On Aug 5, Ho Kooi Sang received a telephone call from the police informing him that his younger brother had died the day before. Little did he know, that this was the beginning of an arduous journey to unravel the 'truth'.

It was a double-shock to the night market trader to learn that his 28-year-old brother Ho Kwai See had died while being held at the Sungai Buloh prison.

Kooi Sang ( left ) was not even aware that the youngest of his six brothers had been in police custody. He was reportedly arrested about a week earlier over a drug related charge.

The 33-year-old father of four then rushed to the Sungai Buloh hospital to identify the body. But here, suspicion overcame his grief when he allegedly saw several large bruise marks across Kwai See's chest.

Unconvinced by the first post-mortem findings that Kwai See had succumbed to a 'perforated ulcer', he arranged for a second post-mortem to be carried out by University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC).

But his attempts to find out the cause of Kwai See's death soon turned into a legalistic nightmare .

Legal tussle

After a misunderstanding with Kooi Sang's lawyer, UMMC forensic pathologist Prof K Nadesan refused to carry out the post-mortem despite agreeing to do so initially.

The medical centre then asked the family to obtain a court order or police permit.

Frustrated, Kooi Sang filed an application with the Kuala Lumpur High Court to order UUMC to perform the post-mortem.

The hearing lasted for nearly a week as lawyers grappled over technicalities. However, on Wednesday - 16 days after Kwai See had died - the court rejected the application.

A dejected Kooi Sang later told reporters that he had reached the end of the rope.

"My son is sick. He was diagnosed with brain tumour two years ago and he is now paralysed. I have been unable to care for him because of my brother's case.

"I wake up every day at 6am and go to bed only after 1am. I have to come to court, take care of my son, and then go to work," he said, holding back tears.

As for his quest to find out the 'truth' about his brother's death, financial constraints dictated that he give up all hope of doing so.

With burial plots costing about RM10,000, the family had no choice but to cremate Kwai See's body.

If he was buried, the family would still have a chance if the High Court's decision was overturned following an appeal as the body can be exhumed and a post-mortem could be done.

What does this mean for Kooi Sang's struggle and for all other cases of suspicious custodial deaths?

Impossible task

Police watch and human rights committee chairperson RN Rajah - who was approached by Kooi Sang for assistance - said without a second post-mortem, the family would face an almost impossible task of proving wrongful death in court.

"At the moment, the family does not even have the first post-mortem report. Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) said he died of ulcer problems. It is unlikely that the final report would say anything else," he said.

Rajah was not even confident that the hospital had attempted to explain the alleged bruise marks found on the deceased.

As an example, he cited another case which the police watch committee was involved in. This concerned the death of S Tharma Rajen , 19, at the Putrajaya hospital after several months in custody under a preventive detention order.

"In Tharma Rajen's ( photo ) case, the findings of the first post-mortem was completely different from that of the second post-mortem. One said he died of pneumonia, while the other said he died of tuberculosis.

"The second post-mortem report also noted down that there were abrasions to his wrists caused by handcuffs," he said.

At the ensuing inquest , Rajah said doctors from the Putrajaya hospital where the youth was warded also made conflicting statements.

"One doctor said he had died of withdrawal symptoms resulting from drug abuse. Another doctor found later that there were no signs that he was a drug abuser."

In short, said Rajah, Kwai See's family would only be able to back up their suspicion if there were medical testimonies that supported their contention.

"An inquest is held to find out the cause of a person's death. We find out why and how he died, then we can consider a lawsuit.

"But in Kwai See's case, how can we fight when we do not have another post-mortem report to say that the first one was not accurate?"

Precedent set

Furthermore, Rajah said the High Court decision could be a license for the police and prison authorities to continue their "brutal acts" against those in their custody.

"This is a clear cut example of how the police are encouraged in their actions. This case sets a precedent. From now on, there will be no justice for the man on the street," he asserted.

In three previous cases where the family of dead detainees have tried to seek answers, their first step was to approach UMMC for a second post-mortem.

But now, the hospital could deny all future requests unless an order from a magistrate or police was produced.

Seeking a magistrate's approval could be complicated, as in Kwai See's case, where there was no magistrate's inquiry into his death.

As for a police permit, it is not inconceivable that families would be reluctant to seek permission from the same people who they suspect are responsible for the death of their loved ones.

With the number of custodial deaths on the rise in this country, Rajah said this is not an encouraging development.

Alarming statistics

Late last year, Deputy Home Minister Chor Chee Heung revealed that 34 people had died while under police detention over a three-year period.

Six persons had died in 2000, 10 in 2001 and 18 during the first nine months of last year.

Adding these figures to other statistics let fall by officials, the police watch committee estimates that on average, one person dies in police custody every two weeks.

Despite this, Chor told Parliament last September that there was no evidence linking the death of several detainees to police brutality.

For the unfortunate families who might be faced with such a predicament in future, their quest for answers would hinge on whether the precedent set by the High Court will be overturned.

As for Kwai See, he is now nothing more than part of the Home Ministry's statistics.