“A person who has been tortured once does not want to be tortured again. That is why he (Tharmendran) has chosen to go back to Sungai Buloh (prison),” Tharmendran’s other lawyer N. Surendran told reporters today.
PETALING JAYA, July 19 — Former air force sergeant N. Tharmendran is returning to prison today after losing his bid for a court protection order against Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) officers he claims intend to abduct him.
Tharmendran’s father N. Nagarajah withdrew his bail on his son’s behalf after the Sessions Court here rejected the ex-airman’s application for a protection order to prohibit RMAF officers from taking him into custody.
“The accused (Tharmendran) has no recourse but to withdraw his bail because he is certain that TUDM (RMAF) will abduct him anytime,” said Tharmendran’s lawyer M. Manogaran today.
The lawyer added that Tharmendran saw several RMAF officers from the air force’s intelligence unit in the courtroom during the hearing itself today.
“A person who has been tortured once does not want to be tortured again. That is why he (Tharmendran) has chosen to go back to Sungai Buloh (prison),” Tharmendran’s other lawyer N. Surendran told reporters today.
Tharmendran was recently released from prison after winning an appeal early this month at the High Court here to reduce his bail to RM50,000 from the original bail of RM150,000 posted by the Sessions Court on January 6.
The ex-airman claimed that the air force “major” who allegedly tortured him as well as nine other RMAF officers under the major’s command were also present at the court building during his hearing this morning.
The 42-year-old former air force sergeant had also alleged in a police report this morning that four RMAF officers had visited his parents’ house in Seremban last Friday to abduct him.
Tharmendran was charged in January this year for the theft of two RMAF F5-E jet engines.
However, Tharmendran recently denied stealing the fighter jet engines, claiming instead that he had been tortured by military officers to force a confession from him to say that he had been responsible for the theft.
Tharmendran alleged that he was dragged, stripped down to his underwear, and thrown into a freezing cold room and made to admit, repeatedly, that he was guilty.
He also said that he was made to wear a crash helmet and was hit with a cricket bat and a golf club three to four times a day.
Judge Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz rejected Tharmendran’s application for a protection order on grounds that the Sessions Court did not have the powers to grant the order.
“The court refers to Section 2 and 4 of the Abduction and Criminal Intimidation of Witnesses Act 1947 and finds that this act cannot be used for the accused. It is specifically for witnesses,” said Hayatul.
Manogaran and Surendran had argued earlier that the court was empowered to grant a protection order to Tharmendran as the protection granted under the Act mentioned was applicable to Tharmendran.
“If you look at Section 4, the statement is ‘whoever abducts any person’. Any person includes the accused who will give a statement in court,” said Manogaran.
Hayatul also said that Tharmendran’s police report claiming that RMAF officers were trying to abduct him was “just an allegation” and could not be used as a basis to grant a protection order.
“This is the worst failure found in the justice system in this country,” said Surendan.
“We can see that Malaysian witnesses are forced to go to prison to protect himself from the authorities,” added Surendran.
Manogaran also said that RMAF does not have the right to take Tharmendran into custody since the expiry of his service contract on May 28 this year, as well as the fact that his salary for the past two months was not paid.
“His (Tharmendran) contract cannot be extended or renewed without consent,” said Manogaran, adding that the RMAF had yet to respond to letters sent to them last week stating that Tharmendran was no longer in their service.
Tharmendran’s trial was postponed to September 6 after he made an application at the Shah Alam High Court to quash the charges against him at the Sessions Court on grounds that they were “frivolous”.
Manogaran and Surendran have maintained that their client is merely a scapegoat in a conspiracy involving high-ranking officers.
by Boo Su-Lyn - themalaysianinsider
PETALING JAYA, July 19 — Former air force sergeant N. Tharmendran is returning to prison today after losing his bid for a court protection order against Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) officers he claims intend to abduct him.Tharmendran’s father N. Nagarajah withdrew his bail on his son’s behalf after the Sessions Court here rejected the ex-airman’s application for a protection order to prohibit RMAF officers from taking him into custody.
“The accused (Tharmendran) has no recourse but to withdraw his bail because he is certain that TUDM (RMAF) will abduct him anytime,” said Tharmendran’s lawyer M. Manogaran today.
The lawyer added that Tharmendran saw several RMAF officers from the air force’s intelligence unit in the courtroom during the hearing itself today.
“A person who has been tortured once does not want to be tortured again. That is why he (Tharmendran) has chosen to go back to Sungai Buloh (prison),” Tharmendran’s other lawyer N. Surendran told reporters today.
Tharmendran was recently released from prison after winning an appeal early this month at the High Court here to reduce his bail to RM50,000 from the original bail of RM150,000 posted by the Sessions Court on January 6.
The ex-airman claimed that the air force “major” who allegedly tortured him as well as nine other RMAF officers under the major’s command were also present at the court building during his hearing this morning.
The 42-year-old former air force sergeant had also alleged in a police report this morning that four RMAF officers had visited his parents’ house in Seremban last Friday to abduct him.
Tharmendran was charged in January this year for the theft of two RMAF F5-E jet engines.
However, Tharmendran recently denied stealing the fighter jet engines, claiming instead that he had been tortured by military officers to force a confession from him to say that he had been responsible for the theft.
Tharmendran alleged that he was dragged, stripped down to his underwear, and thrown into a freezing cold room and made to admit, repeatedly, that he was guilty.
He also said that he was made to wear a crash helmet and was hit with a cricket bat and a golf club three to four times a day.
Judge Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz rejected Tharmendran’s application for a protection order on grounds that the Sessions Court did not have the powers to grant the order.
“The court refers to Section 2 and 4 of the Abduction and Criminal Intimidation of Witnesses Act 1947 and finds that this act cannot be used for the accused. It is specifically for witnesses,” said Hayatul.
Manogaran and Surendran had argued earlier that the court was empowered to grant a protection order to Tharmendran as the protection granted under the Act mentioned was applicable to Tharmendran.
“If you look at Section 4, the statement is ‘whoever abducts any person’. Any person includes the accused who will give a statement in court,” said Manogaran.
Hayatul also said that Tharmendran’s police report claiming that RMAF officers were trying to abduct him was “just an allegation” and could not be used as a basis to grant a protection order.
“This is the worst failure found in the justice system in this country,” said Surendan.
“We can see that Malaysian witnesses are forced to go to prison to protect himself from the authorities,” added Surendran.
Manogaran also said that RMAF does not have the right to take Tharmendran into custody since the expiry of his service contract on May 28 this year, as well as the fact that his salary for the past two months was not paid.
“His (Tharmendran) contract cannot be extended or renewed without consent,” said Manogaran, adding that the RMAF had yet to respond to letters sent to them last week stating that Tharmendran was no longer in their service.
Tharmendran’s trial was postponed to September 6 after he made an application at the Shah Alam High Court to quash the charges against him at the Sessions Court on grounds that they were “frivolous”.
Manogaran and Surendran have maintained that their client is merely a scapegoat in a conspiracy involving high-ranking officers.
by Boo Su-Lyn - themalaysianinsider
No comments:
Post a Comment