Bar Council: Suicide finding is ‘a leap in logic’
The Malaysian Bar says the RCI’s finding that Teoh Beng Hock had committed suicide was “unsupported by the facts and evidence”.
Lim said in view of the above, and as there were no evidence whatsoever produced at the RCI hearing of Teoh’s whereabouts or movements after 6:15am, and that the MACC staff would have begun arriving by 8:00 am, “to surmise that Teoh had committed suicide between 7:15am and 11:15am requires a leap in logic and an assumption of facts not in evidence”.
Teoh EL San Free Malaysia Today
The Bar Council has rejected the suicide finding of the Royal Commission of Inquiry on Teoh Beng Hock’s death, saying that the conclusion was “unsupported by the facts and evidence”.
Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee also urged the government as well as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission to apologise to Teoh’s family and the citizens of Malaysia, over his death; and compensate Teoh’s family over their loss.
“It is very clear to the Malaysian Bar that full responsibility for Teoh Beng Hock’s death lies squarely and solely on the MACC, and that immediate action must be taken to hold the culpable officers accountable for their behaviour,” said Lim.
He said the Bar welcomed the statement by Minister in Prime Minister’s Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz that “appropriate action would be taken against the officers through the process of law without delay”.
Lim said the authorities should investigate the relevant officers for possible offences under sections 304 and 304A of the Penal Code, namely for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and for causing the death of TBH by negligence, respectively.
However, Lim said that Nazri had erred when he quoted forensic psychiatrist Professor Paul Mullen
to support the fact that Teoh had a “weak character”.
“Contrary to the statement made by Nazri, Mullen did not testify that Teoh had a ‘weak character’ that led him to take his own life. He did not conclude that Teoh had committed suicide,” said Lim.
Rather, Lim said, Mullen’s testimony stated:“in [his] opinion, what we learned of Teoh Beng Hock’s personality and behaviour do not suggest any increased risk of suicide”.
“He (Mullen) further opined that the context of the events that had taken place was not one ‘which, in [his] experience, leads to suicide in custody’, as he had not been made aware of anything ‘to explain panic and distress sufficient to drive [Teoh Beng Hock] to conclude his honor had been irreparably tarnished’,” said Lim.
Lim said this was in stark contrast to what Nazri had stated during the release of the report as Mullen’s testimony in fact did not provide the basis for a finding of suicide.
Leap in logic
The Bar Council noted the RCI findings were the following:
- That the time of death had been between 7:15 am and 11:15 am on July, 16, 2009;
- That Teoh Beng Hock had not been released at 3:30 am and been left alone sitting on a sofa after his statement had been recorded;
- That Teoh Beng Hock had been subjected to a fourth interrogation session after 3:30 am by Hishamuddin Hashim and his officers, which was aggressive and relentless. In addition, the RCI rejected the evidence of MACC officer Raymond Nion that he had seen Teoh Beng Hock lying down unattended on a sofa at approximately 6am;
- That the fourth interrogation session was probably between 3am and 7am; and
- That the window from which Teoh Beng Hock is said to have fallen out was located conspicuously.
Lim said in view of the above, and as there were no evidence whatsoever produced at the RCI hearing of Teoh’s whereabouts or movements after 6:15am, and that the MACC staff would have begun arriving by 8:00 am, “to surmise that Teoh had committed suicide between 7:15am and 11:15am requires a leap in logic and an assumption of facts not in evidence”.
Lim also noted that the the other joint expert psychiatric report tendered during the RCI by Dr Badiah Yahya and Dr Nor Hayati Ali (who were engaged by MACC and present during most of the court proceedings and had interviewed Teoh Beng Hock’s family members, housemate and work colleagues) also said there was lack of information on whether Teoh had suffered any strenuous mental strain from an interrogation.
