'No justice after 16 years': Indira support group calls out police, Suhakam

Summary

• The Indira Gandhi Action Team (Ingat) has accused the police and Suhakam of failing to enforce a Federal Court order to locate Indira’s abducted daughter, Prasana Diksa.

• Ingat criticised the police for years of repetitive affidavits with no real investigation, and Suhakam for six years of inaction despite agreeing to hold an inquiry.

• The group is urging the formation of a police special task force, a Suhakam report to Parliament, and government action against officers responsible.

A support group for M Indira Gandhi has urged the police and Suhakam to take immediate action to locate her Muslim convert former husband, Riduan Abdullah, and their abducted daughter, Prasana Diksa.

In a statement, the Indira Gandhi Action Team (Ingat) chairperson, Arun Dorasamy, slammed both the police and Suhakam, accusing them of neglect and nonfeasance.

He urged the police to immediately form a special task force to enforce the Federal Court’s order and called on Suhakam to submit a special report to Parliament acknowledging its failure to monitor the case.

The group also urged the government to take disciplinary action against officers who failed to carry out the court’s directive, and to have the parliamentary Human Rights Select Committee investigate broader institutional lapses in enforcing judicial rulings.

“Between 2021 and 2025, the police filed more than 18 affidavits in the High Court, all containing nearly identical paragraphs, only the dates and signatures changed.

“There is no evidence of field investigation, no cross-agency cooperation with the Immigration Department, the National Registration Department, the Road Transport Department, Bank Negara, or the International Criminal Police Organization.

“They claimed that continuous efforts are being made, but such statements have now become an insult to the law itself,” Arun said in the statement.

He said that after an official complaint was filed, Suhakam had agreed to conduct an independent public inquiry to probe into the failures to enforce the Federal Court’s order.

“Yet after six years, no inquiry has been conducted, no report has been issued, and there has been no communication with the complainant,” Arun lamented.

Suhakam’s inaction

In a meeting with Suhakam this morning, Indira and Ingat’s legal team submitted an official letter detailing the failures of enforcement agencies and Suhakam’s role.

Arun claimed that in the meeting, Suhakam had apologised for its shortcomings in providing updates concerning the case, and stated that no inquiry had been conducted to date, as the organisation was bound by Section 12(3) of the Suhakam Act 1999.

The statute prohibits the commission from initiating an inquiry into any matter that is still before the courts or has already been decided by the courts.

However, Arun claimed that Suhakam pledged to take administrative action to push the relevant agencies, including the police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers, to act accordingly.

“We respect Suhakam’s position as the national human rights body, but we are disappointed by its inaction and the six-year delay without even a single notification letter.

“Suhakam cannot simply hide behind Section 12(3) - its moral duty and humanitarian mandate go far beyond technical excuses.

“If Suhakam could show courage in the cases of Pastor Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat, why not in the case of a mother who has been searching for her missing child for 16 years?” Arun questioned.

The support group also claimed that the continued inaction is a blatant violation of several laws, including Articles 5(1) and 8(1) of the Federal Constitution, and Sections 20, 21, and 53 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Child Act 2001.

No duty of care owed to Indira

On Aug 11 this year, the Court of Appeal heard that the police do not owe Indira a duty of care in the case involving the search for Riduan and Prasana.

Senior federal counsel Nur Ezdiani Roleb told the panel of judges, led by Zaini Mazlan, that the police’s duty of care is only applicable to those within their custody.

A duty of care refers to a legal or moral obligation to avoid causing harm to others.

Indra filed an RM100 million suit in 2020, in which she named former inspector-general of police (IGP) Abdul Hamid Bador, the police, the Home Ministry, and the government as defendants, after receiving no news about her daughter’s whereabouts.

She claimed that Hamid, during his tenure as the IGP, as well as the police, had committed the tort of nonfeasance, and alleged that he intentionally neglected to carry out their duties in locating his ex-husband and daughter.

In her statement of claim, she said her daughter’s abduction had caused her anxiety from constantly worrying for the 17-year-old’s safety and well-being.

Indira also sought RM100 million in general, exemplary and aggravated damages against all the named defendants.

However, the High Court dismissed her suit after finding that Hamid and the police had exercised their duties in executing the Federal Court’s mandamus order.

No strong obstacle for cops to locate Indira's child: ex-CJ

Cops are still looking for Indira's daughter, says deputy home minister

COMMENT | Indira confronts a state that enables kidnapping

Indira fails in suit to arrest Muslim convert ex-husband, recover daughter

Cops 'late' to act on Indira's ex-husband's arrest order: Former IGP

Govt, police ordered to pay RM14k cost to Indira