Jun 7, 11 | MalaysiaKini
DAP stalwart and Ipoh Timor MP Lim Kit Siang has called on the prime minister and cabinet to override the police and attorney-general’s (AG) call for an inquest into senior customs officer Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed’s death, and replace it with a full-blown royal commission of inquiry (RCI).
Lim (left) said such a move will restore public confidence in national institutions and also in the prime minister and cabinet.
“I have no qualms in admitting that I have reservations about the Teoh Beng Hock RCI, particularly over the conduct and strategy adopted by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and its counsel Muhammad Shafie Abdullah who could make the outrageous suggestion that Teoh had committed ‘honour suicide’, but Malaysians are currently being deprived of a more satisfactory option to get to the bottom of Ahmad Sarbani’s death,” he said in a statement.
“I hope my reservations over the Teoh RCI are proven wrong. However, the cabinet’s immediate task is to act boldly and justly into the death of Ahmad Sarbani. Let Najib Abdul Razak and his cabinet ministers not disappoint Malaysians once again tomorrow.”
Police had last Friday filed an application for an inquest to determine the circumstances leading to the death of the Selangor Customs assistant director. The application was submitted at the Kuala Lumpur court complex.
Ahmad Sarbani’s (left) sudden death caught the country by surprise as the MACC was swooping to carry out investigations over allegations of Custom officers being on the take and causing the country millions of ringgit in losses.
The death on April 7 also happened in the midst of the Teoh RCI looking into the cause of death and MACC’s investigation procedures. Ahmad Sarbani died after falling from the third floor of the MACC Kuala Lumpur headquarters.
Police have classified the case as sudden death. Friends of Ahmad Sarbani when interviewed on the day he was buried said they suspected foul play as he had allegedly gone to the MACC to retract his statement.
Lim said Najib and his cabinet are facing another test on whether they dare to act boldly to override the AG and the police by establishing an RCI on Ahmad Sarbani’s death.
“Or are they just ‘sitting ducks’ waiting for a change of government in Putrajaya in the next general election?” said the hard-hitting DAP leader.
#1 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 - 6:01 pm
The problem is by law (s334 of Criminal Procedure Code) any death in custody of police (by extension to MACC) has to trigger an Inquest. (The only exception where Inquest is dispensed is where police investigates leading to one of its own being charged but since that never happens it is Inquest). Admittedly Inquest is not satisfactory. It cannot do the police’s job. It is confined to ascertainment of facts only from what government doctors and police provide. If these provided do not 100% prove guilt of anyone, almost invariably open verdict is returned. In simple English it means “Don’t know what really happened that caused death!”.
#2 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 - 6:02 pm
When there is public clamour that Inquest’s verdict based on government hospitals & police findings being disputed, then one has an RCI, as in TBH’s case.
In Sarbani’s case how does one jump queue and dispensing the Inquest mandated by law?
To override the CPC requiring Inquest and supersede it with RCI straightaway tantamounts to govt’s admission that there are strong elements of foul play suspected within precincts of its own security services, which it is hard to expect it will ever admit or acknowledge. Sarbani must then go through the Inquest route and then RCI: after all in what way is it different from TBH’s case? But to dispense Inquest, its hard to conceive.
#3 by sheriff singh on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 - 7:24 pm
“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it’s enemy action.”
Auric Goldfinger.
#4 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 - 10:09 pm
Can some good lawyer chec for precedents on RCI without an Inquest?
This is just procedural. The law may state the need for an Inquest but if it is silent on RCI, does that necessarily meAN that an RCI is precluded till after an Inquest.
If an Inquest is going to delve into some silly irrelevancies, straitjacketed by some absurd terms of reference dictated by some ignoramus, then would not an unfettered RCI be better suited for a quick resolution of this tragic episode.
Call it what u will; the rakyat wants to see justice for Sarbaini. PM Najib should not have to think long and hard on so simple an issue; otherwise he is simpy not fit to be the nation’s PM.
#5 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 - 10:17 pm
Can some good lawyer chec for precedents on RCI without an Inquest?
This is just procedural. The law may state the need for an Inquest but if it is silent on RCI, does that necessarily meAN that an RCI is precluded till after an Inquest.
If an Inquest is going to delve into some silly irrelevancies, straitjacketed by some absurd terms of reference dictated by some ignoramus, then would not an unfettered RCI be better suited for a quick resolution of this tragic episode.
Call it what u will; the rakyat wants to see justice for Sarbaini. PM Najib should not have to think long and hard on so simple an issue. He is simpy not fit to be the nation’s PM.
#6 by sheriff singh on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 - 11:05 pm
The King can command a RCI anytime. Anybody got a problem with this?
#7 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 - 12:20 am
The King can command a RCI any time – only upon the advice of PM/cabinet.
Reason: Constitutional Monarchy system under which executive authority of Federation is vested formally
in Yang di-Pertuan Agong but HRH must act in accordance with advice of Cabinet headed by Prime Minister.
For that reason non implementation of Lingam RCI recommendation, questioning Royal Address’s contents and even Karpal’s questioning of Zambry’s appointment as MB are not acts of ‘derhaka’ but are acts questioning government’s wisdom upon advice of which a Cobnstitutional monarch acts… RCI depends therefore on Najib & cabinet.
#8 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 8 June 2011 - 8:59 am
And Najib/cabinet (Govt) will not skip the procedural legal requirement of Inquest to jump peremptorily and straighhtaway into RCI because to do so simply implies that the Govt indirectly acknowledges, and agrees with Opposition and skeptical members of public that the institution of Inquest, its enquiry based on findings of police, coroner, govt doctors etc indeed the whole administration of justice apparatus are unreliable, bias and collude to cover up misdeeds/misfeasance amongst errant members/black sheep within its security apparatus.