Why block family’s bid to obtain Pastor Koh’s classified report, lawyer asks

 

Susanna Liew said Pastor Raymond Koh’s family has a right to know the special task force’s findings on his disappearance.

KUALA LUMPUR: 

Pastor Raymond Koh’s family is questioning the government’s 

conflicting

 stance in their lawsuit compared to a similar case involving missing activist Amri Che Mat.

Lawyer Jerald Gomez, representing the family, told the High Court here today the police and government opposed their bid to obtain a classified report on Koh’s disappearance for its ongoing civil lawsuit.

He pointed out that in Amri’s case, the government abandoned its appeal from a decision made by another High Court in which the judge ordered Putrajaya to release the classified report to the activist’s wife, Norhayati Ariffin.

An inquiry by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) had concluded that Amri and Koh were victims of enforced disappearances carried out by the state, specifically by the Special Branch. In response, the home ministry established a special task force to investigate the commission’s findings.

Neither the home ministry nor the task force has publicly released the report despite repeated calls to do so by various parties, including by Suhakam and several other NGOs. The report has been classified as a government secret.

Part of the classified report was tendered as evidence in Norhayati’s lawsuit against the police and government over the conduct of the authorities’ investigations into Amri’s disappearance.

There is no reason for the government to discriminate against (Koh’s wife) Susanna Liew in her discovery application. National security is not considered threatened since parts of the contents have been disclosed to Norhayati,

 Gomez said.

Liew contended that the report was relevant to her lawsuit as Koh’s family had a right to know the special task force’s findings on his disappearance.

However, senior federal counsel Nurul Farhana Khalid, appearing for the police and the government, told the court the task force report is not relevant to Liew’s lawsuit. She also said the task force report’s findings were merely 

recommendations

, and the court was not bound by them.

They filed this suit claiming the defendants (police) were involved in the pastor’s kidnapping and also for misfeasance. These allegations are to be proven by the plaintiff (Liew) by tendering evidence in the trial,

 Farhana added.

Question on delay in filing discovery application

Trial judge Justice Su Tiang Joo then asked Liew’s legal team why the discovery application was only filed in May, almost a year after the trial started.

Gomez told the court that since Liew was on the witness stand for more than six months, the lawyers were not in a position to communicate with her on matters related to the case.

We filed this application as soon as she completed her testimony,

 he said.

Su then fixed Aug 15 to hand down his decision on Liew’s application for disclosure of the task force’s report.

In 2020, Liew filed a lawsuit against the police, the inspector-general of police and a number of former high-ranking police officers over Koh’s disappearance.

She is seeking damages, as well as for the authorities to be held liable for his unlawful abduction, and for misfeasance in public office.

The defendants include former IGPs Khalid Abu Bakar and Fuzi Harun, as well as the former principal assistant director of the Special Branch’s social extremism division, Awaludin Jadid. - FMT