Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail explained why inquiries before a magistrate and a Royal Commission were both necessary in the case of Teoh Beng Hock.
He said the inquest before a magistrate was held to determine if anyone was criminally liable. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, it was mandatory for a magistrate to hold an inquiry, more so in cases of sudden death.
The Royal Commission, being set up under Section 2 of the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950, was to inquire into the conduct and management of government officers and departments, or for the public welfare.
Gani said it was only proper for a court of law to determine the cause of death.
“The Royal Commission of Inquiry is rightly and lawfully formed for the purpose of inquiring into the procedural aspects of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission in carrying out investigations.”
On Wednesday, the cabinet decided on an inquest into the death of Teoh and the setting up of a Royal Commission of Inquiry to study the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s standard operating procedures in questioning witnesses and other duties.
A janitor found Teoh’s body sprawled on the fifth floor roof of Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam, where the SelangorMACC office is located, on July 16.
Police have classified his death as sudden death. Meanwhile, lawyer Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah hoped the judiciary would allocate a senior member of the Sessions Court to preside over the inquiry.
He said the CPC provided that the inquiry be conducted by a firstclass magistrate and this included a senior Sessions Court judge.
He said the results of the inquest could be used in a trial if someone was charged whereas nothing from the commission proceedings could be admitted as evidence.
Another lawyer, M.M. Athimulan, who supported the government’s move, said the two separate inquirieswere held for different purposes because the subject matter was different.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL TAN SRI ABDUL GANI PATAIL’S STATEMENT ON THE INQUIRY UNDER THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE IN RESPECT OF THE DEATH OF TEOH BENG HOCK
THE purpose of an inquiry under the Criminal Procedure Code is to inquire when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of such death.
This has been lucidly reiterated in Re: Loh Kah Kheng (1990) 2 MLJ 126 Dzaiddin J (the former Lord President when he then was), which held: “It must be remembered that the function of a magistrate holding an inquiry under Chapter XXXII of the CPC is to inquire, when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of such death (Section 337).
“The ’cause of death’ is defined under Section 328 to include not only the apparent cause of death as ascertainable by inspection or post-mortem examination of the body of the deceased, but all matters necessary to enable an opinion to be formed as to the manner in which the deceased came by his death and as whether the death resulted in any way from, or was accelerated by any unlawful act or omission on the part of any other person.
“Hence, the magistrate holds an inquiry by examining witnesses on oath and while usually following the ordinary rules of evidence, he may admit any evidence which he thinks fit, especially hearsay evidence. His duty is to ascertain the cause of death and he is not bound to follow the usual procedure of law courts.”
Under Section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code a magistrate can dispense with an inquiry if he is satisfied of the cause of death but in all other causes it is mandatory for the magistrate to hold an inquiry, more so in cases of this nature which involves sudden death. Holding a similar inquiry by the royal commission would be duplicitous in such instance.
In the case of Teoh Beng Hock, I have acted under Section 339 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code to direct the magistrate to hold an inquiry into the cause of and the circumstances connected with the death of Teoh Beng Hock and the magistrate is duty bound to hold an inquiry. Hence, it is undoubtedly clear that the adequate recourse and appropriate venue are provided by the law for cases of this nature.
In addition, the government has decided to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry. The functions of this royal commission must not be confused with an inquiry under the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 2 of the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950 clearly makes reference to the inquiry into the conduct and management of government officers and departments or for the public welfare.
Welfare is defined in The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary as “happiness, well-being, good health or fortune of a person, community, etc; successful progress, prosperity”. Therefore, it cannot be overstretched to cover an inquiry into the death of this nature, wherein an inquiry by the magistrate under the Criminal Procedure Code is more appropriate and sanctioned by the law.
Therefore, the Criminal Procedure Code being a specific legislation that makes provisions for such inquiry, it is only proper that a court of law determines the cause of death. The Royal Commission of Inquiry is rightly and lawfully formed for the purpose of inquiring into the procedural aspects of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission in carrying out investigations.
