A former policeman told the Kuala Lumpur High Court today that he had nothing to do with former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee Abdul Malek Hussin apart from witnessing his release from detention.

Retired Superintendent S Philip was testifying at the latter's RM30 million civil suit hearing. Abdul Malek filed the suit against the government, former Inspector-General of Police Rahim Noor and Special Branch officer Borhan Daud for the alleged abuses he endured under detention from September to October 1998.

Contrary to Abdul Malek's claims, Philip maintained that he was never present during visits by the former's family members at the Bukit Aman federal police headquarters where he was held.

"As far as I can remember, sincerely and truly, I was present (only) on the day of his release. I am sorry, I don't remember (about the family visits)," he said when cross-examined by counsel R Sivarasa ( photo, left).

"If the counsel still insists that I was present, then he can officially check with the relevant authorities. There has been a lapse of eight years," he added.

Abdul Malek has insisted in his testimony in court that Philip, on the day of his release, had tried to persuade him against exposing his 57-day ordeal under detention.

The former detainee, who was arrested in connection with the demonstrations that erupted after the sacking of ex-deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim, claimed that he suffered physical and psychological trauma.

Abdul Malek claimed that he was forced to strip naked and drenched with water in an air-conditioned room, beaten more than 60 times to unconsciousness, sexually harassed and abused, forced to drink urine and threatened with an HIV/Aids virus injection.

Evading questions

Philip's insistence that his direct contact with Abdul Malek was limited to the day of his release led to similar evasions regarding his contacts with other ISA detainees in Bukit Aman.

"Unless there is a direction, it is not often (that I meet ISA detainees). Only if there is an instruction," said the former Special Branch officer.

Philip also refused to suggest an average of the number of times he met ISA detainees within a given period of time, as "there is no specific time."

"I cannot give you an exact number of visits that I have made to ISA detainees," he said.

This line of answering later landed Philip in a spot when he failed to reconcile one of his duties, which included ensuring the 'safety and security' of a certain Police Remand Centre (PRC) in Kuala Lumpur, with his apparent 'detachment' from detainees.

Philip said as the PRC (whose location was kept under wraps) was under his portfolio, he was responsible for ensuring that the prison guards and officers were doing their duties, and that the detainees were well and safe in their cells.

Sivarasa: Do you raise questions about the welfare and conditions of the detainees?

Philip: I go there solely for the security and safety of the place. In the course of my visits, I normally or generally ask how the detainees are doing, are they fine, how are they, and so forth.

Sivarasa: Do you ask the sentries or detainees themselves?

Philip: I ask the prison guards.

Sivarasa: If you are concerned with or about the conditions of the detainees, why did you not ask the detainees directly?

Philip: During the visits, the detainees are asleep.

Sivarasa: Would you agree that all you have to do is knock on the door and wake the detainees up and ask the same question?

Philip: They are fast asleep. I would not disturb them.

The hearing resumes on Dec 1.