Ainum should clarify the fog of public queries surrounding the various aspects of  the Seremban murder case before the start of the coroner’s inquest tomorrow to enhance public confidence in the administration of justice

(Petaling Jaya, Sunday): Tomorrow, the inquest into the death of a car accessories shop worker, Seow Nan Keong, 27, who was allegedly shot dead by a businessman in Seremban on January 14, will begin  at the Seremban Magistrates’ Court and five days have been set aside for the hearing.

Before the start of the inquest, the Attorney-General Datuk Ainum Mohd Saaid should clear the fog of public queries behind the double set of extraordinary circumstances surrounding the Seremban murder case, namely:
 

• the controversial granting of bail to the  prime suspect in the Seremban murder case when such cases are non-bailable offences;
• the controversial order of the Attorney-General for an inquest when police investigations are still on-going.

On Thursday, the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Norian Mai confirmed the earlier statement by the Negri Sembilan Chief Police Officer Datuk Amiruddin Embi that the release of the murder suspect on police bail, and the two subsequent renewals, were on the instruction of the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

If Norian Mai and Amiruddin are right, then it is not the police but the Attorney-General’s Chambers which  must be responsible to clarify  the controversial granting of bail to the prime murder suspect, and give answers to numerous questions surrounding the  various aspects of the Seremban murder case, including:
 

• Who was responsible for the instruction to the police to grant and renew police bail - whether Ainum herself or the Head of the Prosecution Division in the AG’s Chambers, Dato’ Abdul Gani Patail.
• Whether it is true that before the first granting of police bail, the police had completed its investigations and submitted its recommendation to the Attorney-General’s Chambers for the prosecution of the suspect for murder; and if so, the reasons for the decision of the  Attorney-General’s  Chambers in rejecting the recommendation.
• Whether Ainum or Abdul Gani would submit to the principle of public accountability to explain the circumstances for the granting and renewal of the controversial bail.
• Whether Ainum or Gani would appear before the coroner’s inquest in Seremban to explain the circumstances for the controversial granting of bail.

The directive by the Attorney-General in her capacity as Public Prosecutor to order an inquest to be held into Seow’s death under section 339 of the Criminal Procedure Code when police investigations are still ongoing, together with the controversial granting of bail,  must have made this case one of the most extraordinary criminal  cases in the history of the country.

In his statement on Thursday, Norian Mai said that based on the facts of the case and initial questioning, the suspect was investigated for murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code and that the case was never reclassified even after further investigation and after expert testimony was recorded.

As this is not a case of “cause of death unknown” but a case of murder, which is also the official position of the Police, is it proper to have a coroner’s inquest to supersede or override ongoing police investigations?

Or has the Attorney-General come to conclusion that there is not sufficient evidence from police investigations to sustain a murder prosecution?

In the interests of public confidence in the administration of justice, Ainum should clarify the fog of public queries about the Seremban murder case before the coroner’s inquest begins its proceedings tomorrow.

(25/2/2001)