Is Najib giving an undertaking that if inquest is unsatisfactory to Teoh family, the RCI will be empowered to probe into the causes and circumstances of Teoh’s death?


Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is reported as saying in Pekan today that the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) set up by the government following the mysterious death of DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock will take into account the findings of the n ongoing magistrate’s inquest.

He explained to reporters that the RCI’s full scope, which includes looking into the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) investigation procedures, is pending the completion of the inquest into the death of Teoh.

“We have to go through the inquest first which will determine the cause of (Teoh’s) death.”

Najib said the RCI, which will look into the procedures of the MACC, would also take into account the findings of the inquest.

“The sequence has to be right,” he said.

I do not know what is this “sequence” that Najib is talking about as he seems to be have been given the wrong advice a second time by the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, who had earlier given the Prime Minister and the Cabinet the wrong advice that there could not be a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the causes and circumstances of Teoh’s mysterious death when under the law there has to be an inquest.

Professor Dr. Shad Faruqi of the of the Faculty of Law, UiTM in his article in the Star “Ferreting out the Facts” (29th July 2009) had dismissed Gani’s contention that a Royal Commission of Inquiry could not be established pending an inquest as “not convincing”.

In fact, Shad Faruqi supported the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry, stressing that “On the peculiar facts of this case, a Commission would have been most appropriate because of the legitimate expectations of the people created by assurances and proposals from many top politicians”.

As Shad Faruqi appreciated, “What is crucial is that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. Public skepticism is acute because despite considerable passage of time, no decisive evidence seems to have emerged”.

The Attorney-General should have briefed Najib by now of the case of the mysterious death of Dr. David Kelly in the United Kingdom in 2003 which caused a nation-wide uproar.

Kelly, a Ministry of Defence scientist, was found dead after appearing before a parliamentary committee investigating the political scandal of the UK war against Iraq as he was accused of leaking sensitive information to the British Broadcasting Corporation.

A judicial inquiry headed by a judge, Justice Hutton was established to inquire into the causes and circumstances of Kelly’s death.

The inquest into Kelly’s death by the Oxfordshire Coroner was adjourned while the inquiry proceeded. The inquiry reported on 28th January 2004 and the Oxfordshire Coroner announced in March 2004 that the inquest would not be reconvened.

There have been other cases of mysterious deaths which evoked great public concern where inquests into the deaths concerned were stood down until the outcome of high-level independent inquiries, after which the coroners concerned would decide whether to continue or terminate inquest proceedings.

So when Najib spoke about getting the “sequence right”, he should have first set up the RCI with expanded scope to inquire into the causes and circumstances of Teoh’s mysterious death, with the inquest standing down its inquiry until the outcome of the RCI.

In any event, what is Najib really trying to say?

Is Najib giving an undertaking that if the inquest into causes and circumstances of Teoh Beng Hock’s mysterious death is unsatisfactory to family members, the Royal Commission of Inquiry will be empowered to probe into the causes and circumstances of Teoh’s death?

This is in fact Najib’s assurance to the Teoh’s family members, his father, mother, elder brother, sisters and fiancée when they met in Putrajaya last Tuesday in response to the query by the family whether they could ask for a RCI into the causes and circumstances of Teoh’s death if they are not satisfied with the inquest findings.

If this is Najib’s position, then let him state it clearly and unequivocally and let the Cabinet tomorrow take and make a formal decision on it after the meeting.

, , , ,

  1. #1 by SpeakUp on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 3:37 pm

    Another vague promise that will be a dead end? Hmmmm … probably.

  2. #2 by Justitia on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 6:49 pm

    The ambiguity is intentional. It acts as an “escape valve” for the people’s demand for a RCI. Najib is a deceitful master. Why should there be any concern for “right sequencing” if we are concerned about getting to the TRUTH? I have a sneaking suspicion that the Inquest is meant to muddy the waters so that the TRUTH is totally obscured from view. We have seen evidences of this with the dodgy blogs and “refusal to provide DNA samples.” I am wondering whose ass is Najib trying to cover or save? Nothing, but a credible, truly independent RCI to get to the TRUTH will be acceptable to the people.

  3. #3 by Callum on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 9:10 pm

    Another BS and LPPL. The end result is still the same.

  4. #4 by nckeat88 on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 10:20 pm

    LKS, you have already made your own conclusion so why need to have the inquest because you willnot accept any other conclusion others than yours. You are really behave like a dictator and this is not an good example.

  5. #5 by the reds on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 10:52 pm

    Najib needs to consult menteri keris first….

  6. #6 by HJ Angus on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 11:19 pm

    In Malaysia the problem is not so much RCIs and their findings.
    As in the case of Lingam, with many VIPs claiming amnesia or dementia, there has been no follow through by the A-G’s office.
    Those VIPs who claimed memory should have been sent for memory testing to see if it was a temporary lapse or what.
    As for as the RCI on the PDRM is concerned, we know that the IPCMC was aborted.
    So will the RCI on TBH result in similar fashion?

  7. #7 by yewming on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 11:41 pm

    1 Malaysia… POORAH>>>>
    Since independent 1957,that mean never have any
    harmony among themselves(malay,chinese and indian)..
    Or the 1st PM(Tunku)till the 5th.PM(P.Lah) failure
    to established peace,harmony and unity among races..
    Najib..your slogan out of date…
    So dont be hero… the only things the Malaysian
    want to know,is to abolish the ISA,
    Mongolia issue unsolved,
    Commission RM500million of purchased submarine…

  8. #8 by cemerlang on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 - 11:46 pm

    Who took the video clip of TBH ( something similar to the ear squat incident of a lady some time back ) ?
    Shouldn’t the MACC officers interrogate TBH instead of PDRM officers ?
    Shouldn’t TBH be accorded a more professional way of interrogation since he is not a criminal ?
    Did PDRM officers watch too much detective or police movies that they resort to the same way of getting information ?
    Why can’t gangsters be allowed to be PDRM officers ?

  9. #9 by Better Malaysia on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 - 1:02 am

    nckeat88,

    Please do put words into YB Lim’s mouth. He did not make any conclusion. What he is trying to do is to ensure that in the event the inquest is an open verdict, will the RCI be commissioned to look into TBH death.

  10. #10 by Better Malaysia on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 - 1:05 am

    Sorry should be:

    Please do NOT put words into YB Lim’s mouth. He did not make any conclusion. What he is trying to do is to ensure that in the event the inquest is an open verdict, will the RCI be commissioned to look into TBH death

You must be logged in to post a comment.