Connect with us

Legal

Lawyer M Ravi highlights the importance of lawyer's presence during police's interview to avoid self-incrimination

Published

5 years ago

on

In 2016, 14-year-old Benjamin Lim fell to his death from his Yishun flat, hours after returning home from Ang Mo Kio police division for an alleged molestation incident involving an 11-year-old girl in a lift.
The North View Secondary School student was brought to the police station by police officers for his statement to be taken and released to his mother after being questioned by the police for three and a half hours, without the presence of a lawyer or accompanied by any adult.
As expected, the case sparked a debate on police processes and speculation over the circumstances leading up to his death. In fact, many instances of what happened before his death also emerged, causing the Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam to take the rather unusual step of delivering a ministerial statement on the issue in Parliament in March 2016.
In August that year, State Coroner Marvin Bay ruled that the teenager’s death was a deliberate act of suicide that could have occurred probably from issues with managing his anger and emotions, as well as stress of being under criminal investigations.
Using this case as an example, international human rights lawyer M Ravi released a video on his personal video channel, RAVIsion, calling for the presence of a lawyer for witnesses and suspects during police interviews and interrogations, and highlighting citizens’ right against self-incrimination.
“Singaporeans have a legal right to not incriminate themselves during police interviews and interrogations. However, if they exercise this right, they may land in deeper trouble in court during trial. So, what is the point of having the right to not incriminate yourself then?” asked the lawyer in his video.

Introduction of “Appropriate Adult Scheme for Young Adults” (AAYS)

At the end of Coroner’s inquiry for Benjamin’s case, it was reported in the ST that “State Coroner Marvin Bay said the police and his school had taken steps to engage him sensitively”, as they found out that the teenager was not accompanied by any adult during the interview.
However, Mr Bay’s report noted that an “additional refinement could be for a school counsellor to accompany the student to the police station”.
Based on this suggestion, a year after Benjamin’s death, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) announced a pilot project, the “Appropriate Adult Scheme for Young Adults” (AAYS) which was rolled out at the Criminal Investigation Department, Bedok Police Division and the Central Narcotics Bureau’s Investigation Division.
Under the scheme, an independent and trained adult will have to accompany a young suspect under the age of 16 to law enforcement interviews. The website for National Council of Social Service explained that the “appropriate adult” should also be “a neutral party that provides emotional support to the young suspect and facilitates communications where necessary”.
The scheme is expected to be completed in mid-2019.
The volunteer, also called the Appropriate Adults (AAs), is expected to look out for signs of distress, aid communication between the young suspect under the age of 16 and the police when necessary, as well as provide emotional support. One has to note that the AA, receives only half a day of briefing before they are considered as trained for the job. The AAs are also instructed to remain neutral and not advocate for the young suspect, nor provide legal advice or disrupt the course of justice in any way, they also cannot be lawyers by profession.
This means that the AA is not a substitute for legal advice or legal counsel.
If that is not all, the AAYS does not include the parent of the youth or minor, meaning they’re left to be accompanied by strangers. This scheme only applies to those below 16 years of age, and adult suspects will not be given such opportunity or access to lawyers during their talks and interrogations with the police.

Call for the right to counsel and the right against self-incrimination

As revealed in the testimony by the police officer who took Benjamin’s statement at the coroner’s hearing, Benjamin admitted that he touched a part of a girl’s body, and he did so intentionally.
As such, Mr Ravi told in his video that if a lawyer was present during his interrogation, he or she may have advised Benjamin on his right not to incriminate himself.
“My intention in raising the Benjamin Lim incident is not to cast aspersions in any way, but to point out that there could potentially be real life consequences of not having immediate access to counsel, and thus not knowing what your legal rights are during such times,” he said.
He added, “How many of us know that we have the right not to incriminate ourselves? Even if we do, do we even know what exactly would be incriminating and consequences of exercising this right?”
Despite having the rights to not self-incriminate, under Section 261 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, an adverse inference can be made against you if you bring up your right not to incriminate yourself and remain silent during police questioning.

As such, the lawyer argues that an average person who is not legally trained would not know “what information may incriminate him or her, and indeed what is meant by incriminating evidence or information”.
If that is not all, the police in the country is also not obliged to inform those called for questioning or interrogation that they have the right to not incriminate themselves.
“This is precisely why it is of utmost necessity if we are to give meaning to our legal rights, that witnesses and suspects have access to lawyer during police interviews. Their lawyers can then advise them so that they do not incriminate themselves,” he stressed.
To make things worse, one can be convicted solely based on his or her statement, without presenting any evidence to support the statement, said Mr Ravi. He also mentioned that although the police have to charge a suspect within 48 hours of arrest, but they can detain the individual for a “reasonable” period of time without a lawyer. Unfortunately, this “reasonable” period of time is not defined or specified in Singapore’s law and is left for the police to decide, said the lawyer.
“In short, you have the right not to incriminate yourself but it can be a major disadvantage for you to exercise it. So as you can see, we do need serious reforms in this area to protect and give meaning to what is guaranteed by the Constitution,” Mr Ravi pointed out.
He also noted that the right not to incriminate yourself is a basic right that is practiced around the world. It is also a “right to protect an accuse from police abuse and coercion”, he added.
As such, the lawyer emphasised the importance of reforms in the law since Singaporean police “have almost unrestricted powers of investigation and interrogation”.
“The right not to incriminate yourself, which include remaining silent during police questioning, reinforces the universal principal of justice – which is the right of an individual to be presumed innocent,” Mr Ravi said in the end of his video.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Malaysian police seek Interpol’s aid in locating Jocelyn Chia, netizens criticise action as unnecessary

The Royal Malaysia Police plan to seek Interpol’s assistance in locating comedian Jocelyn Chia, according to Bernama.

However, many Malaysian netizens argue that pursuing action against Chia is unnecessary, as it would only give her the attention she desires.

Chia defended her controversial MH370 joke in a CNN interview, explaining that the context was lost when a clip of the routine circulated on social media.

She clarified that the joke was based on the friendly rivalry between Singapore and Malaysia and expressed no ill feelings toward Malaysia.

Published

1 year ago

on

13 June 2023

By

MALAYSIA —  The Royal Malaysia Police are planning to seek the support of Interpol, the International Criminal Police Organization to track down comedian Jocelyn Chia, Malaysian state news agency Bernama reported.

Inspector-General of Police Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani, as quoted by Bernama, revealed that an official application will be submitted to Interpol on Wednesday (14 June).

The purpose is to conduct further investigations under Section 504/505(c) of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

The police’s objective is to obtain both the “full identity” and the current whereabouts of Jocelyn Chia.

Additionally, they have applied to the Malaysian Multimedia Communications Commission (MCMC) for user profiling to aid in the investigation of the comedian’s social media accounts.

“We (police) have also transcribed the suspect’s speech from the video clip,” he said.

Malaysian netizens said action against Jocelyn Chia is unnecessary

However, a significant number of Malaysian netizens have expressed their opinion that taking action against Jocelyn Chia is unnecessary.

They believe that such actions would only serve to give her the attention she seeks, and they argue that allocating resources and taxpayer money toward addressing an individual like Chia would be a waste.

S Arutchelvan, the deputy chairperson of the Malaysian Socialist Party, expressed the opinion that it is unnecessary to waste time on pursuing Jocelyn Chia.

He believes that it is more important to focus on locating Jho Low, referring to the prominent figure involved in the 1MDB scandal, and police should prioritize addressing serious matters rather than comedic issues.

Chia’s insensitivity has drawn heavy criticism from both Malaysians and Singaporeans

Chia, in her controversial performance, portrayed Malaysia as an ex trying to reconnect with Singapore after the nations’ separation in 1965.

In a particularly distasteful jest, she associated Malaysia’s attempt to ‘visit’ Singapore with the tragic MH370 incident.

Her remarks were met with disapproval by the audience, but she unapologetically responded, “What? Malaysian Airlines going missing is not funny, huh? Some jokes don’t land. This joke kills in Singapore.”

Chia’s insensitivity has drawn heavy criticism from both Malaysians and Singaporeans, many of whom regard her comments as a stark reminder of the ongoing pain of the MH370 tragedy for victims and their families.

Chia defended her joke

Chia mentioned that Malaysian audience members often approach her after shows to express their enjoyment, indicating that they “did not take offense” to her performance.

Singapore High Commissioner distancing Jocelyn Chia as “no longer Singaporean”

Meanwhile, Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan and the Republic’s High Commissioner to Malaysia, Mr Vanu Gopala Menon, also expressed their disapproval of Chia’s comments, emphasizing that she does not represent the views of Singaporeans.

Memon posted on social media to sincerely apologise to all Malaysians for Chia’s hurtful remarks.

“The Singapore Government does not condone words or actions that cause harm or hurt to others and Chia, who is no longer Singaporean, does not in any way reflect our views.”

He reiterated that as closest neighbour, Singapore and Malaysia enjoy a strong and multi-faceted relationship, with deep and cross-cutting ties, “We also have unique historical and close people-to-people ties. ”

“Comments such as those made by Chia are unhelpful and undermine the close trust and friendship that both our countries and peoples enjoy,” Menon added.

Continue Reading

Arts & Culture

Malaysian Home Ministry withdraws appeal against High Court’s 2021 ruling on ‘Allah’ in Christian publication

Malaysia’s Home Ministry has withdrawn its appeal against a High Court ruling that overturned the ban on using the word “Allah” in Christian publications. Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail cited ‘contradictions’ between an administrative order and a 1986 Cabinet decision.

Despite this, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim stated that restrictions remain for non-Muslims in other states, a claim contested by Sarawak state assemblyman Baru Bian

Published

1 year ago

on

17 May 2023

By

MALAYSIA — The Home Ministry of Malaysia has withdrawn its appeal against the High Court’s decision in March 2021, which overturned the government’s ban on the use of the word “Allah” in Christian publications throughout the country.

Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, the current Home Minister under Anwar’s administration, explained that his Ministry made the decision due to “contradiction found between a Home Ministry administrative order and a Cabinet decision made in 1986″.

The court record shows that The Attorney-General’s Chambers, representing the Home Ministry, notified the Court of Appeal that they would not pursue the appeal.

According to Malaysia English media outlet The Star, the Home Minister clarified that the court’s decision was based on an administrative approach and not a theological standpoint, as the court is not deemed appropriate to decide matters related to religion specifically.

“This is because the function of the Court itself is not appropriate to decide matters related to religion specifically,” he explained the matter to the reporters on Tuesday (16 May).

In Malaysia, the legal system consists of both civil courts and Shariah courts, the latter being responsible for matters concerning Islamic law.

The Home Minister said in the 10 March 2021’s judgement, it is clear that the Judge made a decision “based on an administrative approach” and it was found to be consistent with the decision of the Federal Court in the case of the Titular Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur vs the Home Affairs Minister in 2014.

“Regarding this, the Government’s decision not to proceed with the appeal is made on a case-by-case basis; without affecting the facts of each case that is currently in court,” he added.

Saifuddin added that the government intends to review and update a comprehensive directive on the use of words like “Allah” to align with the interests of the multi-racial and multi-religious community in Malaysia.

Malaysian PM acknowledges rights of Christians in Sarawak

In the meantime, when responding to the Home Ministry’s decision to withdraw its appeal in the case, Malaysia Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim acknowledged that Christians in Sarawak can use the word “Allah,” but restrictions remain for non-Muslims in other states.

“The court had ruled (in favour of Sarawak) and we must understand that it is Sarawak’s prerogative,” he said in an event on Tuesday.

However, Baru Bian, a lawyer and a state assemblyman in Sarawak challenged the Prime Minister’s statement, emphasizing that the High Court’s ruling applies to the entire country and not just Sarawak.

“The judgment of the High Court applies throughout the whole of Malaysia,” he reiterated.

One of the high-profile cases in Malaysia

On May 11, 2008, Malaysia’s Home Ministry seized eight educational CDs and books from Jill Ireland Bill, a Sarawak Christian of the Melanau tribe, at an airport in Sepang.

The CDs containing titles including ‘Cara Menggunakan Kunci Kerajaan Allah’, ‘Cara Hidup Dalam Kerajaan Allah’, and ‘Ibadah Yang Benar Dalam Kerajaan Allah’, which Jill brought back from Indonesia.

In August 2008, Jill Ireland filed a lawsuit against the Home Minister and the Malaysian government, challenging their decision to confiscate the materials.

This legal battle spanned over a decade and focused on Jill Ireland’s constitutional rights to freely practice her religion and seek recognition for those rights.

A significant breakthrough came on 10 March 2021, when the Malaysian High Court delivered a landmark ruling in favour of Jill Ireland.

The court granted her the right to use the word “Allah” in her religious education, overturning a 1986 directive by the Home Ministry that prohibited its use in Christian publications.

During the ruling, Judge Datuk Nor Bee stated that the four Arabic words, including “Allah,” could be used by Christians in their publications, provided it is clearly indicated as “For Christians Only” on the front page.

The judge deemed the 1986 directive “illegal and unlawful,” as it lacked justification on the grounds of public order or potential confusion.

Furthermore, the judge pointed out that the use of the word “Allah” in Bahasa Malaysia by the Christian communities of Sabah and Sarawak since 1629 had not caused any significant problems leading to public disorder over the centuries.

Sabah church drops its 16-year-long legal challenge 

While the High Court made landmark decision for Sarawak’s Jill Ireland case, Malay Mail reported on Wednesday (17 May) that a Sabah church, Sidang Injil Borneo’s (SIB), has chosen to end its 16-year-long legal challenge against the Malaysian government’s 1986 ban on the use of the word “Allah” in Christian publications.

SIB’s case was linked to the Home Ministry’s 2007 decision to seize and withhold the release of the church’s Christian educational materials containing the word “Allah.”

On 15 August 2007, the customs department seized three boxes of educational materials belonging to SIB at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) airport in Sepang.

Despite SIB’s explanation that the materials were intended for educational purposes within the church and not for sale, the Home Ministry initially refused to return them, citing a directive from 19 May 1986.

However, in January 2008, the Home Ministry returned the publications to SIB with the condition that they could only be distributed if the front page was stamped with the symbol of the “cross” and labelled as a Christian publication.

Despite this, SIB decided to continue pursuing the case, which involved constitutional rights such as freedom of religion, equality before the law, and protection against religious discrimination.

The legal process surrounding the case has been ongoing since 2008 and continues to the present day.

Continue Reading

Trending