Al-Fatihah: Aminul Rasyid Amzah (Justice Delayed is Justice Denied)

Al-Fatihah: Aminul Rasyid Amzah
16 May, 2011By Khairul Idzwan
Loyar Burok

***********************************************************************************
It has been a year since Aminul Rasyid Amzah was killed by the police. Until today, there is no official apology from the police and the case is still in court, where the accused has been called to enter his defence, as a prima facie case has been established against him. But still, justice delayed is justice denied.
************************************************************************************

I was not at the scene of the incident, so I can not tell the truth behind the incident. However, I would like to give my personal opinion on the manner in which the police did the shooting.

This is not the first time the police shot suspects to death, as suspects who are under a remand order can also died in lock-ups. Remember Kugan Ananthan and Gunasegaran Rajasundram? Or should I remind you with two deaths at the premise of the police’s "brother", the MACC? Teoh Beng Hock and Ahmad Sarbani? To make things straight, I have nothing against the police or the authorities. I know they have a huge responsibility to ensure that Malaysians live peacefully. But not everything can be settled through shooting or killing, especially when the shooting causes the death of suspects.

In this particular incident, the reason for the police shooting is questionable. I don’t think the police needed to fire multiple shots in the first place. The boy was wrong for driving without a valid licence and snuck out from his house in the middle of the night without his parents’ permission. But can that be a justification for the shooting? Moreover, if I were in his shoes, maybe I would do the same. Just imagine, being chased by several people in motorcycles and accidentally knocking a car. Then, suddenly being chased by police patrol cars. Any "Ali, Ah Chong and Muthu" aged 15 would probably panic in such a situation.

The police had reasonable suspicion to arrest him. Section 24 of the Police Act provides that "if any police officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that a vehicle is being used in the commission of any offence, he may stop and detain the person" [Section 24(1)(b)]. Section 24(3) of the same Act further adds that "if the person fails to obey any reasonable signal of the police officer to stop the vehicle, the person is guilty of an offence and can be arrested without a warrant."

So, in my opinion, when the car had stopped, the police should have first told the boy to surrender. In some newspapers, they reported that the police shot the boy when he tried to run over the police while reversing the car. My personal opinion is that the statement is quite absurd. Based on several photos I have found in blogs, it is impossible for the car to go forward. So, logically, the police will go to the side of the car and not to the back of the car if they wanted to check the condition of the boy.

And some newspapers reported that the police found a long parang in the car. Is it just a cover up to justify the shooting? Nobody will ever know.

Nevertheless, the mother revealed another fact to reporters. The boy had already died before the car went over the side of the road and hit a house. This means that while asking the car to stop, the police had already shot the boy to death. I think this is intolerable. The police should not start firing at the car if they know that, by shooting it, they may cause death to the persons inside the car.

According to the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life [Article 9]. Article 10 further adds that the officials must identify themselves as such and give a clear warning on their intent to use firearms, with sufficient time for the warning to be observed unless by doing so, it will unduly place the law enforcement officials at risk, or would create a risk of death or serious harm to other persons.
The point here is, the use of firearms can only be justified if it is strictly unavoidable.

Even in criminal law, the defence of self-defence can only be invoked if he is in imminent danger, with no other means to save himself from that danger. In an English case, Rashford (2005) All ER 192, the question in that case was whether the defendant feared that he was in immediate danger from which he had no other means of escape; if the violence he used was no more than appeared necessary to preserve his own life or protect himself from serious injury, he would be entitled to rely on self-defence. The keyword here, besides imminent danger, is the proportionality of the attack.

Thus, did the police fire a warning shot before firing at the boy’s car, and subsequently at the boy? Next, did the boy fire back or use other means to attack the police and put the police in imminent danger?

The police have many powers in order to prevent crimes, but that does not includes shooting a suspect to death. According to Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 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. This means that a person should be considered innocent until it can be proven that he is guilty. If a person is accused of a crime, he should always have the right to defend himself. Nobody has the right to condemn him and punish him for something he has not done.

So, is there any proof to show that the boy is guilty? Even under Article 11 of the UDHR, he is innocent until he is proven guilty. The police must also remember that a suspect is not necessarily guilty. The word suspect itself shows that the suspect is not yet guilty but that it is just suspected that he may have committed a crime.

A fatal shot will cause death to the suspect. If the suspect is dead, how can the police tender evidence to show that he is guilty? How can the investigation continue when the suspect himself is dead?

================================================================
Khairul Idzwan read law in UiTM and is now chambering. He misses his law school days. He blogs at http://kairulizwan.wordpress.com.
================================================================

Najib Allegation Police Report (wt 21 pages evidence)

Opposition group alleges corruption in report against Najib
By Debra Chong
(Extracted from Malaysia Insider Website)

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 21 – PKR Youth leader Badrul Hisham Shaharin led a group of five people in lodging a police report today against Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for corruption.

The group claimed they provided the police with evidence in connection with a number of deals to procure military equipment while Najib was Defence Minister.

Najib has been at the brunt of a series of allegations since he became the front-runner to succeed Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi as Umno president and Prime Minister.

Allegations of impropriety have surfaced over the proposed acquisition of Eurocopter helicopters for RM2.3 billion and the RM4.6 billion Scorpene submarines deal.

The group which made the police report today calls itself the Sekretariat Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM).

They claimed to have supplied police with 21-pages of evidence implicating the DPM, including documents proving the authenticity of several text messages between Najib and lawyer Datuk Shafee Abdullah.

A series of text messages, which purportedly implies the deputy prime minister had interfered in the police investigations into the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu in 2006, was published recently in jailed blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin's Malaysia Today website.

Shafee was then acting for Abdul Razak Baginda, Najib's close associate who was subsequently charged for abetting in the murder.

Today, SAMM demanded that police reopen the investigations on Najib's alleged involvement with the murdered victim to show whether he had abused his position and power.

"We filed the report so that the proper procedures can begin," said Badrul, the spokesman for SAMM. "Otherwise, the police will say 'without an official complaint, we cannot start official procedures'."

"We just want to help the police with their investigations. We are providing them some supplementary documents to give them a head start."

The other four, who co-lodged the report at the Dang Wangi district police station here, are Aiman Athirah Al Junaidi, the information chief for national Pas Muslimat; president of Gerak Ramlan Abu Bakar, blogger Amin Iskandar and Wan Anis Adnan.

Police Reputation Down Again (SALT DRUG CASE)

How are we to trust Malaysia Police Force Again?
A High Profile Drug Case suspect in Johor is acquited.
Five (5) Suspect accuited of a drug trafficking charge after the "drugs" were found to be salt.

The Story

(1) The Suspect were alleged to have committed a preparatory act for trafficking 40.8kg of Ketamin on March 4 at 3.10pm at a house on Jalan Jingga 5, Taman Pelangi.

(2) Two had confessed to being involved with those responsible for the theft of the syabu from the Johor police headquarters on July 31.

(3) To date, 11 civilians and seven police personnel, including a probationary Inspector and a 29-year-old policewoman, have been arrested. The police personnel are still in custody -- four under the Special Preventive Measures and three for housebreaking.

(4)During the course of the investigations, Lance Corporal Morne Ali Amat, was found dead with a gun shot wound to the side of his head in an oil palm plantation near Setia Indah on August 10. It was reported that police were trying to contact him to have his statement recorded in connection with this case, when he was found dead. Police had classified that case as sudden death.

(5) Today 10 Sept 2008 - Five (5) Suspect accuited of a drug trafficking charge after the "drugs" were found to be salt

Malaysia Police Force could not diffentiate "DRUGS" with "SALT"

Five (5) Suspect accuited of a drug trafficking charge after the "drugs" were found to be salt.

Related to this drug salt case :

10 August 2008
The case of the RM1 million drugs theft from the state police headquarters took a tragic twist yesterday when one of the policemen being investigated was found shot dead.

Lance Corporal Morne Ali Amat was found with a single bullet wound to the right side of the head at an oil palm plantation in Setia Indah, near here, at 11am yesterday.



NST reported on 18 Aug 2008

JOHOR BARU: A stroke of luck appears to have saved Johor police the blushes of losing 5kg of drugs in their custody.

And they have two policemen from the neighbouring state of Malacca to thank, after they stopped the two culprits in the theft for speeding.

The policemen nabbed the suspects after they attempted to bribe them with RM450 to escape a speeding ticket.

On searching the suspects' car, they found white powder, believed to be syabu in two small plastic containers, two bottles of a brown liquid also believed to be syabu and 67 Erimin 5 pills.

The suspects were arrested and on questioning, led police to an apartment in Taman Johor Jaya where they found brown liquid believed to be syabu and some drug processing equipment.

Johor police chief Datuk Mohd Mokhtar Shariff said they believed they have solved the case of the stolen syabu but he declined to elaborate how the two men were linked to the syndicate.

It is learnt that the two had confessed to being involved with those responsible for the theft of the syabu from the Johor police headquarters on July 31.

The two, aged 23 and 40, were flagged down at a roadblock at KM185 of the north-bound North-South Expressway near Jasin for speeding on Friday.

Mokhtar said they were arrested when they attempted to bribe the policemen manning the roadblock with RM450.

He said the suspects had previous records for drug-related offences.

"The liquid syabu was found in a Carlsberg beer bottle, a mineral water bottle and a 3-litre metal jerry can, along with a bottle of methylated spirit, a can of thinner and another of turpentine believed to be for processing the drug," Mokhtar said.

"The drugs have been sent to the Chemistry Department for analysis." He, however, could not say how much of the stolen syabu was recovered.

To date, 11 civilians and seven police personnel, including a probationary Inspector and a 29-year-old policewoman, have been arrested.

The police personnel are still in custody -- four under the Special Preventive Measures and three for housebreaking.

During the course of the investigations, Lance Corporal Morne Ali Amat, was found dead with a gun shot wound to the side of his head in an oil palm plantation near Setia Indah on August 10.

It was reported that police were trying to contact him to have his statement recorded in connection with this case, when he was found dead.

Police had classified that case as sudden death.

Mokhtar said following the theft of syabu from the evidence room at the state police headquarters, they had taken several measures to ensure that a similar incident would not recur.

While admitting the theft had marred police image, Mokhtar added that they had learnt from the incident and what was most important was that there was no cover-up in the investigations.

This, he said, was reflective of the fact that seven police personnel linked to the case were arrested.

"Those who committed criminal offences will be prosecuted while disciplinary action will be taken against those found to be in dereliction of duty,' he added.

The theft of the syabu caused red faces among Johor police as it occurred right under their noses.

The drugs, with a street value of RM1 million, was part of a RM48 million drug haul in May where 12 suspects of an international drug trafficking syndicate were nabbed.




NST reported the following on 11 August 2008

RM1 MILLION JOHOR POLICE HQ DRUGS THEFT: Policeman under probe found dead


The Star report 9 Sept 2008

JOHOR BARU: Five men, including two Mexicans and a Canadian, who were allegedly part of a major international drug syndicate were acquitted of a drug trafficking charge after the “drugs” were found to be salt.

Their freedom however was short-lived as, following the acquittal by a High Court here, the men were rearrested by the police under the Special Preventative Measures of the Dangerous Drugs Act.

Earlier in court, deputy public prosecutor Laila Lateh requested that the charge against the men be withdrawn as per instructions from the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

Ho Bee Seng, 53, and Tan Chwee Liang, 28, from Singapore, Jesus Alfonso, 36, and Gorge Enrique, 32, from Mexico and James Dugalo, 41, from Canada, were alleged to have committed a preparatory act for trafficking 40.8kg of Ketamin on March 4 at 3.10pm at a house on Jalan Jingga 5, Taman Pelangi.

When High Court Judicial Commissioner Datuk Mohd Zawawi Salleh asked for the reason behind the withdrawal, DPP Laila reiterated that she had instructions from Putrajaya.

At that point, Mohd Zawawi asked if this was the “salt case” upon which DPP Laila remained silent.

Defence counsel Gobind Singh Deo, who represented one of the men, Canadian James Dugalo, asked that the court not only discharge his client, but also acquit all the suspects.

He argued that under Section 254 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, if a DPP decided to withdraw or discontinue a case, the court has the capacity to discharge and acquit the suspects.
Gobind said that all the suspects had been in detention for seven months since March this year and they had also been charged with a serious capital offence, which ordered for a mandatory death sentence upon conviction.

“It is not fair to leave that hanging over their heads. There is also no dispute that the substance of the subject matter is salt,” he said.

Mohd Zawawi agreed and said that the application was substantially grounded on the third reason as salt does not form a scheduled substance under the Dangerous Drugs Act.

He then ruled that the men be acquitted and that all their passports and belongings be returned to them.

Meanwhile, Johor Police Chief Dept Comm Datuk Mohd Mokhtar Mohd Shariff when contacted confirmed that the men had been rearrested for 60 days under the Special Preventative Measures.

Saiful Doctor Declaration : Saiful Not Sodomised ; Police make him to sign BM Statement (Full Report Updated)

The Statutory Declaration of Dr Mohamed Osman is available in Malaysia Today Website.
http://us2.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/10901/84/

CLICK HERE for Full STATOTORY DECLARATION OF DR. MOHAMED OSMAN IN PDF FORMAT

Full Statutory Declaration of Dr. Mohamed Osman

I, Dr. Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid PR Card No.[A 358617] having a status as a Malaysian Permanent Resident of full age and having my residential address at B 24-3, Manara City One Condominium, Jalan Munshi Abdullah, 50100 Kuala Lumpur, do solemly and sincerely declare as follows:

1. I am making this Statutory declaration in full knowledge and awareness that the matters relating to the police report by one Mohd Saiful Bukhari B Azlan (the Patient) that he has been sodomised by someone and that the medical report relating thereto attended by me has been widely circulated in the media.

2. I make this declaration to the best of my knowledge and recollection to present the true picture as far as my involvement is concerned.

3. I graduated from Institute of Medicine 2 University of Rangoon, Mayanmar in 1977. Immediately after graduation I worked as a Medical Officer with several public and private medical institutions in Myanmar until 1990. In 1991 I migrated to Malaysia and worked with RISEAP as Medical Officer until 1995. I later worked with HIKMAH (Harakah Islamiah) in Sarawak as a Medical Officer until 1999. I was later employed by the University Hospital in Petaling Jaya from 2000 to 2007 as Medical Officer and I joined Hospital PUSRAWI at the beginning of 2008 until now also as a Medical Officer. In total I have accumulated more than 30 years valuable experiences in the medical field.

4. Some time at the end of June 2008 while on duty in PUSRAWI, I was referred with a patient now widely known as Mohd Saiful Bukhari B. Azlan. He was initially attended to by another female doctor but subsequently referred to me as the Patient requested to be examined by a male doctor.

5. Through my experience I have encountered many similar complaint as the said Patient and I have thereupon proceeded with the appropriate examination on the Patient i.e. Per rectal examination and I have recorded my findings in the Hospital's standard medical examination folder.

6. I later learned that the examination folder was widely circulated in the media and internet and I was shocked and surprised to find out that the exact medical examination folder with its exact content without amendment or addition has found its way into the media.

7. The circulation of the medical report came to my knowledge after I went on leave. For record, however, I would like to confirm that I strongly stand firm on my findings.

8. In normal practice in the Hospital, at the end of the examination, the Patient's folder will be forwarded to the record office by the nurse or staff on duty together with the folders of other patients and I, or any other attending doctor for that matter, should have never handled patients record personally. I have never seen the Patient's medical record ever since until it was widely circulated by the media. I would like also to stress that I have no knowledge of the person responsible leaking the report to any third party.

9.Two days after I attended the examination on the patient, I came to know that the Patient's name appeared in the newspaper. I checked with hospital's computer and find out that the said Mohd Saiful Bukhari B Azlan was my patient. I had immediately informed Dr Kamarudin, the Hospital's director of the matter and was accordingly advised to refer the matter to the Hospital's administration which I duly complied.

10.Some time in early July 2008, I was visited by a police officer in uniform who introduced himself as ASP Rosmi Mat Derus from IPD Brickfield, Cawangan Jenayah. He informed me that the Patient has made police report and he is investigating the case. I was later interviewed and questioned on matters related to the Patient's medical examination which I have cooperated fully with him.

11. ASP Rosmi recorded my statement in his own handwriting in Bahasa Malaysia. He prepared 9 to 10 pages of hand written statement and asked me to sign and stamp every page with my official rubber stamp.

12. As the statements was handwritten and in Bahasa Malaysia, I did not understand most of it as I am not proficient in Bahasa Malaysia.

13.The following week, the same officer came to see me in plain cloths bringing along with him a prepared, typed and printed statement in Bahasa Malaysia which he asked me to read and sign.The Officer informed me that I have to re-signature the statements as the previous statements were handwritten and he needed the statements to be properly typed.

14.I read few paragraphs and made few amendments to the statements with the officer's assistance. I also pointed out to him those certain facts which has not been discussed in the previous meeting but was introduced in the typed statements. The facts queried was why the name of Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim appeared in several paragraphs when it was never brought up during the first interview and neither did the Patient ever confided in me with the identity of the alleged perpetrator. He replied that Dato' Seri Anwar is the accused and as I already came to know that Dato' Seri was the accused after reading the newspaper.

15. The Officer later inserted few additional paragraphs in the last page in his own handwriting and in Bahasa Malaysia. I also explained that in order to conduct the required examination procedure on the Patient and to utilize the instrument I have to apply lubricant on that instrument.

16.Even though I hesitated I signed the typed statements as I did not want to have any issues with the police. The second meeting lasted for about 45 minutes to one hour.

17. Approximately one week after the second meeting with ASP Rosmi, I was visited by another police officer in plain cloth who introduced herself as DSP Choo from Jalan Hang Tuah, Bahagian Jenayah. She asked me to explain all over again and I have complied by explaining everything that I knew in detail the whole procedures in relation to the examination on the Patient.

18.We conversed in English and she recorded in her own hand writing in Bahasa Malaysia. The written statement was later translated to me in English and I was later asked to sign the 4 to 5 pages statements.

19.On the onset of the interview she impressed on me that I will be charged if I refused to cooperate with the police. The meeting lasted for about an hour.

20. The seemingly constant and unending police investigation and being aware of the high profile nature of the case has disturbed me tremendously and I become worried of my safety and that of my family. Approximately one week after the third visit by the Police I decided to apply for leave and left Malaysia with my family.

AND I made this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue o the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act, 1960

Subscribed and solemly declared
By the above named
Dr Mohd Osman Abdul Hamid
This 1st day of August 2008
(signed before COMMISSIONER for Oath, Mohd Annuar bin Mohd Salleh)




TheStar Online
Thursday August 7, 2008 MYT 4:18:39 PM

Doc who examined Saiful stands by his report (Update 2)
KUALA LUMPUR: The Myanmar doctor who had examined Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan is standing by his medical report that the former aide to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was not sodomised.

In a statutory declaration dated Aug 1, Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid @ Than Aung, reiterated that he stood by 'his findings'.

"For the record I would like to confirm that I strongly stand firm on my findings," he said in his statutory declaration.

Dr Mohamed Osman also said he had no knowledge of how his medical examination report on Mohd Saiful was circulated to the media and Internet. "I would like to stress that I have no knowledge of the person responsible for leaking the report to any third party," he added.

Dr Mohamed Osman said that some time in early July, he was visited by an officer from the Brickfields district police's criminal division, ASP Rosmi Mat Derus, who interviewed him about the medical examination on Mohd Saiful.

He said ASP Rosmi recorded the statement in Bahasa Malaysia, in his own handwriting, which he did not understand.

The following week the same officer returned with a typed statement in Bahasa Malaysia for him to read and sign.

However, Dr Mohamed Osman said certain facts that were not discussed in the previous meeting had been introduced in the typed statement, namely Anwar's name.

Dr Mohamed Osman claimed Anwar's name was never brought up during the first interview and Mohd Saiful also never confided to him about the identity of the alleged perpetrator.

"About a week later I was visited by a plainclothes police officer by the name of DSP Choo from the criminal division of the Jalan Hang Tuah district police, who impressed on me that I would be charged if I refused to cooperate with the police," he added.
Dr Mohamed Osman said he then decided to flee the country with his family as he feared for his and their safety.

Saiful was examined by Dr Mohamed Osman at Hospital Pusrawi before he lodged a police report alleging he had been sodomised by Anwar.

The Myanmar national was put into the centre of the sodomy allegation controversy, when the report was leaked and posted on blogs on July 29.

The hospital has since stated that Dr Mohamed Osman had not carried out a sodomy related examination on Saiful.