With the death of Teoh Beng Hock, the authority should introduce better investigation techiques to be used by all investigative bodies including police, MACC and others. One important point to remember is, it does not mean that all investigations should end in prosecution of the person. There are times in the course of investigation, when it is found, there is not enough evidence to do so. In such a situation the case therefore cannot proceed to court.
Witnesses may have been interviewed or interrogated. Still there is a missing link. When this link cannot be established even after making all efforts, then the suspect should be freed. High profile cases in other countries are let go because of similar grounds. But it does not mean that the individual cannot be investigated for the same offence later. What is needed is for the evidence to be corroborated by documents etc. or by witnesses. Once this has been done, meaning jigsaw puzzle is in order, the next step is to prepare for court hearing.
There are instances during investigation when witnesses have been intimidated, threatened, blackmailed, put under duress etc. with a view to implicate the suspected party. This is wrong. Confessions made under such conditions in law are considered invalid or inadmissible ( legal term ) as they are not made voluntarily.
Of course it would be best if government could make it a law that when an individual is being interviewed or interrogated by an investigative body, he can have recourse to the sevice of a lawyer to protect his right or interest if he so wishes. This will ensure that the investigation will not deviate from its original course to the extent that physical intimidation real or otherwise can be made to the person concerned.
Witnesses may have been interviewed or interrogated. Still there is a missing link. When this link cannot be established even after making all efforts, then the suspect should be freed. High profile cases in other countries are let go because of similar grounds. But it does not mean that the individual cannot be investigated for the same offence later. What is needed is for the evidence to be corroborated by documents etc. or by witnesses. Once this has been done, meaning jigsaw puzzle is in order, the next step is to prepare for court hearing.
There are instances during investigation when witnesses have been intimidated, threatened, blackmailed, put under duress etc. with a view to implicate the suspected party. This is wrong. Confessions made under such conditions in law are considered invalid or inadmissible ( legal term ) as they are not made voluntarily.
Of course it would be best if government could make it a law that when an individual is being interviewed or interrogated by an investigative body, he can have recourse to the sevice of a lawyer to protect his right or interest if he so wishes. This will ensure that the investigation will not deviate from its original course to the extent that physical intimidation real or otherwise can be made to the person concerned.
No comments:
Post a Comment