The Court of Appeal today awarded the family of a shooting victim RM351,000 and lambasted the police for acting as "executioners" in self-defence.

In overturning the Shah Alam High Court judgment, Justice Hamid Sultan Abu Backer ruled that the police cannot shoot to kill suspected criminals.

"It is trite law of Malaysia that the federal constitution does not permit police officers to kill suspected and/or dreaded criminals by fake encounters.

"The police are paid through public funds with a primary duty to arrest criminals and put them for trial.

"They cannot be allowed to roam trigger-happy as this will be in violation of rule of law and the relevant authorities must seriously check such violation," Justice Hamid said.

He further outlined further weaknesses in the High Court’s judgment resulting in the appellate court to overturn the judgment.

Justice Hamid Sultan ( right ) wrote the unanimous judgment by the three-member appellate court bench that was led by Justice Linton Albert with Justice Vernon Ong Lam Kiat as the third judge.

The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal last month and the unanimous decision was delivered today, where they awarded the widow, Abra Bibi Shahul Hamid, and her three children who filed a dependency claim.

She and her children named the inspector-general of police, the Malaysian government and one ASP Ong Seng Keong who led the operation, as respondents.

Abra’s husband, identified as Abd Jaffar, a car repossessor, who was seated on the front passenger seat of a Proton Waja, was killed by a team of police Special Action Unit who shot the deceased six times in Shah Alam on Sept 2, 2008 at 10am after the car was blocked by the authorities.

In overturning the Shah Alam High Court decision, Jusfice Hamid Sultan outlined its weaknesses and laid out the facts of the case, where police in their defence claimed that a shot was fired from Abd Jaffar’s car, resulting in the police to shoot.

Different serial numbers

Despite a gun being found in the Proton Waja, no gun residue was found on Abd Jaffar.

There was also conflicting testimony by the police witnesses as to the gun recovered - a Steyr M9 A1 - where one police officer testified that it has a serial number of MOO 2893 but the chemist who examined the gun gave a different serial number of M00 2895.

“Hence, this glaring error, which was never explained, casts suspicion on whether the gun was recovered from the car or whether the gun was placed in the car after the police had shot the deceased,” Justice Hamid Sultan noted.

The judge noted that the courts are mindful of the sacrifice made by the police personnel in maintaining law and order.

“(However) what is reprehensible and needs to be condemned are fake encounters as the facts of the instant case prima facie will show, and the failure of the relevant authorities to discipline such officers and worse still claim self-defence under the Police Act, which has no relevancy to the killing,” he said.

Using the A Kugan case as an indicator, Justice Hamid Sultan said exemplary damages of RM300,000 would be considered sufficient and another RM51,000 in dependency damages.

The court also awarded costs here and in the court below.