Friday, April 29, 2022

Silence of the Coroner about the 8 deaths following the Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot incident disturbing - Death of detainee at detention facility by reason of Covid may make government criminally liable

Media Statement – 29/4/2022

Silence of the Coroner about the 8 deaths following the Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot incident disturbing

Death of detainee at detention facility by reason of Covid may make government criminally liable

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is concerned about the silence of the Coroner on the recent 8 deaths, including one that allegedly died by reason of Covid-19. The Coroner must state whether he/she has decided to have an inquest or otherwise. Death by reason of Covid in a detention facility may place criminal liability on the government, Commandant of Detention facility, Minister and other relevant public officers.

At about 4am last Wednesday(20/4/2022), 528 Rohingya detainees, being men, women and children, escaped or broke out  from the Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot in Penang. 7, including 3 children, were killed when hit by a car while crossing the North-South Expressway at Kilometer 168. The seventh – a 14-year-old girl – succumbed to her injuries yesterday (NST, 27/4/2022).

Another died, allegedly because of Covid-19. Kedah police chief Commissioner Wan Hassan Wan Ahmad was reported saying, that the ‘…Police have ruled out foul play behind the death of a Rohingya detainee at the Temporary Immigration Detention Depot near Bandar Baharu last Wednesday. "The detainee's death was a separate matter. We have classified the case under a sudden death report (SDR) case. He had died from virus infection after contracting Covid-19," Wan Hassan told reporters…(New Straits Times, 28/4/2022). It looks like the detainee died at the depot, not at some hospital where he was admitted for treatment.

When a detainee is in a government detention facility dies by reason of Covid, the government including the Minister of Home Affairs, Director General of Immigration and the Commandant of the Immigration Detention facility may be criminally concerned or liable for the death.

Unlike a person not under detention, who can freely do the needful including compliance with Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) to prevent being infected by Covid-19, which include doing the needed self-tests and seeking necessary healthcare, a person under detention is denied many of these freedoms, and the duty to keep free a detainee from being infected by Covid, and also getting the needed healthcare, reasonably falls on the detaining authority.

It has been more than 2 years since Malaysia been affected by Covid-19, and the question is whether the relevant authorities are making sure that detainees in government facilities are complying with the SOPs to prevent infection, detect infections and provision of the necessary speedy healthcare if found to be infected. Were there regular temperature checks, Covid testing and medical check-ups done at the Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot? The fact that the detainee died in detention, not in some hospital whilst receiving necessary medical attention raises questions?

The Coroner is supposed to determine also ‘whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death’ (Section 337 Criminal Procedure Code/CPC).

Criminal liability arises not simply by reason of actions, but also omissions. The failure to ensure detainees in a detention facility are not infected by Covid-19, the failure to detect infection amongst detainees and/or the failure to provide speedy healthcare to the infected are possible reasons why the government and/or other responsible persons may be found criminally liable and/or concerned with the death.

The Coroner must forthwith have an INQUEST(or inquiry into deaths) into this death in custody allegedly by reason of Covid-19, and also the other 7 deaths that resulted by reason of allegedly a vehicular incident.

In the currently applicable Practice Direction issued by the then Chief Justice of Malaysia Tan Sri Datuk Seri Panglima Richard Malanjum [Arahan Amalan Bil 2 Tahun 2019, Pengendalian Laporan Mati Mengejut Dan Siasatan Kematian Oleh Mahkamah Sesyen Koroner] it was emphasized that cases classified as ‘sudden deaths’ must be investigated by the Coroner, and, if need be, it should be reclassified as a case requiring inquest, or a death in custody case. The Coroner ought not simply or blindly accept police classification of ‘sudden deaths’.

All 8 deaths that happened, in MADPET’s view, are deaths in custody.

Noting that whilst the Coroner in Malaysia, now a Sessions Court Judge, is duty bound to determine the cause of death of all deaths in Malaysia, with or without an inquest. Section 334 CPC re-emphasizes the need for an inquest for deaths in custody, and this includes deaths of persons who were in custody at the Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot.

Did the relevant officers/authorities adhere to the law, and immediately informed the Coroner of the deaths – ‘…shall immediately give intimation of such death to the nearest Magistrate, and the Magistrate or some other Magistrate shall, in the case of a death in the custody of the police, and in other cases may, if he thinks expedient, hold an inquiry into the cause of death…’.(s.334)

While public attention is now on the case of Sam Ke Ting who was recently sentenced to six years in prison for reckless or dangerous driving, resulting in the death into eight teenagers riding their bicycles on a road. The High Court allowed the appeal overturning the Magistrate’s Court decision to acquit and discharge the 27-year-old woman last October 2021. Will the driver/s of the car/s that caused the death of the 7 that ‘escaped’ from the Immigration detention facility be similarly charged?

What was the protest or grievance of the detainees the Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot that led them to run away from detention? Was it simply a ‘riot’ or an exercise of the right to peaceful assembly that led these 500 plus to escape? Is there a need for an independent inquiry by a Royal Commission of Inquiry, a Parliamentary Committee, SUHAKAM(Malaysia’s Human Rights Commission), EAIC(Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission) or some other independent body. MADPET calls for an independent public inquiry into the incident at Sungai Bakap Immigration Detention Depot that to date has resulted in at least 8 deaths.

MADPET calls for a report by the Coroner as to his/her findings, including as to whether a public inquest will be done. If the government and/or relevant persons are criminally liable for the deaths, action including criminal prosecution must be taken without fear or favour, and indiscriminately as stated in Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution, ‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.’

MADPET also reiterates the call for enacting of a law that clearly recognizes the asylum seeker and/or refugees, as current law only recognizes foreigners in Malaysia with the proper documentation and those without. As such, asylum seekers and/or refugees may be treated the same as any foreigners found in Malaysia without proper documentation, and this is not just.

 

Charles Hector

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

Depot escape: No foul play behind detainee death; police probing all angles, including negligence

GURUN: Police have ruled out foul play behind the death of a Rohingya detainee at the Temporary Immigration Detention Depot near Bandar Baharu last Wednesday.

Kedah police chief Commissioner Wan Hassan Wan Ahmad said a post-mortem examination conducted on the detainee revealed that the he had died from Covid-19 infection.

However, Wan Hassan stressed that investigations into the rioting incident was still ongoing and this includes possible elements of negligence by the depot management.

"Our investigations are taking into account all possible elements. How it happened, why it happened, who were the masterminds in the rioting element, we take into account everything and will submit the investigation papers to the Deputy Public Prosecutor's Office.

"It is up to the DPP or the state Prosecution director to decide whether it is proper to charge anyone (for negligence).

"The detainee's death was a separate matter. We have classified the case under a sudden death report (SDR) case. He had died from virus infection after contracting Covid-19," Wan Hassan told reporters after launching the state-level Op Selamat for the Hari Raya festive season at the North-South Expressway rest area in Gurun here today.

He explained that was why police had classified the case under Section 223/224 of the Penal Code for escape from confinement negligently suffered by a public servant and also under Section 147 of the Penal Code for rioting.

"We are probing from all possible angles. I have called for a meeting earlier today and we have identified a few things that need to be done and follow up actions.

"We have also recorded a statement from the depot management. If there is an element of negligence, we will zoom on to establish how bad it was but for now I can't divulge the details as investigations are still underway," he said.

In a related development, Wan Hassan said the number of escapees still at large remained at 61 as of today.

Yesterday, he was reported as saying police believed the Rohingya detainees had made their way to Seberang Perai Selatan in Penang.

In the 4am incident last Wednesday, 528 Rohingya detainees staged a riot before breaking out from the depot.

However, six of them including two children were killed when they were hit by a car while crossing the North-South Expressway near Jawi in their attempt to flee. A seventh – a 14-year-old girl – succumbed to her injuries yesterday.

Police have since recaptured over 400 of the detainees with 61 more still at large.

It was reported that several hours prior to the rioting incident, one of the detainees, in his 30s, had died in the depot.

The detainees had claimed that the camp management had failed to provide medical treatment for the sick detainee.- NST, 28/4/2022

 

Another Rohingya detainee in NSE crash dies

GEORGE TOWN: The death toll from last week's North-South Expressway crash that saw several escapees from an Immigration temporary detention depot in Kedah killed increased to seven yesterday.

This was as a 14-year-old girl who was seriously injured in the crash succumbed to her injuries at the Seberang Jaya Hospital.

State police chief Datuk Mohd Shuhaily Mohd Zain confirmed the victim's death, adding that another victim, a 21-year-old man, was still being treated at the same hospital.

"Investigations into the incident are ongoing. We have recorded statements from several witnesses to assist investigation into the crash," he said after the launch of the state-level Op Selamat at the Bayan Baru Ramadan bazaar here this afternoon.

About 4.30am last Wednesday, 528 Rohingya detainees broke out from the detention centre in Bandar Baharu after staging a protest.

Local villagers managed to recapture 88 of them before surrendering them to the Immigration Department.

Subsequently, Penang police managed to rearrest 229 of them at Km168 of the NSE.

In their haste to flee, a group of Rohingya attempted to rush across the NSE, and a passing vehicle rammed into them, leading to six being killed and several injured.

The dead were two men aged 20 and 36, two women aged 14 and 18, a 9-year-old boy and a girl, 8.

Meanwhile, Shuhaily said police are still on the hunt for another 61 Rohingya detainees who fled, with the latest two arrests made in the state on Monday.

Asked if that meant the detainees may have fled from Penang, Shuhaily said there was a possibility as the borders of the neighbouring states were nearby.

"What I am concerned about is the possibility that the Rohingya detainees may have assimilated with the locals.

"It has been one week after their escape and they may have gotten help in terms of food, which is why they are able to resist being arrested," he added.- NST, 27/4/2022

Woman previously acquitted of reckless driving now gets six years’ jail for mowing down eight teens on JB road

Sam Ke Ting is pictured at the Johor Baru High Court April 13, 2022. — Picture by Ben Tan
Sam Ke Ting is pictured at the Johor Baru High Court April 13, 2022. — Picture by Ben Tan



JOHOR BARU, April 13 — Sam Ke Ting was today sentenced to six years in prison by the High Court for crashing into eight teenagers riding their bicycles on a road here about five years ago.

The decision was made by High Court Judge Datuk Abu Bakar Katar after the prosecution succeeded in their second appeal against the Magistrate’s Court decision to acquit and discharge the 27-year-old woman last October last year.

Sam had been charged with reckless or dangerous driving, resulting in the death of eight cyclists on Jalan Lingkaran Dalam, Johor Baru on February 18, 2017.

Sam, a clerk, was also ordered to serve six months in prison if she did not pay a RM6,000 fine, apart from being disqualified from driving for three years effective after the completion of her prison sentence.

In his judgment, Abu Bakar said the Magistrate’s Court has erred in failing to decide the respondent’s defence without being under oath.

“The respondent, in her defence, stated that she did not see the group of cyclists at the scene of incident and there were other vehicle that hit the deceased bicycles and drove away. This version had never been raised by the respondent during the prosecution case.

“The Magistrate’s Court made a mistake when it accepted the respondent’s defence for not knowing there would be ‘basikal lajak’ activity during the time of the incident as an excuse to drive dangerously, which resulted in the victims’ deaths.

“The respondent should have drove carefully instead driving fast, causing the incident and she should have realised that the area’s lighting was not bright at around 3.20am,” he said before sentencing.

Sam had earlier appeared at the Johor Baru High Court compound at about 9am wearing a white striped shirt and brown long pants. She looked calm after the sentence was handed down.

Defence counsel Muhammad Faizal Mokhtar urged the High Court to grant a stay of execution on Sam as they would be appealing the case at the Court of Appeal.

However, Abu Bakar rejected Sam’s appeal for stay of execution as they have yet to receive approval from the Court of Appeal.

Johor prosecution director Tengku Amir Zaki Tengku Abd Rahman and deputy public prosecutor Muhammad Syafiq Mohd Ghazali prosecuted the case.

On October 10 last year, the Johor Baru Magistrate’s Court upheld the decision of the accused to be acquitted and acquitted of the charges which occurred on February 18, 2017.

Based on the charge sheet, Sam who at the time of the incident was 22-years-old, was accused of driving a car with registration number JQB 9984 along Jalan Lingkaran Dalam recklessly or dangerously resulting in the death of eight cyclists at 3.20am.

The eight victims involved were Mohamad Azrie Danish Zulkefli, 14 (at the time of the incident);  Muhamad Shahrul Izzwan Azzuraimie, 14;  Muhammad Firdauz Danish Mohd Azhar, 16;  Fauzan Halmijan, 13;  Mohamad Azhar Amir, 16;  Muhammad Harith Iskandar Abdullah, 14;  Muhammad Shahrul Nizam Marudin, 14 and Haizad Kasrin, 16.- Malay Mail, 13/4/2022

 

Monday, February 07, 2022

Hold inquiries into all custodial deaths, NGO tells AG (FMT)

 # Note, the law, Criminal Procedure Code already says that the Coroner must hold INQUESTs for all deaths, and especially Death in Custody. So, there is NO need for a Court Order and no need for the AG to do anything. The Coroner(now a Session Court Judge) is duty bound by law to do INQUEST without anyone askinghim/her to do the inquiry into death. See MADPET's earlier statement -

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

 Hold inquiries into all custodial deaths, NGO tells AG

19 Shares
facebook sharing button
twitter sharing button
whatsapp sharing button
email sharing button
Police say there have been seven deaths in custody in the first five weeks of this year. (Freepik pic)

PETALING JAYA: An NGO has urged the attorney-general to conduct inquiries into every death in custody in the country.

This comes after police reported seven cases of custodial deaths in the first five weeks of 2022.

Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances (CAGED) also called on the authorities to answer several questions linked to these deaths.

In one of the cases, it said, police had revealed that two detainees and two officers had been remanded for investigation, but their remand order expired on Jan 20.



“Has anyone been charged?” CAGED asked in a statement, adding that it wanted to know if police had also treated anyone as suspects in the other six cases.

It also questioned if the completed investigation reports would be submitted to the coroner within one month of each death, as promised by police to the police reform commission.

“WIll the Royal Malaysia Police ask the coroner to conduct inquiries into all deaths in custody?” it said, adding that Section 334 of the Criminal Procedure Code mandated that every death in police custody must be investigated by a coroner.

CAGED also pointed to the lack of consistency in announcements on the custodial deaths.

“For instance, the ethnicity of victims has been revealed only in four of the seven announcements and the remand dates have not been released for the sixth victim,” it said.

It also said the names of the victims had also been withheld by police and demanded an explanation for it. - FMT, 7/2/2022

Thursday, February 03, 2022

6th Death in Police Custody of 2022...

 

The Malaysian law today places a duty for the Coroner to also move fast - to view the body, related sites, maybe even witnesses with a view at getting to the truth --- was the death caused by the action/omission of another, which makes it then not a 'sudden death' or a death by natural causes. Remember, the law now is that inquest on death and custody case MUST be completed in 6 months...  see Contempt Proceedings Against Home Minister and Others for failure to complete inquest in death in custody cases as directed by the Judiciary?

In January 2022, the reported deaths in police custody are as follows:-

a)      13/1/2022 - a 63 year old man, who would probably be alive, died in a police lock-up at the Taiping district police headquarters (IPD), Perak.

b)     16/1/2022 -  37-year-old man died at the Pengkalan Chepa police station at 4.35pm.

c)      28/1/2022 - 38-year-old detainee died at the Marang police station lock-up in Terengganu on Friday (Jan 28), and

d)     29/1/2022 -  38-year-old man died while in police custody in Kuala Kangsar, Perak

 

5th Death in Police Custody of 2022 - Myanmar national, Kajang district police headquarters - died on Wednesday. A local apparently caught and brought the foreigner to the police - the likelihood of it being 'sudden death' is little - was there force exerted or other things done before the foreigner was delivered to the police?

6th Death in Police Custody of 2022 - 38-year-old detainee was brought to the Indera Mahkota centralised lock-up last Tuesday to attend a hearing under Section 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 today(3/2/2022) - died on 2/2/2022.[There is a similarity to the first case, where this person ought not even been in a police lock-up, which are for suspects investigated - not for persons already accused(charged) in court- this need to be looked into...]

See earlier relevant posts:-

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

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

Other relevant posts:- 

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

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,...??

 

Bukit Aman investigating death of foreign detainee at Kajang Hospital


  • Nation
  • Wednesday, 02 Feb 2022

KUALA LUMPUR: Bukit Aman's Integrity and Standards Compliance Department (JIPS) is investigating a sudden death report involving a foreign detainee at Kajang Hospital on Wednesday (Feb 2).

JIPS director Datuk Azri Ahmad said the Myanmar national was sent to the hospital on Monday (Jan 31) at about 8.10am after complaining that he was not feeling well, after which he was admitted for further treatment.

"The hospital informed police that the detainee died on Wednesday and the cause of death was still undetermined,” he said in a statement.

He said on Jan 30, at about 5.30 pm, a local man had surrendered the foreigner to the Kajang district police headquarters on suspicion of motorcycle theft.

Azri said the suspect was being investigated under Section 379A of the Penal Code as well as Section 6(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1959/63. - Bernama - Star, 2/2/2022

 

Detainee dies in Pahang

Police said the 38-year-old detainee was to attend a drug hearing today. (Freepik pic)

PETALING JAYA: A detainee at the Penor Prison in Kuantan died yesterday after complaining of chest pain.

In a statement, Bukit Aman’s Integrity and Standards Compliance Department director Azri Ahmad said the 38-year-old detainee was brought to the Indera Mahkota centralised lock-up last Tuesday to attend a hearing under Section 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 today.

The detainee complained of chest pain on Friday and was taken to Hospital Kuantan for treatment.

Yesterday, the hospital told police that the detainee had died due to tuberculosis.

“The Integrity and Standards Compliance Department’s custodial death investigation unit will investigate the case,” said Azri.

This is the sixth death of a detainee that Azri’s department has reported this year. - FMT, 3/2/2022

CHINA PRESS covered the MADPET Statement on death custody and contempt?

For full statement see

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

CHINA PRESS covered the MADPET Statement

Unfortunately, I could not copy and paste here...so follow the link to read the full report..

 


Govt must complete inquests into deaths in custody on time – Charles Hector (Vibes)

 

Govt must complete inquests into deaths in custody on time – Charles Hector

NGO says by law, all such inquests are required to be completed within six months

Updated 11 hours ago · Published on 03 Feb 2022 11:20AM · 0 Comments

16 Shares
facebook sharing button
twitter sharing button
email sharing button
whatsapp sharing button
wechat sharing button
print sharing button
Govt must complete inquests into deaths in custody on time – Charles Hector
Madpet (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) says it is most concerned as to whether the coroner is doing its job, including the conducting of speedy inquests (inquiries) as required by existing laws. – Pixabay pic, February 3, 2022

AS of March 2019, all death in custody inquests has to be completed within six months.

In January 2022, 4 persons have already died in police custody, and Madpet (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is most concerned as to whether the coroner is doing its job, including the conducting of speedy inquests (inquiries) as required by existing laws.

The special coroner’s courts came into being in 2014, and are now pursuant to Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 by then Chief Justice Richard Malanjum, that came into force on March 8, 2019, amongst others, state that all deaths in custody inquests must be completed within six months.

The law also now stipulates the need for registration in court, and the duties of the coroner, who today is a sessions court judge. A non-compliance with the current law, including court directions may amount to not just an offence, but also a contempt of court.

In January 2022, the reported deaths in police custody are as follows:

a) 13/1/2022 – a 63-year-old man, who would probably be alive, died in a police lock-up at the Taiping district police headquarters (IPD), Perak

b) 16/1/2022 – a 37-year-old man died at the Pengkalan Chepa police station at 4.35pm

c) 28/1/2022 – a 38-year-old detainee died at the Marang police station lock-up in Terengganu on Friday (January 28), and

d) 29/1/2022 – a 38-year-old man died while in police custody in Kuala Kangsar, Perak

In compliance with the court’s directions, the inquest must be completed within six months. After March 8, 2019, Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 states, amongst others, that all deaths in custody inquests must be completed within six months. Other inquests/investigations of sudden death cases must be done in nine months.

On December 16 last year, the home minister disclosed in Parliament that the total number of death in police custody cases for the period beginning January 2015 until September 2021 was 79, and that inquests were conducted only for 20 cases. After the court’s direction, inquest not yet commenced should have started and ended within six months.

The special coroner’s court has been established since April 15, 2014, which provides also for the registration of deaths in court, and for duties and procedures for inquests. Has the minister, police and the prosecutors complied with these directions?

If not, then the home minister and also police, other law enforcers and even prosecutors may be guilty of contempt of court, over and above possibly a violation of existing applicable law for failing to commence and complete inquests in the remaining about 59 cases of death in police custody until September 2021, following the minister’s admission that inquests were only done for 20 cases.

All deaths, even sudden deaths, meaning deaths on the face of it not caused or expedited by actions and/or omissions of another, are required to be registered in court. All inquests need to be registered in court.

Special coroner’s court – with a sessions courts judge as coroner since 2014

Malaysia, through the judiciary, had established a special coroner’s court in every state capital since 2014, and determined that the coroner shall be a sessions court judge, and no longer a magistrate.

This coroner’s court will also deal with all deaths, not just deaths in custody, but even sudden deaths (natural deaths arising by reason no fault, be it action or omission, of another) and even deaths in workplaces, commonly referred to deaths by industrial accidents. All deaths need to be registered in court, where a different registration code is provided for inquests (Code 65A), and for deaths in custody (Code 65B). Other sudden deaths come under Code 65, which the coroner also needs to evaluate each of these allegedly “deaths by natural causes” and determine whether an inquest is needed or not.

Duties of the coroner

The practice directions state clear duties for the coroner, including the need to examine bodies at the place where death happens, participate in post-mortems, obligation to notify next of kin of the death, and also give notice to the next of kin when inquests are done. If the coroner cannot attend to view the body and the site where the death occurs, then the state director can instruct the nearest magistrate and/or sessions court judge to do the needful.

Speedy action crucial to prevent tampering with evidence

Madpet stresses the importance of speedy action by the coroner, who later is duty bound to determine “…when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death.” (s.337 Criminal Procedure Code).

Further, there is always the real possibility that the police may contaminate the crime scene, having reference to the 2018 findings of the inquiry by the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) into the death in custody of Syed Mohd Azlan which found police officer/s criminally liable, and also found that police had tampered with evidence – even causing a rubber mat and/or carpet possibly stained with blood to vanish.

Prosecution of accused no longer a total bar on inquest – just a delay

When someone is charged in court in connection with the death, the coroner cannot commence or continue with the inquest, until that case and related appeals are disposed of. This means that thereafter, the inquest can be commenced.

Police, besides assisting the coroner, have another different obligation

The other legal obligation of the police and the public prosecutors is the investigation to identify and prosecute the perpetrator of the crime that resulted in the death. To be able to charge anyone for a crime, the public prosecutor is duty bound to find sufficient evidence that, in their belief, will be sufficient to show that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not uncommon that the insufficiency of evidence leads to fact that a suspect may not be charged in court, and our hope is always that in such cases, investigations be continued until justice is served.

The coroner and the inquest procedure are there also to prevent mistakes by police and/or prosecutors like making a wrong conclusion of a death as being simply a “sudden death” or natural death for which no one is criminally liable.

Naturally, when it is a death in custody of the police or any other state bodies, it is all the more important that an inquest be done without fail by an independent coroner speedily. This special treatment of death in custody was emphasised by Parliament in the Criminal Procedure Code, and even the judiciary by the assignment of death in custody with a different code, requiring an inquest.

There were 166,507 deaths recorded in 2020, and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 points out the added duty of the coroner to ascertain the details needed for the registration of deaths pursuant to Registration Of Births And Deaths Act 1957. As such, the sufficiency of the special coroner’s court with one sessions court judge as coroner per state needs to be re-evaluated. It may be best for the enactment of a Coroners Court Act, and provision of required staff to assist the coroner in carrying out its duties. It is best that the coroner is freed from other duties of a sessions court judge. It is best that the coroner’s court be placed under the jurisdiction of the judiciary.

As such, Madpet calls:

- For inquests into the recent four deaths in police custody in January 2022 to be completed in six months;

- contempt of court actions against the minister of home affairs, inspector-general of police and other law enforcement officers including prosecutors that caused the failure of ensuring inquests into death in police custody cases, as required by the chief justice’s Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, to be completed within six months be seriously considered;

- For the consideration of criminal prosecution of police and/or others that failed to comply with the requirement of the Criminal Procedure Code with regards to inquests (inquiries into death);

- Call for action also against sessions court judges appointed as coroners, who failed to comply with the requirement of Practice Directions by the chief justice of the Federal Court;

- Call for the enactment of a Coroners Court Act, that will also provide for the employment of paid staff to assist the coroner in carrying out his/her duties, noting that the coroner has the responsibility of looking into not just deaths in police custody, but all deaths including deaths at workplaces, when on average, there is about 150,000 or more deaths annually in Malaysia; and

- Calls on the chief justice of the Federal Court to forthwith disclose the number of sudden deaths, number of inquests, number of inquests into death in custody cases that have been registered and considered by the coroner and their outcomes. – The Vibes, February 3, 2022

Charles Hector is spokesman for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture

 

See full statement at 

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

Death in custody inquest: Can contempt proceedings be held against Home Minister?[Focus Malaysia]

 

Death in custody inquest: Can contempt proceedings be held against Home Minister?

NON-GOVERNMENTAL organisation (NGO) Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET) is curious if the Home Minister, Inspector General of Police (IGP) and other law enforcement officers (prosecutors) are in contempt of court for their failure to ensure inquests into death in police custody cases.

This is given that Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 by then Chief Justice Richard Malanjum that came into force on March 8, 2019 stated among others that all deaths in custody inquest must be completed within six months.

Moreover, the Special Coroners Court has been established since April 15, 2014 to enable registration of deaths in court as well as to undertake duties and procedures for inquest.

“Has the minister, the police and the prosecutors complied with this directions?” asked MADPET co-founder Charles Hector in a media statement.

Charles Hector

“In January 2022, four persons have already died in police custody, and MADPET is most concerned as to whether the coroner is doing its job, including the conducting of speedy inquests (inquiries) as required by existing laws,”

The four reported deaths in police custody are, namely:

  • Jan 13: A 63 year-old man died in a police lock-up at the Taiping district police headquarters (IPD) in Perak.
  • Jan 16: A 37-year-old man died at the Pengkalan Chepa police station at 4.35pm.
  • Jan 28: A 38-year-old detainee died at the Marang police station lock-up in Terengganu.
  • Jan 29: A 38-year-old man died while in police custody in Kuala Kangsar, Perak.

On Dec 16 last year, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin disclosed in Parliament that the total number of death in police custody cases for the period beginning January 2015 until September 2021 was 79 with inquest conducted only for 20 cases.

Stressing the importance of speedy action by the Coroner who is duty-bound to determine “when, where, how and what manner the deceased came by his death”, MADPET called on:

  • A consideration of criminal prosecution of police and/or others that failed to comply with the requirement of the Criminal Procedure Code with regard to inquests (inquiries into death);
  • Action against Session Court Judges appointed as Coroners who failed to comply with the requirement of practice directions by the Chief Justice of the Federal Court;
  • The enactment of a Coroners Court Act that will also provide for the employment of paid staff to assist the Coroner in carrying out his/her duties (noting that the Coroner has the responsibility of looking into not just deaths in police custody but all deaths including deaths at workplaces when on an average there is about 150,000 or more deaths annually in Malaysia); and
  • The Chief Justice of the Federal Court to disclose the number of sudden deaths and number of inquest on death in custody cases that have been registered and considered by the Coroner and their outcomes. – Feb 3, 2022 , Focus Malaysia 
  •  
  • See full statement at 

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

Madpet calls for contempt of court against home minister, IGP (Malaysiakini)

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

Madpet calls for contempt of court against home minister, IGP
Published:  Feb 3, 2022 7:30 PM
⋅
Updated: 7:30 PM
 
The Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) has called for contempt of court against those responsible for obstructing inquests in custodial death cases from being completed within the required time frame.

In the group’s statement today, Madpet’s list of individuals includes Hamzah Zainudin, Inspector-General of Police Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani and other law enforcement officers such as the prosecutors.

“Madpet calls for the contempt of court actions against these individuals who caused the failure of ensuring inquests in death in police custody cases, as required by the chief justice’s Practice Direction No 2 of 2019, to be completed within six months be seriously considered,” it said.

Effective March 2019, Practice Direction No 2 of 2019 states that all deaths in custody inquests must be completed within six months - with other inquests of sudden death cases to be done within nine months.

“In December last year, Hamzah disclosed in Parliament that the total number of deaths in police custody cases for the period beginning January 2015 until September 2021 was 79, and those inquests were conducted only for 20 cases.

“After the court’s direction, (said) inquests (were) not yet commenced (even though it) should have started and ended within six months.

“The Special Coroners Court has been established since April 15, 2014, which provides also for the registration of deaths in court, and for duties and procedures for (the) inquest.

“Has the minister, the police and the prosecutors complied with these directions?” asked the group.

It added that if the relevant authorities failed to act in accordance with said directions, they should be found guilty of contempt of court.

The group’s statement comes after four reported custodial deaths which took place last month in Kelantan, Perak and Terengganu.

Additionally, among other calls, Madpet pushed for the inquest of the four recent custodial deaths to be completed in six months and for the enactment of a Coroners Court Act - providing for the employment of paid staff to assist the coroner in carrying out their duties.

Further, the group called on the chief justice of the Federal Court to disclose the number of sudden deaths, number of inquests looking into death in custody cases that have been registered and considered by the coroner, as well as their outcomes. - Malaysiakini, 3/2/2022

Wednesday, February 02, 2022

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

Media Statement – 2/2/2022

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

As of March 2019, all death in custody inquests had to completed within 6 months

In January 2022, 4 persons have already died in police custody, and MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is most concerned as to whether the Coroner is doing its job, including the conducting of speedy inquests (inquiries) as required by existing laws.

The Special Coroners Courts came into being in 2014, and now pursuant to Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 by then Chief Justice Richard Malanjum, that came into force on 8/3/2019, amongst others, state that all deaths in custody inquest must be completed within six(6) months.


The law also now stipulates the need for registration in court, and the duties of the Coroner, who today is a Sessions Court Judge. A non-compliance of the current law, including Court Directions may amount to not just an offence, but also a Contempt of Court.

In January 2022, the reported deaths in police custody are as follows:-

a)      13/1/2022 - a 63 year old man, who would probably be alive, died in a police lock-up at the Taiping district police headquarters (IPD), Perak.

b)     16/1/2022 -  37-year-old man died at the Pengkalan Chepa police station at 4.35pm.

c)      28/1/2022 - 38-year-old detainee died at the Marang police station lock-up in Terengganu on Friday (Jan 28), and

d)     29/1/2022 -  38-year-old man died while in police custody in Kuala Kangsar, Perak

 


In compliance with the Court’s directions, the inquest must be completed within six(6) months. After 8/3/2019, Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 states, amongst others, that all deaths in custody inquest must be completed within six(6) months. Other inquest/investigation of sudden death cases must be done in 9 months.

On 16/12/2021, the Home Minister disclosed in Parliament that the total number of death in police custody cases for the period beginning January 2015 until September 2021 was 79, and that inquest was conducted only for 20 cases. After the Court’s direction, inquest not yet commenced should have started and ended within 6 months.

The Special Coroners Court has been established since 15/4/2014, which provides also for the registration of deaths in court, and for duties and procedures for inquest. Has the Minister, the police and the prosecutors complied with this directions?

If not, then the Home Minister and also the police, other law enforcers and even prosecutors may be guilty of CONTEMPT OF COURT, over and above possibly a violation of existing applicable law for failing to commence and complete inquests in the remaining about 59 cases of death in police custody until September 2021, following the Minister’s admission that inquest was only done for 20 cases.

All deaths even sudden deaths, meaning deaths on the face of it not caused or expedited by actions and/or omissions of another, are required to be registered in court. All inquests need to be registered in court.

Special Coroners Court – with a Sessions Courts Judge as Coroner since 2014

Malaysia, through the Judiciary, had established a Special Coroners Court in every State Capital since 2014, and determined that the Coroner shall be a Sessions Court Judge, and no longer a Magistrate.

This Coroners Court will also deal with all deaths, not just deaths in custody, but even sudden deaths (natural deaths arising by reason no fault, be it action or omission, of another) and even deaths in workplaces, commonly referred to deaths by industrial accidents. All deaths need to be registered in court, where a different registration Code is provided for inquests (Code 65A), and for deaths in custody(Code 65B). Other sudden deaths come under Code 65, which the Coroner also need to evaluate each of these allegedly ‘deaths by natural causes’ and determine whether an inquest is needed or not.

Duties of the Coroner

The practice directions states clear duties on the Coroner, including the need to examine bodies at place where death happens, participate in post-mortems, obligation to notify next of kin of the death, and also give notice to the next of kin when inquests be done. If the Coroner cannot attend to view the body and the site where the death occurs, then the State Director can instruct the nearest Magistrate and/or Session Court judge to do the needful.  

Speedy Action Crucial To Prevent Tampering With Evidence

MADPET stresses the importance of speedy action by the Coroner, who later is duty bound to determine ‘…when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death.'(s.337 Criminal Procedure Code).  

Further, there is always the real possibility that the police may contaminate the crime scene, having reference to the 2018 findings of the inquiry by the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) into the death in custody of Syed Mohd Azlan which found police officer/s criminally liable, and also found  that the police had tampered with evidence – even causing a rubber mat and/or carpet possibly stained with blood to vanish.

Prosecution of accused no longer a total bar on inquest – just a delay

When someone is charged in court in connection with the death, the Coroner cannot commence or continue with the inquest, until that case and related appeals are disposed off. This means that thereafter, the inquest can be commenced.

Police, besides assisting the Coroner, have another different obligation

The other legal obligation of the police and the Public Prosecutors is the investigation to identify and prosecute the perpetrator of the crime that resulted in the death. To be able to charge anyone for a crime, the Public Prosecutor is duty bound to find sufficient evidence that, in their belief, will be sufficient to show that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not uncommon that the insufficiency of evidence leads to fact that a suspect may not be charged in court, and our hope is always that in such cases, investigations be continued until justice is served.

The Coroner and the inquest procedure  is there also to prevent mistakes by police and/or prosecutors like making a wrong conclusion of a death as being simply a ‘sudden death’ or natural death for which no one is criminally liable.

Naturally, when it is death in custody of the police or any other State bodies, it is all the more important that an inquest be done without fail by an independent Coroner speedily. This special treatment of death in custody was emphasized by Parliament in the Criminal Procedure Code, and even the Judiciary by the assignment of death in custody with a different code, requiring an inquest.

There were 166,507 deaths recorded in 2020, and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019 points out the added duty of the Coroner to ascertain the details needed for the registration of deaths pursuant to Registration Of Births  And Deaths Act 1957. As such, the sufficiency of the Special Coroners Court with 1 Session Court Judge as Coroner per State needs to be re-evaluated. It may be best for the enactment of a Coroners Court Act, and provision of required staff to assist the Coroner in carrying out its duties. It is best that the Coroner is freed from other duties of a Session Court Judge. It is best that the Coroners Court be placed under the jurisdiction of the Judiciary.

As such, MADPET calls

-         For inquest of the recent 4 deaths in police custody in January 2022 to be completed in 6 months;

-         Contempt of Court actions against the Minister of Home Affairs, Inspector General of Police and other law enforcement officers including prosecutors that caused the failure of ensuring inquests in death in police custody cases, as required by Chief Justice’s Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, to be completed within 6 months be seriously considered;

-         For the consideration of criminal prosecution of police and/or others that failed to comply with the requirement of the Criminal Procedure Code with regards to inquests(inquiries into death);

-         Call for action also against Session Court Judges appointed as Coroners, who failed to comply with the requirement of Practice Directions by the Chief Justice of the Federal Court;

-         Call for the enactment of a Coroners Court Act, that will also provide for the employment of paid staff to assist the Coroner in carrying out his/her duties, noting that the Coroner has the responsibility of looking into not just deaths in police custody, but all deaths including deaths at workplaces, when on an average there is about 150,000 or more deaths annually in Malaysia; and

-         Calls on the Chief Justice of the Federal Court to forthwith disclose the number of sudden deaths, number of inquests, number of inquest on death in custody cases that have been registered and considered by the Coroner and their outcomes.

Charles Hector

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

Note:-

To view the relevant Practice Directions of the Court mentioned/referred to the above media statement, see Death in Custody - Coroner is Session Court Judges, no more Magistrate, all deaths must be registered in court - Practice Direction

A MADPET statement that was issued following the 1st Death in Police Custody can be seen here

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

Other relevant posts:- 

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

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,...??