|Press Release: End Deaths in Police Custody Now!|
|Wednesday, 02 January 2013 11:20am|
It is shocking that individuals continue to die in such highly suspicious circumstances while under the care of the police, which raises very alarming questions about the treatment of detainees in police custody and the methods of interrogation used.
The duty of the police is set out in very clear terms in the leading judgment of Lord Bingham of Cornhill in Amin, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  4 All ER 1264, where Lord Bingham said:
Death in custody, especially under dubious conditions, is among the worst crimes one can imagine in a civilised society under the rule of law. The burden of proving that such a death did not occur by foul means must surely fall squarely on the law enforcement agency in question. The reasons are plain: the victim was being held in isolation and was wholly within the control of the detaining authority; rarely are there independent witnesses to such a crime, as the witnesses are generally interested parties or persons under enquiry; and the police adhere to a strict chain of command code and are bound by a “blue wall of silence”.
Based on the statistics disclosed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, 156 persons died in police custody between 2000 and February 2011, and this was reportedly at least the sixth incident of custodial death at the hands of the police in 2012. Such tragedies underscore the dire need for an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (“IPCMC”), to function as an independent, external oversight body to investigate complaints about police personnel and to make the police accountable for their conduct. K Nagarajan’s death is inexcusable, and is another incident demonstrating that the police are unable to police themselves.
The Malaysian Bar calls for an immediate inquest into the incident, which is a matter of utmost public interest and warrants the highest level of priority. Although Chapter XXXII of the Criminal Procedure Code requires that all custodial deaths be investigated by way of inquest, no inquest is held in most instances. Every death in custody must be thoroughly and impartially investigated. K Nagarajan’s death must not be relegated to a mere statistic.
The Malaysian Bar also calls on the authorities to urgently implement structural reform, where inquests are concerned. Recent enquiries into deaths of persons that occur whilst in the custody of, or in or around the premises of, law enforcement agencies, have resulted in “open” verdicts.
The Malaysian Bar thus urges the Government to introduce a Coroners’ Act, and establish a Coroners’ Court with the following features:
It is also disquieting that, in the case of K Nagarajan’s arrest, the protocol prescribed under the Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (“YBGK”) scheme does not appear to have been complied with. The guidelines for enforcement officers provide that as soon as an arrest has been made, and before the suspect is questioned, the officer must inform the suspect’s family (or friend) regarding the arrest, and must also provide details regarding the arrest and the suspect to YBGK. However, K Nagarajan’s family has reportedly stated that they were not informed about the arrest, and YBGK did not receive any notification.
K Nagarajan’s tragic fate is the latest in a deplorable string of deaths occurring in the context of investigations carried out by law enforcement agencies. It must be the last. The Malaysian Government must act now.
Our heartfelt condolences go out to K Nagarajan’s family and friends.
Lim Chee Wee
2 January 2013