A defence witness in the trial of a police corporal charged with causing the death of a 15-year-old teenager told the Sessions Court in Shah Alam today that police may use a firearm under justified circumstances.

Principal assistant director of the federal police CID’s Prosecution and Legal Division, SAC Razali Basri, 54, said this was provided for under Paragraph 4 of the Inspector-General of Police’s Standing Order (IGPSO).

azlan Replying to counsel M Athimulan representing the accused, he said the particular order accorded a police officer protection against court action for using a weapon on reasonable grounds.

Corporal Jenain Subi, 48, had been asked to make his defence against the charge of causing the death of Aminulrasyid Amzah at Jalan Tarian 11/2 on April 26, 2010 between 1.10am and 2am. The teenager died from a shot in the head.

Jenain faces a jail term of up to 30 years and a fine under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code if convicted.

    

Cross-examined by deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar as to the objective of the IGPSO, Razali said it was a guideline for police in their operating procedure.

He agreed with Mohd Dusuki that in the context of Paragraph 3 of the IGPSO, a police personnel needed not necessarily use a firearm if his or the lives of others were not in danger.

Paragraph 3 of the IGPO states that a police officer can be armed with a weapon while on duty at roadblocks, during operations including those by the Narcotics Department, CID, Traffic Branch, General Duties Branch or whichever branch or division where his life and that of others, or property under his guard are at risk.

It further states that he can use the weapon for self-defence and to protect others under threat of death or serious injury.

Questioned by DPP Idham Abd Ghani whether traffic offences like beating the red light and speeding justified shooting by police, Razali said it depended on the situation.

“If the vehicle beats the red light and is heading towards a crowd or zebra crossing, it can be stopped by whatever means, even with shots,” he said.

    

To another question from Idham, Razali said a roadblock was a more reasonable option than shots to stop a car.

The DPP had asked him whether the more reasonable thing to do was to mount a roadblock than to shoot, in the case where a police patrol vehicle had obtained information from another patrol car that a speeding car that had also beaten the red light was going along its route.

Asked by Athimulan whether it was justified for police to fire a shot in order to stop a speeding vehicle, Razali replied it was, “just for the purpose of stopping the car”.

The trial before Judge Latifah Mohd Tahar continues on July 22.

- Bernama