Summary

  • Lawyer Ramkarpal Singh urges the AGC to explain its decision to classify police investigations into Teoh Beng Hock's death as no further action.

  • Ramkarpal questions whether the decision was made to avoid contempt of court proceedings by meeting a court-mandated deadline.


A legal representative for Teoh Beng Hock’s family has questioned the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ (AGC) decision to classify investigations into his death as “no further action” (NFA). 

Lawyer Ramkarpal Singh highlighted that the AGC had failed to directly inform the family of its decision, with the matter instead being relayed by the police.

“It is very unusual (as) the AGC’s decision to classify the case as NFA was conveyed by a third party and not the AGC itself. 

“Why did the attorney-general himself not come up with an official letter, either to the family’s lawyer or to the family themselves, confirming his decision?” Ramkarpal (above, right) questioned during a press conference at the Karpal Singh & Co law firm in Petaling Jaya. 

On May 20, the Criminal Investigation Department had written to Ramkarpal to inform him of the AGC’s decision, which police said was determined on May 19.

In the letter, police also stated that their investigations had been conducted under Section 342 of the Penal Code relating to unlawful confinement. 

Ramkarpal also raised suspicions on the timing of the AGC’s NFA decision, noting that it was made just two days before the deadline set by the Kuala Lumpur High Court, which ordered the police to complete investigations into Teoh’s death.

‘Disclose reasons why’

“I presume (the NFA) decision is what they mean by ‘completion’ (of investigations into Teoh's death),” remarked Ramkarpal, who is also DAP’s Bukit Gelugor MP.

“The public and Teoh’s family have a right to know whether the AGC’s decision to NFA the case was made to avoid potential legal repercussions, including contempt proceedings, over failure to comply with the High Court order,” he added.

Teoh Beng Hock

On Nov 21 last year, the High Court ordered the police to complete its investigation into Teoh’s death within six months.

This came after appeals court judge Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh allowed a judicial review application by Teoh’s parents.

Urging the AGC to clarify the reasonings behind its decision to NFA the probe, Ramkarpal said the family is waiting on such details first before considering its next step.


READ MORE | Will Teoh Beng Hock's case find closure under Harapan rule?


“The AGC’s explanation could be subject to further legal challenge.

“We know that the AGC has no duty to disclose their reasoning, but in this case I urge the attorney-general to do so, considering how this matter has been ongoing since 2019... suspicions will remain until the AGC clears the air,” he added.

‘Why no homicide probe?’

The lawyer also said authorities should address queries by Teoh’s family on why the investigation was carried out under Section 342 instead of laws relating to homicide or culpable homicide.

Ramkarpal pointed out that in 2014, the Court of Appeal had ruled that Teoh’s death was caused or accelerated by unlawful acts, including those of MACC officers.

In 2009, Teoh, an aide to then-Seri Kembangan assemblyperson Ean Yong Hian Wah, was found dead after overnight questioning at Selangor MACC, which was then headquartered at Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam.


READ MORE | Five unsolved mysteries about Teoh Beng Hock’s death


In February this year, police said they would utilise 3D crime scene reconstruction technology to assist in their renewed investigation.

However, later that month, the family lamented how the police were repeatedly questioning them instead of the MACC officers implicated in Teoh’s death.

In April, Bukit Aman Criminal Investigation Department director Shuhaily Zain accused the family of being uncooperative, a charge they have denied.

Suhaily also said that the investigations were hampered by limitations, including how several witnesses were unable to be reinterviewed while others refused to come forward.