Connect with us

Law & Order

“Quite unusual” for police officer not wanting to “re-victimise” the Liew family: Sylvia Lim

Published

on

It is quite unusual that the police officer involved in the investigation of the Parti Liyani case did not want to re-victimise the Liew family, said the Worker’s Party (WP) Member of Parliament (MP) for Aljunied GRC Sylvia Lim in Parliament on Wednesday (4 Nov).

Ms Lim noted that during the trial, the investigating officer gave a different reason for the five-week lapse in the investigation – that he did not take the evidence into custody because he “did not want to re-victimise” the Liew family.

“Speaking as a former police officer, I find this quite unusual in a theft case that an officer would consider this issue of re-victimisation,” she asserted.

Ms Lim then questioned if it had crossed Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam’s mind that the investigating officer “may have felt that he was dealing with somebody who is very prominent, and therefore needed to take extra care”, even though there was no pressure from former Changi Airport Group chairman Liew Mun Leong.

She also called for the Minister to clarify his earlier statement regarding the High Court’s judgement on the case.

“The sense I’m getting is that he is saying that if the High Court had known certain other information at the time, the High Court may have come to a different conclusion. Is that what he is saying?” Ms Lim asked.

The way the matter was handled negates the suggestion of any implicit extra attention, says Law and Home Affairs Minister

In response, Mr Shanmugam said that the High Court’s decision – based on the facts presented – is both “natural and understandable”.

“I explained that we didn’t go about looking for any further evidence to question the High Court. It was the High Court’s decision which required us to do further investigations, specifically on the Liews and whether any criminal investigations had been committed,” the Minister elaborated.

He added that in the course of the investigations, further evidence was found.

Mr Shanmugam continued, “I am a Member of Parliament. I am here, I am making a ministerial statement. I have this information in my possession. So, I have to set it out – all in good faith, honesty, and transparency.

“And that is all I’m doing. I am not in any way therefore suggesting that if this information was there before the High Court, it could’ve come to a different decision. I don’t want to be making these comments.”

The Minister then said that if Ms Lim or any other MP thinks that the High Court would’ve benefitted from this information, it is their “prerogative” to think that.

“But I don’t think that I should be suggesting that,” he expressed.

“What is important for me is to show what the police and agency had, and I’m happy for Ms Lim’s confirmation that there was no expressed influence by Mr Liew Mun Leong or his family.”

Mr Shanmugam went on to say that the question on whether there was implicit bias in the investigation was also a “question that has struck [him]”.

However, the Minister noted that the investigating officer’s conduct seems to prove otherwise, given that the officer had waited five weeks to act on the case.

“I’m saying to you the way the matter was handled [negates] the suggestion of any implicit extra attention,” he asserted.

Ms Shanmugam then argued that the time taken for the investigating officer to visit the scene is “different from why he did not seize the item”, adding that the police assess the necessity to take evidence into custody based on the facts of the case as well as the nature of the items.

The Minister explained that if a photograph of the physical items is deem adequate by the officer, then there is no need to seize them.

“So, that’s what meant by ‘I did not want to re-victimise’,” he justified.

Read: Karl Liew to face charges for giving false evidence, false information to public servant in Parti Liyani case | The case of Parti Liyani: All you need to know

Continue Reading
34 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
34 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

AFP

Marcos says Philippines is ‘done talking’ with ICC

President Ferdinand Marcos announced that the Philippines will no longer cooperate with the International Criminal Court’s probe into the drug war, asserting that the alleged crimes should be handled domestically.

The ICC resumed its inquiry despite the country’s withdrawal in 2019. Thousands have died in the anti-narcotics campaign under both Duterte and Marcos’ administrations.

Published

on

MANILA, PHILIPPINES — The Philippines will no longer deal with the International Criminal Court, President Ferdinand Marcos said Friday after The Hague-based tribunal rejected Manila’s appeal to stop a probe into a deadly drug war.

Thousands of people have been killed in the anti-narcotics campaign started by former president Rodrigo Duterte in 2016 and continued under Marcos.

“We’re done talking with the ICC,” Marcos told reporters during a visit to the southern island of Mindanao, according to an official transcript.

“The alleged crimes are here in the Philippines, the victims are Filipino, so why go to The Hague? It should be here,” he said.

The ICC launched a formal inquiry into Duterte’s crackdown in September 2021, only to suspend it two months later after Manila said it was re-examining several hundred cases of drug operations that led to deaths at the hands of police, hitmen and vigilantes.

ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan later asked to reopen the inquiry in June 2022, and pre-trial judges at the court gave the green light in late January — a decision that Manila appealed shortly afterwards.

A five-judge bench on Tuesday dismissed Manila’s objection that the court had no jurisdiction because the Philippines pulled out of the ICC in 2019, some three years before the inquiry was resumed.

Marcos said Friday the government would take “no more actions” regarding the ICC ruling, but would “continue to defend the sovereignty of the Philippines and continue to question the jurisdiction of the ICC in their investigations”.

Thousands killed

More than 6,000 people were killed in police anti-drug operations during Duterte’s term, official government figures show, but ICC prosecutors estimate the death toll at between 12,000 and 30,000.

The drug war has continued under Marcos even though he has pushed for more focus on prevention and rehabilitation.

More than 350 drug-related killings have been recorded since Marcos took office last June, according to figures compiled by Dahas, a University of the Philippines-backed research project that keeps count of such killings.

Opened in 2002, the ICC is the world’s only permanent court for war crimes and crimes against humanity and aims to prosecute the worst abuses when national courts are unable or unwilling.

Manila argues it has a fully functioning judicial system, and as such, its courts and law enforcement should handle the investigation into alleged rights abuses during the drug war — not the ICC.

Only four police officers have been convicted for killing drug suspects in two separate cases since the start of the crackdown in 2016.

Rights groups allege the killings were carried out as part of a state policy, and that Duterte had publicly encouraged them with incendiary rhetoric during his public comments.

During his presidency, Duterte openly encouraged law enforcers to shoot suspects in anti-drug operations if the lawmen felt their own lives were in danger.

— AFP

Continue Reading

AFP

US slams Hong Kong bounties as ‘dangerous’ precedent

The US condemns Hong Kong’s bounties on democracy activists abroad, warning of dangerous precedent and human rights threats.

Published

on

WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — The United States on Monday condemned Hong Kong authorities for issuing bounties linked to democracy activists based abroad, saying the move sets a dangerous precedent that could threaten human rights.

Hong Kong police offered bounties of HK$1 million (about US$127,600) for information leading to the capture of eight prominent dissidents who live abroad and are wanted for national security crimes.

“The United States condemns the Hong Kong Police Force’s issuance of an international bounty” against the eight activists, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said in a statement.

“The extraterritorial application of the Beijing-imposed National Security Law is a dangerous precedent that threatens the human rights and fundamental freedoms of people all over the world,” he added, saying China is engaging in “transnational repression efforts.”

“We call on the Hong Kong government to immediately withdraw this bounty, respect other countries’ sovereignty, and stop the international assertion of the National Security Law imposed by Beijing.”

The national security law — which has reshaped Hong Kong society and eroded the firewall that once existed between the special autonomous region and the mainland — has the power to hold accused people across the world accountable.

All eight activists are alleged to have colluded with foreign forces to endanger national security — an offense that carries a sentence of up to life in prison.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) also weighed in from its New York headquarters to attack the bounties as “baseless” and an expansion of China’s “political intimidation campaign beyond its borders.”

“The Hong Kong government increasingly goes above and beyond to persecute peaceful dissent both within Hong Kong and abroad,” Maya Wang, HRW’s associate Asia director, said in a statement.

“Offering a cross-border bounty is a feeble attempt to intimidate activists and elected representatives outside Hong Kong who speak up for people’s rights against Beijing’s growing repression.”

— AFP

Continue Reading

Trending