THE Independent Police Complaints of Misconduct Commission Act 2019 (IPCMC) is not a mechanism for making inquiries into custodial deaths. It’s a police misconduct commission.
This would mean any allegations of wrongdoing/misconduct is brought to IPCMC after the custodial death inquiry is completed in accordance to law i.e. the Criminal Procedure Code. Presently, the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission is carrying out the task of IPCMC. By the way, the Pakatan Harapan government’s version of this bill would not cut it.
In addition, the coroner’s court should be strengthened and a coroner’s court act should be ratified. In the meantime, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code should be strictly adhered to.
The Practice Direction of 2019 should also be complied with, and death inquiries should be completed within six months of such cases occurring. There should be an inquest conducted for every custodial death case. This would include cases occurring in immigration detention centres.
Furthermore, there should be independent probes conducted into custodial deaths. For the time being, police investigations of such cases should be done by a special forensics team in the police force in compliance with existing laws. This special unit should be independent of the police station related to the death. Ideally, it should be based in Bukit Aman, headed by an officer whose integrity and independence would not be questioned.
The Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) should look at human rights infringements in such cases after the coroner’s court completes its investigation. The recommendations by Suhakam would be useful to improve the situation in the detention centres, not only for detainees, but also for officers manning such centres.
Moreover, people should stop saying that custodial deaths only affect Indians. It affects all of us Malaysians. This problem can only be eradicated if we see it so. Identifying a problem with any particular race is just that: a problem.
There are a handful of activists and lawyers who do not understand the need to comply with these things that have already been set out in the law. There is no other way to get justice except through the courts. There is no element of politics and discrimination in the course of the law in court for death in custody cases. History has proven that so many court decisions are in favour of the family after going through the proper, due process. Any dissatisfaction with the decision of a court can be taken to a higher court.
As such, the cries for the rule of law used by some of the activists should be remembered in the issue of deaths in custody. For cases of death in custody, according to the principle of the rule of law, an inquest is the only way to find the cause of death and the persons who are supposed to carry responsibility for the death.
Only through an inquest will we be able to see the transparency of the inquiry. We also have the opportunity to dispute and challenge any allegations and evidence presented by the authorities involved custodial deaths. No investigation by any other party is as transparent as the inquest process by the coroner’s court.
Justice is for both sides. As activists and lawyers who adhere to the principle of rule of law, it is inappropriate to be prejudiced and biased before an investigation is conducted.
Everyone should work together to try and achieve zero deaths in custody. – The Vibes, June 7, 2021
Eliminating Deaths And Abuse In Custody Together (Edict) is human rights organisation that provides legal assistance in cases related to custodial deaths and violence
