(Kuala Lumpur, 8th) The Democratic Action Party (DAP) demands that Attorney General Tan Sri Mohamad Dusuki must explain in detail why he considers it inappropriate to initiate criminal prosecution against those involved in the Teoh Beng Hock case, citing 'insufficient evidence' as the reason.
National Chairman Gobind Singh Deo and Secretary-General Loke Siew Fook issued a statement on behalf of the party's central executive committee, stating their support for Teoh Beng Hock's family considering a judicial review to challenge the 'no further action' decision.
'We support this action and urge the Attorney General to reconsider his decision and no longer delay prosecuting those involved in the death of Teoh Beng Hock.'
Following the latest police report on the Teoh Beng Hock case, the Attorney General classified the case as 'no further action' (NFA) on May 21.
The statement mentioned that on May 30, the Attorney General wrote to the legal team of Teoh Beng Hock's family to explain this decision. The letter attempted to show that the investigation results indicated there was insufficient evidence to initiate criminal prosecution.
Since the occurrence of the Teoh Beng Hock incident in 2009, DAP's position of demanding that the culprits involved in Teoh Beng Hock's death be brought to justice remains unchanged. The party formed a legal team and requested an inquest to determine the cause of his death.
'During the process, we confirmed that there were bruises on Teoh Beng Hock's neck.'
On January 5, 2011, the inquest court ruled the case as an 'open verdict.' Due to dissatisfaction with the verdict, a review was requested at the Shah Alam High Court.
'However, our application was dismissed by the High Court, maintaining the verdict of the inquest court. We appealed to the Court of Appeal and won, overturning the rulings of both the inquest and the High Court.'
After considering all evidence, the Court of Appeal ruled that Teoh Beng Hock's death was due to 'the unlawful acts of unknown persons, including officers of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) involved in the arrest and investigation of the deceased.'
'We also assisted and represented the Teoh Beng Hock's family in civil litigation, successfully getting the government and MACC to admit negligence leading to Teoh Beng Hock's death. The family was awarded RM600,000 in compensation and RM60,000 in costs.'
The rulings from the Court of Appeal and civil litigation provide a basis for further police investigation and the identification of those involved in Teoh Beng Hock's death.
While it is the police's task to investigate this case and identify those responsible, the Attorney General has the discretion to decide the next steps based on investigation results.
According to the Federal Constitution, only the Attorney General has the discretion to decide whether to prosecute. In light of the rulings made by the Court of Appeal and High Court in civil litigation, the Attorney General must explain why he did not exercise this power in this case.
National Chairman Gobind Singh Deo and Secretary-General Loke Siew Fook issued a statement on behalf of the party's central executive committee, stating their support for Teoh Beng Hock's family considering a judicial review to challenge the 'no further action' decision.
'We support this action and urge the Attorney General to reconsider his decision and no longer delay prosecuting those involved in the death of Teoh Beng Hock.'
Following the latest police report on the Teoh Beng Hock case, the Attorney General classified the case as 'no further action' (NFA) on May 21.
The statement mentioned that on May 30, the Attorney General wrote to the legal team of Teoh Beng Hock's family to explain this decision. The letter attempted to show that the investigation results indicated there was insufficient evidence to initiate criminal prosecution.
Since the occurrence of the Teoh Beng Hock incident in 2009, DAP's position of demanding that the culprits involved in Teoh Beng Hock's death be brought to justice remains unchanged. The party formed a legal team and requested an inquest to determine the cause of his death.
'During the process, we confirmed that there were bruises on Teoh Beng Hock's neck.'
On January 5, 2011, the inquest court ruled the case as an 'open verdict.' Due to dissatisfaction with the verdict, a review was requested at the Shah Alam High Court.
'However, our application was dismissed by the High Court, maintaining the verdict of the inquest court. We appealed to the Court of Appeal and won, overturning the rulings of both the inquest and the High Court.'
After considering all evidence, the Court of Appeal ruled that Teoh Beng Hock's death was due to 'the unlawful acts of unknown persons, including officers of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) involved in the arrest and investigation of the deceased.'
'We also assisted and represented the Teoh Beng Hock's family in civil litigation, successfully getting the government and MACC to admit negligence leading to Teoh Beng Hock's death. The family was awarded RM600,000 in compensation and RM60,000 in costs.'
The rulings from the Court of Appeal and civil litigation provide a basis for further police investigation and the identification of those involved in Teoh Beng Hock's death.
While it is the police's task to investigate this case and identify those responsible, the Attorney General has the discretion to decide the next steps based on investigation results.
According to the Federal Constitution, only the Attorney General has the discretion to decide whether to prosecute. In light of the rulings made by the Court of Appeal and High Court in civil litigation, the Attorney General must explain why he did not exercise this power in this case.