COMMENT | I read with sadness regarding the demise of KC Vohrah, who was a former Court of Appeal judge as well as former Suhakam commissioner (2002 till 2008).

It is sad because one would not be able to properly pay their respects to a decent judge, who was an exceptional defender of justice and truth during this period of the movement control order (MCO).

My condolences to his friends and family.

The first time I heard about him was when he was the High Court judge deciding on the sentence against two police personnel charged over the death in custody case of Lee Quat Leong, a 42-year-old air cond technician.

This was back in 1995. There was this infamous robbery at a Maybank in Taman Cheras, Kuala Lumpur. Everyone was baffled how the robbers managed to bag such a huge sum.

It appeared that the police suspected that Lee was involved since he knew the layout of the bank as he had done work there. He was arrested on April 28 and died two weeks later on May 12, 1995.

The death certificate stated that the cause of death was haemorrhage consistent with blunt trauma to most parts of the body. The late Karpal Singh, who was the family's lawyer, said there were numerous injuries and fractures on the victim's body.

There was a huge public outcry resulting in the police conducting an internal investigation. But the investigation could not identify the assailants.

Due to the continued public outcry, the then attorney-general Mohtar Abdullah ordered a judicial inquiry. It was reported that Mohtar ordered the inquiry after the police failed four times to identify the perpetrators. This was my initial exposure to police abuse and cover-ups. It was also my first exposure to death in detention.

The inquest later found 11 police personnel including those with the rank of ASP, responsible for the death. However, only two low-ranked police personnel were charged with “causing hurt” even though an innocent man was murdered.

Both pleaded guilty. The "blunt objects or weapons" mentioned in the post-mortem report were not t

tendered as exhibits during the trial. The duo was sentenced to just 18 months in jail.

Once again, the people were unhappy with the verdict and called on the government to appeal against the decision. This was rejected by the AG.

Lee's family and Karpal did not give up. The brother of the victim applied for the sentence to be reviewed and the matter was brought before the High Court.

This was during Dr Mahathir Mohamad's first tenure as PM and post the judicial crisis which saw judges being sacked by kangaroo tribunals. So I did not expect much from the appeal and lost interest knowing that the whole matter was a farce.

Brave judge doubles the sentence

During the review stage at the High Court, the prosecutor argued against an increased sentence. That is when I heard about this brave judge KC Vohrah who subsequently doubled the sentence against the two police personnel.

Passing the sentence he said, “Police officers are custodians of the law and, they have to uphold, not breach, the law... Over-zealousness which involves such blatant breaching of the law with the use of violence can never be a mitigating factor. Clearly, the courts are under a duty, and in the larger interest of substantial justice, to show their abhorrence of this type of crime."

At the end of that same year, some organisations including Suaram, where I worked, organised the Asia Pacific Conference on East Timor (Apcet) on the issue of East Timor.

This resulted in the detention of 10 activists. Once again, Vohrah’s judgement liberated the activists from further remand and became a precedent in subsequent cases.

Back then and even now, when a person is remanded by the Magistrate's Court, it is a norm for lawyers not to make an appeal to a higher court because it is time-consuming and by the time they make the application, the case might become academic.

But this changed in Apcet because among those arrested was a fellow lawyer R Sivarasa. Many lawyers Including M Puravalen, Sulaiman Abdullah, Ragunath Kesavan and Malek Imtiaz were working hard to secure the release of the activists.

Vohrah dismissed the magistrate's order and set them free.

It was also the first time we learnt of the importance of the “Lockup Diary”. In his judgement, Vohrah mentioned that the investigation diary Section 117 requires “a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case to be transmitted to the magistrate when producing a suspect before him or her.

“In this case, no copy of the entries was transmitted to the magistrate. The failure to transmit to the magistrate a copy of the entries was fatal to the application as it meant that the magistrate did not have the prescribed material to make the order of remand.”

Vohrah said it was tantamount to an unlawful remand. He also said magistrates should not think that their function is merely routine and cursory.

I also had the opportunity on many occasions to see him handling matters as a Suhakam commissioner.

Thinking ahead. In the absence of good judges, and with the increased powers given to the police under the MCO, I just hope the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) bill will be tabled in the coming Parliament sitting.

Vohrah was a strong advocate for justice as he gave judgements that mattered.

Rest in Peace.

S ARUTCHELVAN is PSM deputy chairperson.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

Keep up with the latest information on the outbreak in the country with Malaysiakini's free Covid-19 tracker.

Malaysiakini is providing free access to the most important updates on the coronavirus pandemic. You can find them here.

Help keep independent media alive - subscribe to Malaysiakini.