A witness at the hearing of a RM30 million suit by an ex-Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee against the Malaysian government told the Kuala Lumpur High Court today that the plaintiff was involved in activities against national security and peace.

The fourth witness, police officer Abdul Hamid Jaafar who has been attached to the special branch for 30 years said in his testimony that he was involved in the operation on Sept 25, 1998 in arresting reformasi activist Abdul Malek Hussin under the ISA.

Abdul Hamid told the court that he had attended a briefing prior to the arrest given by Borhan Daud, who was one of the respondents named in the suit, together with the then inspector general of police and the Malaysian government.

The witness said that those attending the briefing was informed that Malek was involved in "demonstrations linked to the reformasi movement which could jeopardise national security and peace then".

The arrest led to Malek's 57-day detention under the ISA.

A number of activists and opposition leaders who took to the streets were detained under the ISA - which allows for detention without trial - during the height of reformasi, sparked by the sacking of former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim.

Malek was the first among them to file an unprecedented civil suit in 1999 to challenge 17 forms of torture he allegedly sustained during the detention. He is seeking RM30 million in damages.

He had told the court in previous hearings that he was stripped naked in an air-conditioned room, blindfolded during interrogation, physically assaulted up to 60 times, beaten until he was unconscious, forced to drink urine and threatened to be injected with the HIV/ Aids virus.

He also testified earlier that he witnessed former IGP Abdul Rahim Noor punching him at his chin in the interrogation room when his blindfold accidentally dropped.

'Substantial differences'

Meanwhile, the witness's contradictory statements were disputed in the court this afternoon.

During cross-examination, counsel R Sivarasa attempted to establish that Abdul Hamid has given inconsistent statements during his testimony in court today as opposed to his previous statement made before a commissioner of oath.

In the witness statement, Abdul Hamid had stated that he led Malek to a room after the latter was brought back to the Kuala Lumpur city police contingent headquarters. However in his testimony today, the witness said he saw Malek with other police officers waiting in the room.

At this juncture, DPP Isnan Ishak objected on the ground that the said statement referred by the counsel was not filed in court. Instead, the counsel was requested to base his questioning on the new witness statement which has been filed.

Isnan stressed that the counsel had not objected to the new statement and neither did he inform the court that he would make references to the previous statement.

However, Sivarasa argued that there is no such requirement under Section 145 of the Evidence Act for him to inform the court in the cross-examination to prove the witness's statements were contradictory.

After a 30-minute argument, Justice Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus ruled the DPP's objection as irrelevant and the witness also admitted that he had contradicted his earlier written statement.

The assisting DPP Morhaji Selamat asked that his witness be given the opportunity to explain his contradictory statements but the judge advised the DPP to do this at the re-examination stage.

The hearing was then adjourned and the judge fixed April 8 for the next hearing in order to allow Sivarasa to continue his cross-examination.

The counsel had earlier claimed that there were "substantial differences" between Abdul Hamid's testimony and his written witness statement.