The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was the second attempt by Malaysia to establish Malaysia’s version of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) with increased powers, staffing and budgetting.
However, in just two years, MACC had achieved what its predecessor the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) had never done in 41 years from 1967-2008 – two deaths at its premises in circumstances suspected by the majority of reasonable Malaysians as caused by MACC – Teoh Beng Hock in July 2009 and Ahmad Sarbaini Mohamad in April 2011.
There was sheer disbelief when news first broke out yesterday that the James Foong Royal Commission of Inquiry had reported that Teoh Beng Hock was driven to commit suicide by aggressive and continuous questioning by MACC officers – raising the question whether there is such an animal as “forced suicide” which is not homicide or murder.
Other news items yesterday which followed on the contents of the RCI report reveals one consistent picture – of how it is impossible for MACC to disclaim responsibility for causing the death of Teoh Beng Hoch who was totally at the mercy of MACC officers while in MACC custody on the fateful days of July 15 and 16, 2009.
There can be no doubt as to the answer even before the establishment of the RCI when the question is asked: Was MACC responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock. The answer is in the categorical positive.
The RCI report did not give a direct answer to the question but anyone reading the contents can only derive one conclusion – that the RCI would say “Yes” if asked to answer this specific question.
The RCI report is an indictment of the MACC. The picture it gives of MACC is not a law enforcement agency but a lawless organisation housed by criminals who have no qualms to break the law to achieve their misguided objectives and agendas which have nothing to do with the battle against corruption.
The question Malaysians are entitled to ask is whether MACC has become Malaysian Ante Chamber of Crime housed by criminals not to uphold the law but to violate all notions and concepts of law, justice and decency?
MACC announced that it accepts with an open heart the findings of the RCI on the death of Teoh Beng Hock and pledged that appropriate action would be taken on RCI findings and recommendations.
If MACC has accepted the RCI findings and recommendations, have all the MACC officers concerned who had acted with impunity in utter disregard the law resulting in the death of Teoh Beng Hock, and then conspired to cover up the truth and commit the crime of perjury at the Royal Commission of Inquiry public hearings with false evidence, been immediately suspended to be charged in court for various crimes, including the murder of Teoh Beng Hock?
Secondly, is the MACC or the Government prepared to publicly accept responsibility for causing the death of Teoh Beng Hock and make a generous ex-gratia compensation payment to TBH’s family, among other things, to minimise the family’s sufferings and to facilitate a closure of the tragedy?
“..whether MACC has become Malaysian Ante Chamber of Crime housed by criminals not to uphold the law..”
You can say that as well of PDRM.
“Teoh Beng Hock was driven to commit suicide by aggressive and continuous questioning by MACC officers”
——————————-
If “Aggressive and continuous questioning” can get a person who is to get married in the morning & who is expecting to have a child in just a few months you might as well say the Sun rises from the west.
MACC is NOTHING but a “TERROR TOOL” of UMNO’s top learders.
Its a frightening thought that in Malaysia, people really can get away with murder.Or can they?
I strongly believe that the james foong committee has been compromised by umno’s strong arm tactic into delivering a neutral but no-brainer conclusion.
“Forced to commit suicide”. WTF is that? “Weak-will” and was “driven to suicide”. Phaark! That is nonsense. What we have here is murder plain and simple, regardless of how it was described by the james foong committee.
Look. Even if teoh beng hock had indeed committed suicide, he clearly would not have done so but for the pressure and aggresive and threatening and abusive behaviour and conduct of the macc officers (acting under the order and direction of toyo and jib who wanted to take back selangor by whatever means).
/// deaths at its premises in circumstances suspected by the majority of reasonable Malaysians as caused by MACC /// the article above said. In law causation is clear and in fact it can safely be regarded as having been established because teoh would not have killed himself otherwise. In which case, his death here must be regarded as homicide, or even murder depending on the circumstances.
The fact that he is weak will is neither here nor there. You must take your victims as they come. They could be strong or weak. You cannot be allowed to claim your victim’s weakness in defence esp if it has been established that your actions had directly caused his death.
No disrespect to James Foong – just 2 nagging questions:
1) where did he get his law degree?
2) where did he get his legal training? MACC? where thAT other senior lawyer gave a demo on how to strangle himself with a neck-tie?
Its not about degree & training, its about being a willing actor on the RCI’s chairs, its about being willing to act out whatever his directors (UMNO) wanted him. The verdict was long settled before RCI commenced!
Ask around the public perception is that TBH was whacked the daylight out of him & held dangling by his belt outside the window by MACC’s officer attempting to force a confession. The belt snapped!
MACC should be shut down for a complete clean up!
I think the Ahmad Sarbani case is going to be a lot more clear-cut, especially with the CCTVs being turned off by someone from the inside. What is clear in TBH’s case is that these guys will stop at nothing to beat the hell out of a witness in order to obtain a confession to implicate an opposition politician.
The RCI is a sham. Whether or not TBH is weak or strong, the question remains. He died under the interrogation by MACC. Now that it is exposed that the 3 officials acted in an aggressive manner, then MACC IS responsible for the death, whether it is suicide or otherwise. However, the RCI did not address the various injury marks found on TBH’s neck and body. They could have been the direct cause of death and NOT suicide. Stating suicide is the most convenient way to pass the buck to the dead person. It is shameful and farcical to the highest order to blame the dead.
UMNO is so evil beyond words
Is this what Najib refer to as ” Defend Putrajaya at all cost”
NR, HH, MY, UmnoB/BN boldly declared: WE R OK N CLEAN, WE HAVE NOTHING 2 HIDE
O yeah?
French Scorpene lawyer William Bourdon was detained 2day at KLIA n will most likely be deported (if he is lucky enuf not 2 b C4ed n his immigration record erased, like U know who)
William is prevented fr briefing rakyat on d progress of a judicial probe in France in2 d controversial RM7 billion Scorpene submarines dat Malaysia bought fr French defence company DCNS
Again, dis involved U know who lah
Another black eye 2 NR, HH, MY, UmnoB/BN
So takut of TRUTH coming out
may the ghosts of macc haunt the criminals every night before, during and after their sleeps until they ‘di-bunuh sendiri’.
The whole thing reminds me of Bertolucci’s The Conformist, set in fascist Italy, where the director employs a clever use of shadow and light, in particular the breathtaking forests scenes with sunlight streaming in between the trees. It’s all the more spectacular because some nasty events occur behind the façade of the sanitized fascist and in the narrative we find Clerici the ‘conspirator’ who just wants to live a normal life and who follows his instincts and gets married.
I’ll digress. Justice K.A.P Ranasinghe, the dissenting voice in the Abas Tribunal, stands proud. His fellow members are overlooked and, fortunately for them, largely forgotten.
Sometime ago, an award was bestowed upon a boy for gallantly rescuing a girl from drowning. A politician asked that the effort of the teenager be glossed over but the apathy of the throng by the pool witnessing two lives at risk, be highlighted instead. The politician said it was an inherent human impulse that moved the boy to protect the life of a fellow human being.
Ranasinghe is no different from the boy. The rights of Salleh Abas were challenged and he stepped in. He displayed ‘nothing extraordinary’ in supporting a beleaguered brother and for that, he is remembered. The tribunal report stands as a tribute to the Sri Lankan.
The composition of the Teoh Commission is analogous to the Abas Tribunal, save that a Ranasinghe is found wanting, but then fortunately for its members, passage of time will ensure that the conformist, who traded the damning red flags in the proceedings for an unreasonable standard of proof that would have otherwise convicted the perpetrator, will be largely forgotten.
“Assisted suicide” or aka “compassionate killing” or aka “euthanasia” is a crime in most countries, even in Malaysia.
Now a “forced suicide” is definitely more serious in nature and which calls for more serious consequences, wouldn’t it?
So when the question beckons: Was MACC responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock? I’d say the answer is very obvious too, that is, in the categorical positive.
The RCI would fail miserably in its duty if it were to leave out the culpability of those MACC officers who caused the “forced suicide” of TBH. So yes, it is also clear as daylight too that even though the RCI report did not give a direct answer to the question but anyone reading the contents can only derive one conclusion – that the RCI would say “Yes” if asked to answer this specific question of “who’s responsible”.
To me, “assisted suicide” does not equate to “forced suicide” because the latter is something far worse. In any event both stand out as a crime and the perpetrators of such crime ought to be severely punished.
I think aggressive interrogation is a lame expression to describe the truth. I firmly believe that those bullies SOB were outright abusive, physically. Beng hock must have been tortured and beaten.
Look at the bersih incident. Look at the numerous video recordings of physical abuse by the police. And all those were carried out in the open and in full view of the public. What more for poor beng hock – in the confines of macc building and in the middle of the night.
James Foong might as well tell Malaysians that THE SUN RISES IN THE WEST! It’s a disgrace for such a senior judge like himself to make such a STUPID JUDGMENT!
I, like “by-e” curse and condemn these murderers and those who indirectly partook in these that they have NIGHTMARES every, HAUNTINGS where ever they go until they literally become INSANE and go jump out a window or highrise building or the bridge!!! God saves Malaysia!!
The RCI is trying to be very polite on its verdict! It refused to conclude that it was planned!
It seems that there are a lot of hanky-panky going on in MACC. Shouldn’t the organization be investigated first before it investigates people who allegedly have committed corruption offenses?
the star yesterday reported the “the police has cleared itself of any wrong-doing in the internal probe regarding using violence in the illegal bersih rally”.
cleared itself. wtf.
must the star always precede mentioning the rally w/ the word “illegal”?
http://malaysiakini.com/letters/170698
The writer above voiced out the sentiments of the rakyat
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/22/world/middleeast/22saudi.html?hpw
The saudis are going to copy Canland’s ISA
Let BN spins off its head! Let them publish more slogans! The people know the real truth and we all have only one objective, come the next GE! They have painted themselves intoi a corner and they still wanted to bluff their way out!
So what, najig, so what?
briefing the pope doesn’t make you a saint;
brifing david cameron, pm of uk, doesn’t make u a democrat.
c’mon be real; not stupid.
Calling them names will not help.
Changing them will.
Charging the guilty 3 will.
Remember our 6 brothers still in detention.
We must change the tenant at Putrajaya.
MACC is another political instrument of UMNO, just like the Malaysian judiciary, EC and the police. If there’s anyone that has to be brought to law, its the UMNO leadership. UMNO is just a band of robbers and murderers.
The plan is satisfy the public…with an RCI.
The outcome is how to protect MACC and keep public satisfied.
Nazri came out to condemn those investigators being un-professionals and rough and need to be punished.
The whole issue is to protect the MACC chief to continue protecting the government with no fear…as UMNO B ministers are experts to twist and turn to protect him.
This is their famous art….two wrongs does not make one right..and poor poor TBH’s is the scapegoat…and they choose their scapegoats…all Malaysians happy..case solved…Malaysia style.
So James CY Foong tells us that beng hock was “forced to commit suicide”.
What the heck is he saying? A thought struck me last night. As a lawyer and now a judge he would surely know the stupidity of this finding and conclusion. It simply makes no legal sense at all. If left to himself (and members of the commission, to themselves) James Foong would not have delivered such nonsense. He must have been pressured to do so (my guess). Maybe he was “forced” to write a neutral – neither here nor there – decision.
“Forced” we was, and so “forced” too was thereby, James concludes, exerted by the macc upon beng hock to “commit suicide”. This is just a little speculation. But what I hv to say next is important. It is on the meaning of “forced to commit suicide”. What is James Foong telling us?
Consider this scenario.
A put poison in B’s drink, then tricked B to consume the drink and B died as a result of drinking the poison.
To my mind A has committed murder. This is clear and relatively straightforward. Now let us modify the scenario to include the element of “force” in the sense of “pressure”.
If X put poison in Y’s drink, then forced Y to consume the drink and Y died as a result of drinking the poison.
To my mind both A and X are equally culpable and they have committed murder. Both intended the death of their respective victims; and both caused their death, one by trickery and the other by force. There is no difference between the two cases.
What about beng hock’s case? James foong said that it was a “forced” “suicide”. The fact that “forced” was found to have been applied suggest to me that James foong was satisfied on evidence that macc had in fact caused the death of beng hock.
The question now is whether macc at the material time, doing what they then did, intended to end beng hock’s life. It was suicide, James foong pronounced. In other words, beng hock terminated himself. Looking again at the earlier examples on A and X, if death was intended, it does not matter at all if beng hock had taken his own life. If the intended design involves death and death did in fact occur, then the legal consequence is murder, no less.
It bears great significance to note that James foong did not conclude that beng hock was “forced to commit an unintended / unforseen / unexpected suicide.” In fact James foong was quite categorical in finding that beng hock was “forced to kill himself”. I think James foong was satisfied on evidence collected that the macc officers actually had the necessary intention to end beng hock’s life.
“Murder.” I say.
ps. With hindsight, I think James foong had been quite tricky and in fact careful with his choice of words / expressions.
Errr just a qualifying note on my views above. I hv not seen the RCI report yet.
Why are you still reading The Star? This is the English version of Utusan Malaysia and the editors are nothing more than UMNO bootlickers. I would encourage everyone to boycott The Star and not to finance the political voice of UMNO.
James CY Foong tells us that TBH was “forced to commit suicide”.
I think what he means is that TBH was placed sitting on the window ledge facing outwards. Then a shove is applied onto his back so that he pummels down, seemingly committing suicide.
Since the applied shoving force= mass x acceleration, TBH’s “suicide” becomes “forced suicide”, which is 1st degree murder. And that is what James Foong is trying to tell us using veiled language.
We used to read or watched interrogation methods of this nature during the cold war, espionage and so on.
Never expect it is happening right in modern Malaysia, and simply over an investigation of RM2400.
‘with increased powers’,
Abuse of Powers instead.
Spinning what is palpably culpable homicide to ‘forced suicide’ based on allegedly TBH turning “weak” due to aggressive interrogation is akin to what Lim Guan Eng described as “murdering TBH twice!” (Pg 4 of The Star 23rd July). Far from appeasing public outrage the RCI’s verdict compounds it. Nazri’s charge the culprits (Star front page) will not appease public anger nor will it mitigate the govt’s negative image since it is vicariously responsible for MACC’s officers’ misdeeds and abuse of power. The govt has therefore committed not only a series of faux pas in Bersih but also in such a RCI verdict that is ‘neither here nor there’ the end result is not only MACC’s image being unsavalgeable but also image/reputation of RCI institution in containing damage being dragged down and called in question! There’s nothing much Najib appears to be capable of doing to reform/charge the entire system held tyogether by a seamless web of abuse of power & corruption. All he could do is to concentrate leveraging on his own personal image as ‘hands on people caring’ leader by going about his walkaton of meeting the people and personally “serving” food to rakyat in Subang Perdana (pic on pg 2 of today’s The Star) !
In the face of its own credibility being shaky our authorities have resorted to the bad habit of dropping big names and appealing to authority to buttress what it asserts. This Appeal to Authority fallacy is acted out as follows:
1. Govt or G is either not legitimate authority on the subject or whose credibility is so low that it is not believed in whatever it says.
2. Credible or Expert A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject.
3. Person A makes claim C about subject S in line with what G asserts.
4. Therefore, C is true, by extension what G says its true….
Continuation from and as an illustration of contents of preceding post (currently under moderation) –
Where subject S is Anwar’s video tape, C is that he was the one in the tape, then A will be the 2 Dartmouth College Professors. Where subject S is TBH’s death, and C is suicide, then A are (i) forensic psychiatrist Paul Edward Mullen, engaged by the Bar Council to assist in the inquiry and (ii) Transparency International-Malaysia (TIM) president, Datuk Paul Low who was quickly quoted, “We have to trust the findings of the RCI because it is properly constituted with people of integrity”! Fact is Paul Edward Mullen is not cited in RCI report. Just certain aspects of his testimony are selectively used to support the RCI’s conclusion that TBH succumbed to pressure. The fact that Paul Edward Mullen was not cited means he himself did not come to this conclusion that TBH succumbed to pressure to the extent of taking his own life.
FORCED SUICIDE – a new legal JARGON invented by none other than a prominent senior judge in Malaysia, JAMES FOONG! This term will surely become LEGAL PRECEDENT in all other cases involving custodial deaths!!!!! Thanks to the LEARNED (NUT) JUDGE!!!!
There are 5 supposedly independent bodies that supposedly monitor the MACC to ensure its integrity and to protect citizens’ rights. These bodies are: the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board, the Special Committee on Corruption, the Complaints Committee, the Operations Review Panel, and the Corruption Consultation and Prevention Panel. What were these committees and their members doing for such abuse of power to occur in MACC right under their nose? Then there is Deputy commissioner and head of operations of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) Daniel Li whose input was canvassed for the creation of MACC praised by him as “a good start for Malaysia to battle graft”. Where is Daniel Li now ? What has he got to say now of what Kit dubbed as “Malaysian Ante Chamber of Crime”?
How could any institution, including RCI, ever come up with a finding that is truthful and acceptable? Just look at the whole motivation of investigating TBH in the first place? Why a RM2,400 “abuse of allocation” case could attract so much attention and urgency to this group of depraved MACC investigators. Who directed them to be so overzealous when witnesses are interviewed relentlessly overnight? What is the logic of doing this when there are numerous other bigger and more urgent corruption cases in the country? It boils down to the whole existence of MACC – for whom this institution is supposed to serve. Then what about the MACC officers themselves? Who are these people? Can we logically assume that they are not racist bent at bullying and torturing Chinese politicians and their aids? Are they not all Malays, gone through BTN and all kinds of indoctrination programmes? What about their personal conviction that they are pro UMNO and anti DAP no matter what?
If RCI has concluded that these officers are immoral and compulsive liars, then nothing they ever said should be taken seriously. A suicide verdict can only happen if TBH died alone. What evidence has the RCI got to come to that decision, i.e THB died alone. Who was last seen with him, is this not how the police investigate most murder cases? Why should this case be any difference?
In “forced suicide” a victim is coerced into committing suicide to avoid facing an alternative option he perceive as much worse. All the RCI said was about aggressive interrogation with psychological pressure to bear and dare not mention physical abuse by interrogators. To say that TBH sucumbed to suicide as alternative to psychological pressure of aggressive interrogation is pure speculation. Dr Paul Edward Mullen was not even cited toi support this conclusion as his. To impute that TBH was so weak as to choose self immolation in complete forgottence of a fiance with a yet to be born child waiting for him at home is the unkindest cut of all – to malign a dead person who is not here to defend himself against a character assassination. I agree with Lim Guan Eng that this is akin to “murdering TBH twice!”
Best example of “forced suicide” was in May 1945 when Hitler blew his brains out as Soviet troops encircled his bunker in Berlin. He preferred to die by his own hands rather than be tortured and executed by his old enemy, Josef Stalin.
Does james Foong mean to tell us that TBH took his own life so as to escape from more physical torment from Ashraf the mamak?
In “forced suicide” a victim is coerced into committing suicide to avoid facing an alternative option he perceive as much worse.// sage
We don’t know this for a fact. For all we know he could be tortured and held by his belt and put out of the window to extract a confession from him. I am sorry, it is not farfetched for me to assume that this group of officers are probably racist bent at getting even with Chinese politicians and their aids.
No wonder the RCI report took a long time to appear.