Salim Bashir said investigations could be conducted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, causing death by negligence, or voluntarily causing grievous hurt.
“The Court of Appeal in 2014 found that Teoh’s death was accelerated by the ‘unlawful acts of persons unknown’ and that the AG could direct the police to conduct further investigations,” he told FMT.
He said there is no limitation period within which charges must be brought against a suspect. However, the prosecution must ensure that it is able to call the necessary witnesses and present the required evidence in court to support the charge, he added.
Salim was speaking to FMT after two senior DAP leaders called for AG Dusuki Mokhtar to explain in detail why he thinks there is insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone for criminal offences which may have resulted in Teoh’s death.
Speaking on behalf of the party’s central committee, its national chairman Gobind Singh Deo and secretary-general Loke Siew Fook called for the AG to review his decision and push ahead with charges against those responsible without further delay.
FMT has contacted Dusuki, who is also the public prosecutor, for his response.
Salim, a former Malaysian Bar president, said the AG under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution and Section 376 of the Criminal Procedure Code had the discretion whether to prosecute a suspect, and which provision of the law to utilise.
Last week, lawyer-activist M Visvanathan told a gathering in solidarity with Teoh’s family that three doctors had during an inquiry said that the deceased had injuries to his neck, which occurred before he fell from the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam, Selangor.
“These injuries would have been capable of making Teoh immobile or unconscious,” he said when contacted, adding that a judge in the Court of Appeal bench stated that there was no necessity to “engage Sherlock Holmes to investigate because the circumstances are so credible”.
Visvanathan said it was absurd for police to confine their recent investigation to wrongful confinement under Section 342 of the Penal Code as Teoh had been detained by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) for lawful investigations.
Lawyer Rafique Rashid Ali called for the AG to issue a press conference instead of a letter to Teoh’s family explaining why he had classified the case as requiring no further action (NFA).
“As the guardian of public interest, the AG should be transparent and accountable as this is a high-profile public interest case, and there needs to be closure to the family’s predicament,” he said.
Rafique said that in October 1994, then AG Mohtar Abdullah announced through the media that he was not pressing charges against an influential political leader as he had no prima facie evidence to pursue a charge of raping an underaged girl.
However, Mohtar said he was not exonerating the suspect of the alleged offence.
He said another AG, Apandi Ali, had in January 2016 told the media that then prime minister Najib Razak had been cleared of any criminal wrongdoing in the RM2.6 billion channelled into Najib’s bank accounts and finance ministry-owned firm SRC International Sdn Bhd.
Apandi said there was “insufficient evidence” to implicate Najib and ordered MACC to close its three investigation papers.
However, in 2018, Najib was charged with corruption in the SRC International and 1MDB case.
Teoh died on July 16, 2009 after being questioned for hours by MACC officers. An inquest was held and the coroner returned an open verdict.
However, the Court of Appeal ruled that Teoh’s death was caused by “one or more persons unknown”, including MACC officers.
In 2019, police launched an investigation under Section 342 of the Penal Code for wrongful confinement.
In November last year, the High Court ordered the police to complete its long-delayed investigations within six months.
Before 2018, two special investigation teams were set up – one in 2011 and the other in 2015 – to look into Teoh’s death. Both cases were classified as NFA by the public prosecutor.