperti yang dikenalpasti di dalam laporan penuh siasatan ini.

EAIC juga sebagai tambahan mengemukakan syor dan cadangan berikut kepada PDRM sebagai penambahbaikan dalam usaha meningkatkan kecekapan dan kualiti pengurusan orang tahanan atau orang tangkapan bagi mengelakkan insiden kematian orang tahanan atau orang tangkapan semasa berada di dalam tahanan: 

1. PDRM menambahbaik SOP berkaitan dengan tangkapan. Jika sekiranya orang tangkapan didapati mengalami kecederaan fizikal (walaupun kecederaan nampak seperti tidak serius), maka saspek itu hendaklah dirujuk terus kepada mana-mana Pegawai Perubatan Kerajaan bagi memastikan tahap keseriusan kecederaan serta status kesihatan saspek tersebut; 

2. PDRM mengadakan “refresher course” atau “refresher training” yang berterusan secara berkumpulan dan berperingkat kepada semua lapisan pegawai dan anggota yang terlibat di dalam operasi serbuan/tangkapan untuk memastikan supaya pegawai dan anggota benar-benar memahami dan mengamalkan kehendak serta tatacara yang diperuntukkan dalam kes-kes tangkapan atau operasi yang berkaitan dengan tangkapan;

3. PDRM memperketatkan dan menjalankan pemantauan dengan lebih berkesan ke atas pematuhan oleh pegawai dan anggota PDRM ke atas SOP Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah atau Perintah Tetap khususnya berkaitan soalsiasat ke atas orang tahanan, penyitaan barang kes dan kewajipan menyediakan borang geledah atau borang bongkar. Di dalam perkara ini terdapat SOP yang melarang sebarang penggunaan kekerasan ke atas orang tahanan semasa disoalsiasat (PTKPN A 118); 

4. PDRM mengemaskini SOP yang berkaitan bagi melarang sama sekali manamana pegawai atau anggota dari menggunakan peralatan yang tidak dibenarkan atau peralatan yang bukan dibekalkan oleh PDRM dalam apa-apa operasi tangkapan; dan

Selain itu, EAIC juga mengesyorkan supaya kajian dibuat oleh pihak Kementerian Dalam Negeri dan Jabatan Peguam Negara ke atas kesesuaian untuk meminda peruntukan Kanun Keseksaan dan Akta Keterangan 1950 bagi memasukkan peruntukan anggapan (presumption) yang akan meletakkan beban bukti ke atas pihak yang mempunyai jagaan dan kawalan ke atas orang tahanan sebagai bertanggungan ke atas kecederaan atau kematian orang tahanan sehingga diakaskan atau dibuktikan sebaliknya.Ini akan dapat mengimbangi keadaan di mana monopoli keterangan hanya dimiliki oleh pihak yang melakukan tahanan ke atas orang tahanan atau mangsa bagi kes-kes kejadian kematian dan kecederaan orang tahanan di bawah jagaan mana-mana pihak berkuasa berkaitan.

EAIC berasa kesal ke atas kes-kes kematian tahanan dalam lokap yang berulang kali berlaku dalam negara dan memandang serius kepada perkara ini. Kejadian kematian orang tahanan akibat daripada kecederaan tubuh badan semasa di dalam tempoh tahanan oleh perlakuan salah laku anggota penguat kuasa hendaklah dibasmi sama sekali. Demi menjaga integriti semua pihak, diharapkan syor-syor Suruhanjaya ini diberi perhatian dan tindakan serius oleh semua pihak-pihak yang berkaitan. Untuk mendapatkan butiran lanjut kandungan laporan siasatan ini orang awam boleh mendapat akses melalui laman sesawang EAIC di alamatwww.eaic.gov.my.

-TAMAT

DATUK YAACOB BIN HAJI MD. SAM

Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Integriti Agensi Penguatkuasaan (EAIC)

Bertarikh 30 Oktober 2015