Friday, September 20, 2024

LFL: PM's flippant response on assault case raises more questio








LFL: PM's flippant response on assault case raises more questions


Published: Sep 20, 2024 9:40 PM


Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) accused Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim of fuelling speculations on the alleged assault of a deaf e-hailing driver by a police officer with his response, describing it as flippant.

“Anwar appears to have no answers, but only evasions,” said LFL director Zaid Malek.

He said the prime minister’s response raised more questions over the delay in prosecuting the perpetrator when there is clear evidence in the form of a dashcam recording.

“It is an undeniable fact that the inspector-general of police has stated that the investigation has been completed and the investigation papers have been given to the Attorney-General’s Chambers, first on June 5 and a second time on July 27.

“All the evidence of the assault, which is Ong Ing Keong’s dashcam video, has also already been given to the authorities from the very beginning of the investigation.

“It is because of this that there has been widespread public concern that the VVIP police escort responsible for the assault was not brought to court to face criminal charges.

“It is audacious for the PM to then ask people to abstain from speculating on the matter when the failure to prosecute despite clear evidence is obvious to everyone,” Zaid (above) added.

Earlier today, Anwar told reporters that certain cases are time-consuming and urged the public not to jump to conclusions.

Ong was assaulted on May 28 outside a hotel in Kuala Lumpur, where he was picking up passengers, by a police personnel escorting Johor Regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim.

On Sept 5, the victim and LFL submitted a memorandum and the dashcam recording of the incident to the Prime Minister’s Office asking for an independent commission of inquiry to be established.



E-hailing driver Ong Ing Keong


Zaid said Anwar failed to grasp how the failure to prosecute impacts public confidence in the Malaysian criminal justice system.

“His flippant response has only generated more questions.

“In cases involving draconian laws such as the Sedition Act and the Communications and Multimedia Act, cases are investigated, prosecuted, and sentenced at breakneck speed. Why not in Ong’s case?” he asked.


Discontentment with justice system

Apart from failing to answer why a simple assault case has resulted in no prosecution against the suspect over the past 115 days, Zaid said the prime minister’s response was also contrary to good governance.

“Anwar’s claim that some cases ‘take time’ does not answer the public’s concern. This is not a complicated murder case or a mega-financial scandal that requires so much time,” he added.

Zaid reminded the prime minister that as the head of the government and leader of the executive, he is responsible for ensuring the rule of law is upheld.

“The administration of justice is not done behind closed doors, and as such, the public is entitled to scrutinise the actions of the authorities and the government.

“Public concern on the delay in Ong’s assault case cannot be dismissed as mere impatience; it is the expression of discontentment with the justice system and is about whether or not the law is applied equally, without fear or favour.

“The PM must therefore give clear reasons why there is such a delay in Ong’s case.



Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim


“He must also remember that the issue is not only the delay in the prosecution of the VVIP police escort but also to investigate and explain how the alleged palace representative was allowed by the police to pressure Ong to drop the case.

“Ong deserves to have justice, which he has so long been denied of, and the public is entitled to assurance that the rule of law is upheld in the administration of justice in our country,” he added.


‘Take compensation or lose phone’

Previously, Malaysiakini reported the Malaysian Deaf Advocacy and Wellbeing Organisation (Dawn) as claiming that Ong had inked a total of four police reports over the incident, three of which were prepared by the police.

In a press conference on May 31, Ong said while he was at the police station, he was informed that a representative of the palace was also present.

“The representative told me I have two choices, either take the compensation or proceed with the matter which will result in the confiscation of my phone,” he said.

Because he needed the phone for work and communicating with his family, Ong said he took the compensation offer under duress.

On the same day, Tunku Ismail issued a statement that he does not condone illegal actions and urged the police to conduct a thorough investigation.


No comments:

Post a Comment