Former police chief Norian Mai is expected to testify in the Kuala Lumpur High Court on March 26, as a defendant in a civil suit filed by five former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainees.

The plaintiffs, Hishamuddin Rais, Badrulamin Baharom, Badaruddin Ismail, Saari Sungib, and Chua Tian Chang (also known as Tian Chua), have alleged that he had defamed them in April 2001.

NONE This was when Norian (left) had reportedly said that they were being detained under the ISA for attempting to topple the government by force.

Yesterday, retired police Special Branch (SB) interrogation officer Mohd Shahir Safrin produced a certificate authorising him to reveal certain paragraphs of a heavily redacted document marked ‘secret’ .

It was signed by then SB director Mohd Yusof Abdul Rahaman and dated Aug 23, 2006.

During examination-in-chief by senior federal counsel (SFC) Nor Mastura Ayob, he read out two paragraphs of Badrulamin’s statements under interrogation that were not listed in the certificate, but were also not redacted.

The paragraphs were examples of Badrulamin’s speeches, which Mohd Shahir described as, “political speeches that are seditious and sow hatred of the government”.

When the plaintiffs’ lawyer Ho Kok Yew pointed out the error,  Justice Lau Bee Lan told the defendants’ lawyers to check on the discrepancy. SFC Iznan Isyak left the courtroom to do so, while Mastura continued questioning the witness.

Iznan then told the court that he had contacted the police headquarters, and they wanted the certificate and interrogation records back.

“It is possible that the document can be disclosed, but there may be an error in the certificate of authority,” he said.

Ho objected, saying that the matter cannot be brushed off as a typographical error because the certificate is the basis for release of the document as well as redaction. The plaintiffs had previously demanded that the document be published in full, and disputed its admissibility.

The lawyers have agreed to decide out-of court, before the hearing resumes on Monday, as to whether to call Mohd Yusof. Ho said he would have to consult this clients.

NONE Mohd Shahir told the court that did not threaten Badrulamin (left) , who he and his team interrogated shortly after he was detained.

He also said he and his team did not interfere when Badrulamin’s family and the Human Rights Commission paid visits, but that he had observed the family visit from outside the room.

Both visits were handled by officers at the Police Remand Centre, he said.

Badrulamin, a religious scholar, had testified that his interrogators had used the family visit to harass him, for example, by asking whether he had said “negative things” to his wife.

He told the court on March 1 that he eventually had to forgo family visits to prevent harassment.

‘Other laws can be applied’

Cross-examined by Ho, Mohd Shahir was quizzed on laws on public order and about public assemblies.

He said that “actions that could threaten public order and national security”, could result in detention under ISA, but agreed that detention under ISA is not the only option other laws can be applied.

“But it is beyond your knowledge as to why Badrulamin was detained under the ISA rather than being charged under the Penal Code. (Do you) agree?” asked Ho, to which Mohd Shahir responded in the affirmative.

isa unknowns Re-examined by Izyan, he said that, in his 30 years with the SB, he had no experience with laws other than the ISA.

The five plaintiffs, all reformasi activists, had been detained for allegedly disrupting public order, particularly in connection to the Black 14 rally scheduled for April 14, 2001. They were held for over two years, except for Badaruddin who had been held for 41 days.

The suit seeks an unspecified sum as damages, as well as a declaration that provisions under the ISA that allow for detention without trial are unconstitutional.

Apart from Norian, the other defendants are the government and then home minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.