Saturday, June 01, 2024

Kepong MP urges IGP to probe how assault investigation was carried out








Kepong MP urges IGP to probe how assault investigation was carried out

Published: Jun 1, 2024


Kepong MP Lim Lim Eng has urged Inspector-General of Police Razarudin Husain to conduct an in-depth investigation into how the police handled the probe into the alleged assault of a person with disabilities.

In a statement today following the allegations made by victim Ong Ing Keong in a press conference yesterday, Lim urged the police to conduct an in-depth investigation covering three main aspects.

“First, the way in which the investigating officer handled Ong.

“Did they carry out their duties with professionalism and empathy, or was there an element of abuse of power or neglect of responsibility?

“Second, who was responsible for drafting the contents of the second police report for Ong? Was the report made with his willingness and honesty or was there another party that influenced or changed the content of the report?” asked Lim.

“Third, did Ong receive a ‘compensation payment’ of RM800 and from whom was the payment received? Is this payment meant to silence Ong?

“Apart from answering the accusations made by Ong, the police also need to explain under what circumstances they can confiscate someone’s mobile phone,” he added.



He questioned if such an action was in line with legal procedures and what were the valid reasons used to confiscate the mobile phone.

“This explanation is important to ensure transparency and fairness in every action taken by the authorities.

“With thorough investigations and clear explanations, we can ensure that the people’s rights are protected and justice is upheld without any compromise,” he added.


Four reports, three prepared by cops

This came after Malaysian Deaf Advocacy and Wellbeing Organisation (Dawn) secretary-general Anthony Chong said that Ong had inked a total of four reports over his alleged assault but had only personally contributed to one of the reports, which is the first he had lodged after the incident on May 28.

“There were four reports (in total). The first report - he told the police (about the incident) and signed,” Chong (above, right) told Malaysiakini after checking with Ong.

“Then in the next three reports, he did not contribute anything. The police got the reports ready and asked him to read and then he signed,” he added.

On Wednesday, Kuala Lumpur police chief Rusdi Mohd Isa said the second report was lodged at 9.45pm on May 28. It stated that Ong did not wish to pursue the matter further as it had been resolved.

Hours earlier, Bukit Aman CID director Mohd Shuhaily Mohd Zain told a press conference that the alleged victim lodged a report at 1pm on May 28 and the case is being investigated under Section 323 of the Penal Code.


Kuala Lumpur police chief Rusdi Mohd Isa


Rusdi's statement led to various quarters calling for the investigation to continue as there is no settlement in a criminal case. He later clarified that the case is still being investigated.

“It is not within our power (to close the case), we have to refer to the deputy public prosecutor’s office first,” he told Malaysiakini.


Reports likely not understood

Asked if Ong fully comprehended the contents of the three additional reports, Chong said that he doubted it.

“From what I understand, he does not fully understand what had been written in the reports.

“He only read words about himself - like time, day, work, what happened. He can recognise (these) words and he agreed. However, he cannot make sense of full sentences,” he added.

Previously, it was reported that the 46-year-old alleged victim had filed a police report claiming that the assault took place when an escort of Johor regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim had instructed him to move his vehicle.

Ong was said to be waiting for passengers who booked his services at the time.


2 comments:

  1. Gangsters in uniform paid by taxpayers
    Racist bastards

    ReplyDelete
  2. Looks like some of the policemen became directly interfering in the case instead only investigating.

    ReplyDelete