Selangor lawyer slams AG for making ‘evidence’ public
UPDATED @ 03:47:21 PM 11-08-2010
SHAH ALAM, Aug 11 — Selangor state-appointed counsel Malik Imtiaz Sarwar took to task today the Attorney-General for exposing details of “new evidence” which had not been tendered in the ongoing inquest into Teoh Beng Hock’s death.
Malik cited the AG’s revelation that a note had allegedly been discovered in Teoh’s bag by the investigating officer two months after his mysterious death.
“The AG himself has allowed evidence to be put before the public without that evidence having surfaced in court,” Malik told The Malaysian Insider.
He said it was regrettable that the AG has chosen to make public the alleged discovery of a note without revealing the circumstances surrounding it.
Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail has been put on the defensive after his office gave notice in Chambers on Monday that they intended to introduce evidence in the form of a note purportedly discovered ten months ago.
Gobind Singh Deo, the lawyer for Teoh’s family, stormed out of a meeting in Chambers on Monday complaining about the new evidence and demanded to know why it had not been introduced earlier.
The AG’s Chambers subsequently disclosed in a public statement more details about the evidence and revealed that it was a note allegedly found in Teoh’s bag two months after his death.
Yesterday, Gani said the public should wait for an explanation when the Coroner’s Court reconvenes.
However speculation is rife that the “evidence” is purportedly a suicide note.
The existence of the “suicide note” had been leaked earlier to pro-Umno blogs and this has contributed further to widespread public disbelief about the integrity of the new evidence the AG plans to tender in court.
“The AG is no position to dictate that the public should wait for this matter to be raised in court before discussion,” Malik said today.
He pointed out the explanation offered by the AG had clouded the matter even further and given rise to more questions.
Malik said the AG’s failure to produce the document at the first available opportunity had seriously undermined the integrity of the inquest.
“A full and transparent account of why and how this came to be must be given.”