Two Acquittals And Indictment Of Police Macc

---

 



Two high-profile young men, two conspicuous trials, six different charges, but the same outcome - one acquitted and freed without the defence being called, and the other had his jail sentence and whipping rescinded on appeal.
One had to spend nine months incarcerated, as bail was not allowed, while the other spent five harrowing years, his integrity being quashed and his character tarnished with a thick brush.
One involved high-powered investigations by the police and the other by the MACC. While in one, the judge was not so kind to the prosecution, suggesting that specific claims by the accused were not investigated by the police, in the other, a three-person panel of judges launched a scathing attack on the investigators - the MACC.
The notes of proceedings at both trials provide insight into how accused persons and witnesses were treated, albeit to gather evidence to support the prosecution.
Both the accused were politically connected. Yusoff Rawther was previously a research assistant in Anwar Ibrahim’s office before he assumed the post of prime minister. Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman is a two-term Muar MP and has served as the youth and sports minister.
In both cases, the sitting judges made derisive remarks at the investigative process and the prosecution.
At the High Court, judge Jamil Hussin stated that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on both of Yusoff’s (above) charges, as it was unable to prove all elements of the offences with credible evidence.
“Furthermore, Yusoff had made a complaint and lodged a police report several days after the arrest, that he could be a victim of being entrapped by Anwar.
“This complaint was not investigated by the investigating officers, despite the claims made against (Anwar), and the accused was still in remand.
“Noting there are several gaps in the prosecution’s case, including the issue of custody and control, this court finds it to be unsafe to call the accused to enter his defence even if the accused chose to remain silent (in his defence),” Jamil said in his grounds.
It was a mocking indictment of the police and the officers involved. This raised questions about the conduct of the police and their methodology in the investigation process.
Almost immediately, Yusoff was in the news again, and attempts were made to sully his name. There were calls for the police to investigate allegations that Yusoff could be a proxy or agent for Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad.
Nadi Gemilang Amal secretariat member Dzul Hilmi Zainol reportedly said the matter raises serious concerns about potential foreign interference.
“We are here to lodge a police report and call for an investigation into Yusoff. Is he a Mossad agent who has infiltrated Malaysian society to push a foreign agenda?” he asked.
Claims of threats, physical abuse
In the case of Syed Saddiq, the Court of Appeal was not so generous with its words. They held that the trial judge had misdirected himself and made remarks about the conduct of witnesses.
Very telling were the appeal court’s remarks of prosecution witness, Rafiq Hakim Razali (PW13), who was the Bersatu Youth assistant treasurer.
Former Bersatu Youth assistant treasurer Rafiq Hakim Razali“We find there is merit in the defence’s contention that the evidence of these witnesses being pressured gives rise to a strong reasonable inference that the MACC might have also exerted improper pressure upon PW13 to tailor his evidence to suit the prosecution case.
“We agree with the defence’s contention that it cannot be dismissed Rafiq had succumbed to the pressure of being investigated and interrogated to the extent that he admitted he had committed criminal breach of trust when questioned by the prosecution and gave evidence against Syed Saddiq.”
More intense were other observations by the judges. Syed Saddiq’s former assistant, Siti Nurul Hidayah Shaziman (DW4), had also testified that she had been threatened and roughed up by MACC officers during interrogation.
She claimed MACC officers had taken her mobile phone, screamed at her, and thrown her mobile phone towards her. While in the investigation room, six MACC officers hissed at her and abused her with the words “babi” and “bodoh”.
“These officers were said to have asserted that she deserved to live alone and to be cast aside by her family when they were dissatisfied with her answers; and one of the MACC officers had even threatened to slap her face and that subsequently she was also asked to stand for about 30 minutes with one of her legs and both of her hands up,” the judges noted.
She then lodged a police report and called a press conference regarding the incident. Subsequently, Syed Saddiq wrote to the MACC chief commissioner, complaining about the improper treatment received by his former assistant.
Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul RahmanQuestions linger over probes, prosecutions
Now that the dust has settled and both have been freed, the question to ask is: What happened to the police report lodged by Siti Nurul Hidayah and the complaint lodged by Syed Saddiq?
Also ignored was Yusoff’s claim that he was set up or framed, which was described as perangkap (trap).
Were they ever investigated or filed as “No Further Action” (NFA)? The complaints are serious misconduct on the part of the investigators.
More importantly, how did the attorney-general give consent to prosecute based on such slipshod investigations and shallow evidence?
Former attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail, in an interview, said that the Attorney-General’s Chambers will not proceed with prosecution unless it has “80 percent chance of securing a conviction”.
Will we ever get to the bottom of this mess, which is likely to erode public confidence in our police, MACC, and the entire process in the enforcement of our laws?
No, now that both cases are being appealed, we will be told that it would be “sub judice” and hence will not be addressed at this time.
Even after the Court of Appeal in Yusoff’s case decides and the Federal Court rules in Syed Saddiq’s case, can we expect an explanation of the investigators’ conduct? - Mkini
R NADESWARAN is a veteran journalist who strives to uphold the ethos of civil rights leader John Lewis: “When you see something that is not right, not fair, not just, you have to speak up. You have to say something; you have to do something.” Comments: [email protected]
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---