The Teoh Beng Hock Royal Commission of Inquiry Report, in Para 119, pronounced its finding on Teoh Beng Hock’s death, as follows:
“119. Having considered all the evidence in its entirety, we found that TBH was driven to commit suicide by the aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation to which he was subjected by certain officers of the MACC who were involved in the ongoing operation by the Selangor MACC on the night of the 15th and into the morning of the 16th.”
Malaysians cannot accept the RCI’s verdict of “forced suicide” as the cause of Beng Hock’s death.
Clearly MACC and MACC officers were responsible for his death at MACC headquarters at Shah Alam on July 16, 2009 through “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” – leaving to everybody’s imagination of the unlawful and even lawless torture Beng Hock was subjected to when he was entirely at the mercy of the “oppressive and unscrupulous” MACC officers for 12 hours on those fateful hours on the night of July 15 and the early hours of July 16, 2009.
What is unacceptable about the TBH RCI report is its failure to clearly and unmistakably state in its conclusion that MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death, although it is clear from the report that the commissioners agree that the MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death.
This is evident from two paragraphs in the TBH RCI report referring to the testimony of one MACC officer Raymond who had testified that he saw Beng Hock at 6 am on the 16th July 2009 “lying on the sofa outside Nadzri’s room”.
Expressing “grave reservations” over Raymond’s evidence, the TBH RCI said (Para 198):
“In our opinion, he was not a reliable witness and was used by those responsible for TBN’s death to distance them from 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.”
In Para 201, the TBH RCI said:
“ As it become obvious to us that Raymond’s evidence was tailored to fit certain objectives which in this case dovetailed those of the MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death, we rejected his evidence as being unworthy of any weight or consideration in respect of the time he claimed to have seen TBH at 6am on the 16th.”
From both these paragraphs, referring to “MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death”, it is crystal clear that the TBH Royal Commission of Inquiry is quite unanimous about who the MACC officers who caused Beng Hock’s death, but the question is why the TBH RCI did not specifically name these “MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death” and spoke instead about “forced suicide”?
Who are these “MACC officers responsible for TBH’s death”? Although the RCI report did not specifically name such persons, their identities are quite clear from Para 225 which said:
“During his interrogation, TBH had to face MACC interrogation heavyweights like Arman and bully [who would manipulate his witness to obtain evidence], Ashraf the abuser [who was Machiavellian in his method to secure evidence] and HH the arrogant leader [who would have no qualms in lying as long as his ends were achieved, regardless of the means employed].”
The “credentials” of Asraf “the abuser” is to be found in Para 158, which said:
“From police records tendered in this inquiry by one DSP Kamaruddin Awang from the Selangor police criminal investigation section, out of the twenty cases reported against the Selangor MACC officers for assault, Ashraf was involved in fourteen of them and was positively identified by a majority of those who had made the reports against him.”
What about “HH” (Hishammuddin Hashim, at the relevant time the deputy director of Selangor MACC and “mastermind” of the operation resulting in Beng Hock’s death)?
Read Para 176 on TBH RCI’s indictment on “HH”:
“We found him to be arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising in his stand. His falsehoods, particularly of his non-active involvement in the entire operation at the material time, were exposed from the contradictory statements he made before us. But more compelling was the confirmation from two of his own officers, namely, Azeem and Azian who were brave enough to reveal towards the later part of our proceedings the actual role of HH in this operation despite the fact that HH was their superior and still holds a senior position in the MACC as director of the MACC Negeri Sembilan.”
The MACC is one of the most important law enforcement agencies in the country to uphold the law, but anyone reading the TBH RCI report cannot escape getting the impression that the MACC, particularly in Selangor, was utterly lawless as it had become a den of criminals with MACC officers blatantly subverting the law.
MACC and MACC officers not only caused Beng Hock’s death through “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” and unlawful misconduct, they broke law after law in the massive MACC operation “masterminded” by Hishammuddin without proper basis, followed by a conspiracy of lies and perjury about what happened – all the way up to the Royal Commission of Inquiry public hearings.
MACC has announced that it accepts with an open heart the findings of the TBH RCI and pledged that appropriate action would be taken on RCI findings and recommendations.
The Attorney-General and MACC should explain why the three MACC officers Hishammuddin, Arman and Arshraf have not been suspended and no criminal charges and departmental disciplinary action taken against them despite RCI report holding them responsible for Teoh Beng Hock’s death.
Furthermore, the TBH RCI have virtually dismissed the whole cast of MACC witnesses at the RCI (except for two “brave” souls Azeem and Azian) as liars, which means they had all committed perjury.
Section 193 of Penal Code prescribes seven years jail and fine for giving false evidence at judicial proceeding like the TBH RCI.
Will the whole lot of MACC witnesses (except for Azeem and Azian) be charged for perjury at the TBH RCI?
** Media Conference Statement at Kampong Simee DAP Service Centre after Kg Simee market walkabout
#1 by limkamput on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 1:24 pm
Yes, let’s begin with Raymond, charge him, send him to jail and throw away the key.
#2 by All For The Road on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 1:48 pm
The full force of the law should be dealt to those held responsible for this tragedy without any further delay!
#3 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 2:37 pm
RCI had grace reservations about reliability of MACC officer Raymond’s testimony – that he saw Beng Hock at 6 am on the 16th July 2009 “lying on the sofa outside Nadzri’s room”.
“In our opinion, he was not a reliable witness and was used by those responsible for TBN’s death to distance them from 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.”- RCI
Personally I believe Raymond is a reliable witness telling the truth. His version is corroborated by Kajang Municipal Councillor (Mr. Tan Boon Wah)’s version. Tan was separately summoned to MACC Office for interrogation on the same day as Mr. Teoh. Tan had said he saw Teoh in the commission’s pantry at 6 am the morning Teoh died when he was leaving the office after being interrogated.
#4 by Loh on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 2:52 pm
///What is unacceptable about the TBH RCI report is its failure to clearly and unmistakably state in its conclusion that MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death, although it is clear from the report that the commissioners agree that the MACC and MACC officers were responsible for Beng Hock’s death.///–Kit
The RCI should not have speculated on how TBH died even if they had not the concrete evidence on who threw TBH over the window. From the way MACC officers tortured TBH in words, they must have done him physical harm. They panicked believing that TBH had died. To cause confusion on how TBH died, they throw him out of the window, hoping that it gave the impression that TBH committed suicide. Since then MACC has worked towards substantiating evidence, including the so-called will simply because the word good-bye was written in the note, besides the fact that the note was discovered months after the event. MACC had at last succeeded to have the RCI speculated that TBH committed suicide. This creates a rule that when in trouble, throw the body out of the window.
The pathologists should know whether TBH was killed, or jumped to his death. Pornthip, the expert from Thailand, was certain that TBH was unconscious when TBH touched the ground, on impact. The university lecturer who gave evidence with regards to the ‘mechanics’ of the fall concluded that TBH did fall to where he was as if he was a rigid body, like a metal ball. The rigid body means that none of its constituent parts could ever move, just like an unconscious body, the unconscious person is like a dead body which could not move his arms or rotate his body during the fall. Thus Pornthip’s evidence is confirmed by the university lecturer. The other three pathologists were tasked only to prove the police opinion that TBH committed suicide. Even the RCI is seen to be serving the interests of the police; who are the three pathologists, two of them have the employment to think about, and the others, the chance to travel to a place known as truly Asia?
The RCI cannot even conclude its investigation based on facts and justifiable interpretations of the facts. Is Malaysia a democratic country?
#5 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 2:55 pm
Both Raymond’s & Tan’s versions – that TBH was well alive and kicking or sleeping at 6 am in MACC – could not be accepted as they would contradict the other version that there was (after the official one ended at 3.30 pm) another fourth “unofficial interrogation” occurring till the time approximating TBH’s death between 7.15am and 11.15 am on July 16, 2009 based on unchallenged testimony from pathologists. That there must be a story of this 4th interrogation continuing non stop till time of his death is necessary to support the theory of suicide – that he could not bear the great pressure and therefore took his own life as better alternative.
#6 by Loh on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 2:56 pm
///Disappointed with the police investigation, Maziah Manap, wife of the late Ahmad Sarbaini Mohamed, found dead at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Comission (MACC) building in Kuala Lumpur, calls on the…///–Malaysiakini
It would appear that MACC has been set up to services RCIs, or the actions of MACC demand supervision by RCI.
AAB has created a monster.
#7 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 2:56 pm
So whatever Raymond & Tan testified (that TBH was sleeping or in pantry and not interrogated at 6am or what or even what Asraf said about earlier bringing a glass of water to TBH at his request), no matter true, must be discredited so as not to contradict and be inconsistent with the other accepted official RCI’s version of a continuous interrogation from 3.30 pm up till the time of death – which I don’t believe at all. The good thing about this official version is that it could eliminate foul play (homicide) by any one within MACC from 6 am to 7.15 am and blame death to suicide arising from pressures of non stop interrogation from 3.30 am to time of death…. To believe this version one has to believe official interrogation started at 10 am the night before ending officially at 3.30 am in morning and then another round of “unofficial” 4th interrogation began from 3.30 to 7 am by the trio – making a total of 9 -10 hours of interrogation to which TBH underwent. I don’t believe this. This is not what MACC first reports said (before vthey had time to spin).
#8 by Loh on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 3:04 pm
But the 4th interrogation was not done besides the window, with TBH sitting on the windowsill facing out. Did they make TBH sit on the windowsill like Ahmad Sarbarni standing outside the window? In that case, the choice is to bend over or answer the question. Bending over would mean that the head reached the floor first rather than the legs, and he would be scratching the wall on the way down. The RCI should then say the MACC created situation for TBH to fall to his death, rather than that TBH chose to take his own life.
#9 by limkamput on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 3:23 pm
The dog chasing its own tail bas begun. Nazri said it is up to the police to investigate given the findings in RCI report. It is up to the police to hand over the investigation papers to the AG and in turn it is UP TO the AG to institute prosecution. Hello, it is not up to the police to investigate. The police must immediately investigate and the AG must prosecute. Otherwise, you are saying whatever said in RCI can be cast aside.
#10 by Jeffrey on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 3:49 pm
Per Loh comments – #8
My thinking is that there was no 4th “interrogation” from 3.30 am to 7 am. (It was just a convenient version believed to support argument of forced suicide).
However there was a something of 4th session (private initiative that has nothing to do with official interrogation) in the early hours after 6 am leading to his death 1 bor 2 hours later), that is not touched upon.
Raymond & Tan testimonies that TBH was Ok (in pantry/sleeping) at 6 am were MORE believable to me but their testimonies were not acceptable as they were inconsistent with the other version of prolonged non stop inerrogation from 3.30 to 7 am, convenient to explain “suicide” by the psychological pressure it supposedly exerted on him to induce suicide as an option!
#11 by k1980 on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 6:32 pm
//Raymond had testified that he saw Beng Hock at 6 am on the 16th July 2009 “lying on the sofa outside Nadzri’s room”.//
How did Raymond know that TBH was alive at that time? Did he place a mirror at TBH’s nostrils to check for breathing? No, he just assumed that the man lying on the sofa was alive, when he might already be dead since 3am. Can you differentiate a dead man from a living one lying on a sofa by just looking at him from a distance?
#12 by k1980 on Saturday, 23 July 2011 - 6:40 pm
//Furthermore, the TBH RCI have virtually dismissed the whole cast of MACC witnesses at the RCI as liars, which means they had all committed perjury.//
Perjury is a very serious crime, but in Canland you can get away with it as long as you support the govt. Several of Richard Nixon’s aides were jailed for perjury, i.e. lying under oath in court during the Watergate trial.