In a statement, Rajesh Nagarajan and Sachpreetraj Singh said the AGC’s constitutional duty is to uphold the rule of law without fear or favour, not to discourage public discussion when state power is implicated in the loss of life.

They stressed that the AGC’s statement was particularly untenable as the case was initially investigated under Section 307 of the Penal Code for attempted murder, which the lawyers said was illogical given that three men had died.

The lawyers said that it was only after sustained public pressure, widespread debate, and justified outrage that the investigation was reclassified as a murder case under Section 302.

“Had the public remained silent, the Section 307 fiction would have persisted. To now admonish the public against ‘speculation’ is therefore deeply disingenuous,” they said.

“Public scrutiny did not obstruct justice; it corrected an obvious and serious misclassification.

“The repeated refrain that the public should not speculate… suggests that citizen engagement is a nuisance rather than a safeguard.

“Justice is not threatened by public debate. It is threatened when institutions become defensive, opaque, and hostile to the very scrutiny that forced them to get the law right.”

They said the AGC’s warning is all the more irrational because the issue of sub judice does not come into play as there are no ongoing court proceedings, trials, or judicial orders restricting discussion on the probe.

Rajesh and Sachpreetraj said that instead of admonishing the public, the AGC should acknowledge that the initial Section 307 classification was “plainly unsustainable”.

They also called on the AGC to recognise that public discourse played a decisive role in restoring legal coherence in the case, and they should also reaffirm that no institution – including the police – is insulated from scrutiny.

The three men were shot dead by Melaka police on Nov 24, who claimed that they were serial robbers who had attacked an officer with a parang. State police initially investigated the incident for attempted murder.

However, Rajesh and Sachpreetraj said an audio recording and forensic evidence suggested that M Puspanathan, 21, T Poovaneswaran, 24, and G Logeswaran, 29, were killed “execution-style”.

On Tuesday, the AGC said it had ordered the police to reclassify the investigation into the shooting as murder.