Justice denied: No Closure for Teoh's family

In less than a month, it will be the 3rd anniversary of Teoh Beng Hock's mysterious and unusual death at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) headquarters in Shah Alam on July 16, 2009.

Instead of getting closer to justice, a written reply from the Prime Minister dated June 20, 2012, has confirmed that the MACC trio who were implicated by the RCI in causing the death of Selangor political aide Teoh Beng Hock have been cleared by the Attorney-General's Chambers.

The Prime Minister said that the AG found that the MACC officers had not committed any offences under the Penal Code or the MACC Act. Thus, no action will be taken against the three officers.

Not only that, according to the written reply above, a special investigation unit set up by the MACC to probe the matter also found that the only disciplinary misconduct by the MACC trio was "not monitoring the witness during interrogation". 

No other form of disciplinary action will be taken against the MACC trio. 

The RCI report clearly pointed out that Arman Alies (the investigation officer known as "the bully"), Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yunus (left) (the assistant investigating officer known as "the abuser") and Hishamuddin Hashim ("the arrogant leader" who is also former deputy director of MACC Selangor) were guilty of excessive use of violence on Beng Hock, therefore police have more than enough reason to commence investigations against the trio for possible offences under Sections 304 and 304A of the Penal Code, namely for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and for causing the death of Teoh Beng Hock by negligence, respectively.

Apart from that, there were 10 MACC officers who gave false testimonies during the RCI proceedings.

Grounds for further probes
They should be investigated under Sections 191 and 192 of the Penal Code for giving false evidence and fabricating evidence to protect certain parties from being held responsible for Beng Hock's death.

I list down below a few examples in which MACC officers were caught lying:

1. On April 20, 2011, Commissioner Datuk T. Selventhiranathan said during the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Teoh's death that Hishamuddin had lied when he earlier claimed ignorance of police reports against his officers, which accused them of physical abuse;

2. On April 27, 2011, MACC Asst Superintendent Azeem Hafeez Jamaluddin told the Royal Commission of Inquiry that Hishamuddin (left) ordered him to testify that Hairul Ilham had led the probe so as to cover up Hishammuddin's role in the investigation against Selangor executive councillor, Ean Yong Hian Wah; 

3. Raymond Nion testified that he saw Teoh Beng Hock at 6am on the 16th of July on the sofa outside Nadzri's room;

But, it was the view of the RCI that "he was not a reliable witness and was used by those responsible for TBH's death to distance them for their wrongdoings by creating an impression that TBH was not only alive at 6am on the 16th but was also resting comfortably and peacefully on the sofa outside Nadzri's room." [para 198 of RCI report] Raymond, in the opinion of RCI, was used as a time-marker by those concerned with TBH's death [para 200 of RCI Report] as it became obvious that "Raymond's evidence was tailored to fit certain objectives" [para 201 of the RCI Report];

4. Bulkini Paharuddin testified that at about 2.30am, on the July 16 after he had finished questioning Tan Boon Wah and briefed Hishamuddin of Tan Boon Wah's recalcitrant attitude, he had told Tan Boon Wah to go home and to bring the relevant documents required the following day.
RCI finds contradictions
But RCI found that his assertion was contradicted by several evidences hence concluded that "Bulkini fabricated this piece of evidence". [Para 80 of RCI Report];

5. Besides, Bulkini also claimed that he heard Tan Boon Wah shouting to Teoh Beng Hock in Mandarin "Ni loh!", translated by Bulkini to mean "You lah!" at the pantry. But after considering the evidence, RCI again ruled that "this assertion of Bulkini was fabricated" [Para 86 of RCI report];

6. Right after the tragedy, MACC told us that TBH was released after his statement was recorded during the 3rd interrogation session but he chose to remain in the Selangor MACC office. 

But it was the finding of RCI that TBH was not released at 3.30am on July 16, but there was a 4th interrogation session conducted by Hishammuddin Hashim, Anuar and Ashraf. [para 194 of RCI report];

7. Guard Khairuddin said he saw Anuar sleeping in the visitor's area, but he pointed out an area which was different from the area where Anuar claimed to have slept at;

Anuar's alibi had been proved to be false as he was found to have with him a prepared script while testifying in the witness box which proved beyond peradventure that he had been coached. [para 195 of RCI Report] and,

8. As a result, the commissioners found that there was a "blue wall of silence came amply into play as evidenced by the untruths spouted by MACC officers to cover up the nefarious activities that took place on July 15 and the 16, 2009". [para 362 of RCI Report]

It is outrageous that despite all the evidence given above, the AG still maintains that MACC officers had not committed any offence under the Penal Code or the MACC Act while the special investigation unit set up by MACC also found that the only disciplinary misconduct by the MACC trio is "not monitoring the witness during interrogation". 

Why have the above named officers been given immunity? Why are they above the law?