Beng Hock’s Murder:No action against Thai forensic pathologist
Published: Friday January 15, 2010 MYT 11:38:00 AM
Updated: Friday January 15, 2010 MYT 4:06:29 PM
Teoh Beng Hock’s inquest takes a further turn (Update)
By WANI MUTHIAH
Counsel for the Government Tan Hock Chuan had earlier given the court the Attorney-General’s assurance that no action would be taken against Thai forensic pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand.
He said the A-G was also of the opinion that Dr Pornthip had not leaked any information to Suara Keadilan, which had carried an article “confirming” that Teoh had been murdered.
Coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas then said that given the A-G’s opinion, there was no longer any need to proceed with contempt proceedings against Raub Ghani, who had lodged a police report against Dr Pornthip alleging that she had leaked information from the results of the second post-mortem performed on Teoh to “unauthorised” parties.
Raub, 41, who is attached to the Putrajaya MACC investigation unit, had lodged the report at the Shah Alam district police headquarters on Jan 1.
However, the counsel representing Teoh’s family, Karpal Singh argued for contempt proceedings to continue against Raub as going by the A-G’s opinion, it would seem to indicate that the MACC officer had lodged a false police report and thus, should be “duly dealt with”.
MACC counsel Datuk Abdul Razak Musa then stood up to protest Karpal’s continued use of the word “murder” in pertaining to Teoh’s death.
When Karpal, who is in a wheelchair, told Abdul Razak to “sit down”, the latter replied: “I will sit down but you cannot stand up.”
The court was thrown into further chaos when at one point, Gobind Singh Deo called Abdul Razak a “scoundrel” for insulting Karpal Singh’s disability, and wanted contempt proceedings initiated against Abdul Razak.
The court has momentarily stood down for both Karpal and Gobind to refer to grounds to initiate proceedings against Abdul Razak.
Coroner Azmil Muntapha fixed Jan 22 to hear submissions in the contempt proceedings against Raub.
He agreed there were elements of contempt in Abdul Razak’s remarks against Karpal, but only cautioned him.
More to come