I feel sad for Teoh Beng Hock’s family, for their pain, disappointment and frustration. Two years on and after, first, an inquest that ruled that Teoh Beng Hock’s death was neither due to suicide, homicide nor third party involvement, and now a Royal Commission of Inquiry deciding that he was “driven to commit suicide”. It’s all a bit too much to stomach.
Let’s say that Teoh was indeed “driven to commit suicide”, as the RCI members have concluded. The question then, in the interest of truth and justice is what or who ‘drove’ him to suicide? According to the RCI, it was “certain officers of the MACC” (three, to be specific), though their “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation…”..
It kind of make sense – three strenuous, gruelling interrogation sessions followed by a fourth during the early hours of July 16, 2009, from 3.30am to 7am, which "must have been the final straw that broke the camel's back".
And there was, inter alia, an expert forensic psychiatrist from Down Under who believed Teoh was “weak in character”, which resulted in him migrating from a low-risk group (with the potential for suicide) to the high-risk group, as a result of aggressive and continuous interrogation by MACC officers.
So, simply put, the RCI concluded that three men in MACC (Hishamudin Hashim, Mohd Anuar Ismail, and Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yunus) drove one man (Teoh) to commit suicide by way of “aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation…”
Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Aziz is reported to have said that the MACC officials did not have the intention of killing Teoh but that the government assures that "appropriate action will be taken against those officers involved who went against MACC procedure based on the rules and laws already in place".
So, accepting that Teoh was driven to commit suicide by three MACC officers, it begs the question – what drove these three men to drive one man to suicide?
I guess it’s like asking what drove Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar to take Altantuya Shaariibuu to the forested land near the Subang Dam in Puncak Alam, Shah Alam, in October 2006, shoot her twice and then destroy her remains with C-4 explosives.
These men are all professional, public law enforcement and security personnel who went against established procedures based on the rules and laws already in place. What drove them to do these very bad things? In fact, in the case of Ashraf, the RCI found him to have a bad record of physical abuse of suspects.
Psychiatrics, forensics, learned men of the legal profession aren’t going to answer these questions, and certainly not get to the truth of the wrongdoing nor satisfy natural justice if they cannot see the forest for the trees.
Hishamudin, Mohd Anuar, Mohd Ashraf, Azilah and Sirul are the trees…in fact, Teoh and Altantuya are also the trees….the trees that got brutally felled.
There are other trees in the forest, nay, the forest itself, that must be examined as drivers, whether or not Teoh was driven to suicide...or was murdered, as was decided in the case of Altantuya.
Failing to see the forest, in this case, is to subscribe to impunity. Impunity, in the international law of human rights, refers to the failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice, constituting a denial of the victims' right to justice and redress.
Impunity is characteristic of countries that suffer from corruption or that have entrenched systems of patronage, or where the judiciary is weak or members of the security forces are protected by special jurisdictions or immunities.
The amended Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights Through Action to Combat Impunity, submitted to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on Feb 8 2005, defines impunity as:
"The impossibility, de jure or de facto, of bringing the perpetrators of violations to account – whether in criminal, civil, administrative or disciplinary proceedings – since they are not subject to any inquiry that might lead to their being accused, arrested, tried and, if found guilty, sentenced to appropriate penalties, and to making reparations to their victims."
The First Principle of that same document states that:
"Impunity arises from a failure by states to meet their obligations to investigate violations; to take appropriate measures in respect of the perpetrators, particularly in the area of justice, by ensuring that those suspected of criminal responsibility are prosecuted, tried and duly punished; to provide victims with effective remedies and to ensure that they receive reparation for the injuries suffered; to ensure the inalienable right to know the truth about violations; and to take other necessary steps to prevent a recurrence of violations."
I feel sad for Teoh’s family.
I echo what Teoh Lee Lan said: “We cannot accept this decision. Teoh driven to suicide is not an answer for us…”
I end with the famous quote:
"Not only must Justice be done, it must also be seen to be done."
