Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances (CAGED) said an inquiry by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) noticed striking similarities in the case with the disappearance of Pastor Raymond Koh, highlighting that a gold Toyota Vios was common in both abductions.
It said the registration number of the car was obtained by a witness in Perlis, and police attempted but failed to conceal the owner’s name.
The questions asked by CAGED are:
- Why did investigating officer (IO) Khor Yi Shuen in Amri’s case initially say that he did not know who owned the car despite a Road Transport Department (JPJ) search confirming the witness’ claim?
- Why did the IO not show the witness a photo of the car owner so that he might be identified?
- Why did the IO only reveal that former policeman Saiful Bahari Abdul Aziz was the owner of the car after being compelled to do so?
- Why did the IO originally claim that he had no knowledge of Saiful’s employment?
- Why did the IO later say Saiful was an “administrative assistant”, yet his supervisor at the Special Branch indicated after questioning that Saiful was a general handyman?
- Why did the supervisor give Saiful an extra 54 days of leave, much more than what he was entitled to?
“Many more troubling things emerged during the Suhakam investigation,” CAGED said in a statement today.
“Yet the government and the opposition think that the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) recommended by the Dzaiddin Commission in 2005 should not be formed.
“We owe it to upstanding police officers to clean up the force. Pride in the uniform must be restored.”
Amri’s disappearance on Nov 24, 2016, drew widespread speculation when it was first reported.
A Suhakam public inquiry in 2019 concluded that he and Koh were victims of enforced disappearance carried out by the state, namely the Special Branch.