Rights group Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram), responding to criticism over the limits of Suhakam’s investigative powers, said the inquiries should not been seen as mutually exclusive from the judicial process, and should instead be used as further proof to ensure those responsible are held accountable.
“We are of the opinion that, if Suhakam’s findings are consistent with what the families are claiming, then they should be used as an additional proof or evidence to expose the violations and strengthen the legal challenges against the police,” it said.
“We owe it to the victims of police misconduct to explore and use every available mechanism to shine a light on the human rights violations experienced and seek justice when we can.”
It said the pursuit of justice should not be limited to a few institutions and figures, and must involve a collective effort with a variety of groups.
Suaram lamented the limits that have been placed on Suhakam’s powers by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999, which it says has long “hobbled” the institution.
One example that has been openly debated over the last week is Section 12(2), which stops the commission from inquiring into any complaint once it is before a judicial inquiry, which Suaram said had been the reason for a number of prior investigations being dropped.
“Civil societies have always addressed the inadequacies of the Act and pushed Suhakam to address human rights violations in a broader sense and push the boundaries within its restricted mandate and powers.”
Recently, the non-governmental organisation Eliminating Deaths and Abuse in Custody Together (EDICT) had told Suhakam to stop its inquiries into custodial deaths after it said G Jestus Kevin had died as a result of blunt force trauma.
EDICT claimed that inquiries into custodial death did not come under Suhakam’s purview.
However, Suhakam commissioner Mah Weng Kwai insisted that they have the power to investigate any allegation that comes to their attention as long as the matter is not in court, with Suhakam’s investigation into the Jestus case concluding in April, before the matter went to court.