Saksi Nafi Dapat Tunjuk Ajar Pegawai SPRM Untuk Beri KeteranganKUALA LUMPUR, 14 April (Bernama) -- Seorang saksi pada Khamis menafikan yang beliau diberi tunjuk ajar oleh pegawai Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) untuk memberi keterangan pada prosiding Suruhanjaya Siasatan kematian Teoh Beng Hock.
Mohd Khairuddin Denan, 56, yang bekerja sebagai pengawal keselamatan di bangunan SPRM, Selangor menolak saranan peguam Cheow Wee dari Majlis Peguam selepas beliau dilihat sesekali merujuk kepada nota bertaip yang berada di hadapannya ketika memberi keterangan.
Cheow kemudian mengambil nota itu daripada Mohd Khairuddin dan membacakan isi kandungan yang tertera pada nota berkenaan di hadapan panel suruhanjaya itu.
Antara isi kandungan nota itu ialah "saya lihat dia baik, dia tidak mencurigai anggapan saya dia adalah saksi walaupun dia keseorangan ketika itu," "mana En Khairuddin tahu dia tidak mencurigai?", "saya tidak dengar bunyi apa-apa ketika pelawat lalu di bahagian pentadbiran".
Ketika disoal Choew siapa yang menyediakan nota tersebut, Mohd Khairuddin berkata: "Saya sendiri yang menyediakan nota berkenaan".
Namun, jawapan yang diberikan oleh Mohd Khairuddin menimbulkan rasa kesangsian terhadap suruhanjaya kerana di awal prosiding saksi itu memaklumkan beliau tidak mahir menggunakan komputer.
Cheow: "Kamu kata kamu tidak pandai sangat menggunakan komputer, tetapi siapa yang menaip nota ini kerana susunan ayat dan ejaan yang digunakan agak bagus?
Mohd Khairuddin: "Saya yang taip nota itu dengan menggunakan komputer di pejabat saya dan saya boleh taip sikit-sikit sebab sebelum ini saya pernah membuat jadual untuk duty kerja saya".
Mohd Khairuddin turut menjelaskan bahawa tulisan tangan yang tertera perkataan "Yang Arif menyoal saya di luar bidang tugas saya. Saya pengawal keselamatan" di belakang kertas nota bertaip itu ditulis sendiri tanpa diajar oleh sesiapa.
Beliau turut menafikan dakwaan pengerusi suruhanjaya, Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan Tan Sri James Foong Cheng Yuen terdapat pegawai SPRM yang meminta Mohd Khairuddin menulis nota berkenaan.
Di awal prosiding, Mohd Khairuddin memberitahu suruhanjaya bahawa beliau ternampak kelibat seorang lelaki Cina yang melalui jalan di bahagian pentadbiran di pejabat SPRM ketika beliau (Mohd Khairuddin) berada di lobi pejabat berkenaan.
"Saya tidak nampak jelas muka lelaki itu kerana saya hanya lihat sepintas lalu, namun saya pasti lelaki berkenaan berbangsa Cina," kata Mohd Khairuddin yang bertugas di pejabat itu mulai 12 tengah malam hingga 8 pagi pada 16 Julai 2009.
Mohd Khairuddin turut menafikan beliau hanya mereka-reka cerita dan memberi keterangan yang tidak benar apabila memberitahu suruhanjaya beliau nampak kelibat seorang lelaki Cina pada hari berkenaan.
Ketika disoal Cheow mengapa perkara itu tidak dinyatakan dalam rakaman percakapan yang diambil polis beberapa hari selepas kematian Teoh, beliau menjelaskan bahawa pihak polis tidak bertanyakan mengenai hal itu kepadanya.
Selain itu, Mohd Khairuddin turut memaklumkan kepada suruhanjaya bahawa beliau tidak mendengar sebarang jeritan, bunyi orang bergaduh dan juga tidak mendengar orang bercakap ketika beliau bertugas di pejabat SPRM pada hari kejadian.
Teoh, 30, setiausaha politik exco Selangor Ean Yong Hian Wah, ditemui mati di koridor tingkat lima Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam, Selangor pada 16 Julai 2009 selepas memberi kenyataan di pejabat SPRM yang terletak di tingkat 14 bangunan itu.
Selain Foong, suruhanjaya itu turut dianggotai bekas Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman, bekas Hakim Mahkamah Rayuan Datuk T.S. Nathan, Pakar Perunding Patologi Forensik Hospital Pulau Pinang Datuk Dr Bhupinder Singh dan Dekan Fakulti Perubatan Kolej Universiti Sains Perubatan Cyberjaya, Profesor Dr Mohamed Hatta Shaharom.
Prosiding disambung Isnin ini. -- BERNAMA
MACC guard’s ‘script’ causes a stir
Bar Council lawyer Cheow Wee quizzes MACC security guard over a paper the latter was holding during questioning.
KUALA LUMPUR: The Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) investigating Teoh Beng Hock’s death received a shock today when a Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) security guard was accused of being coached in answering questions in court.
Mohd Khairuddin Denan, 56, a Selangor MACC security officer, was “exposed” when Bar Council lawyer Cheow Wee asked him to show the commission a piece of paper that the former was frequently referring to.
The paper, alleged to be “scripted instructions”, consisted of computer-typed notes of what appeared to be a short list of questions and answers to aid Khairuddin’s cross-examination.
There was also a short handwritten note at the back of the paper, which read: “Yang Arif menyoal saya di luar bidang tugas saya. Saya pengawal keselamatan. (Your honour you are questioning me on something beyond my job scope. I am a security officer).”
When the incriminating item was revealed, RCI chairman James Foong asked: “It seems that there are people helping you. Did MACC officers help you?”
A flustered Khairuddin, however, insisted that it was his personal notes that he prepared earlier.
Minutes earlier, Cheow had asked Khairuddin if he was adept at computer usage.
Khairuddin: I’m not that good at it.
Cheow: But if someone helps Pak Cik to turn it on, you would know how to type?
Khairuddin: Yes.
Cheow: Earlier I saw you referring to some notes on your diary there (at the witness stand). There’s a paper with printed words, did you prepare that yourself?
Khairuddin: Yes.
Cheow: Can we see it? (note seized and projected on court screens). What’s this? You said you’re not good at computers? Who did this for you?
Khairuddin: (Silence)
T Selventhiranathan (commissioner): If that’s really your own notes, then why is there a question directed to yourself as “Encik Khairuddin”? It says here: “Mana En Khairuddin tahu dia tidak mencurigai? (How did Mr Khairuddin know he is not suspicious?)”
Khairuddin: No. I really prepared it myself. If I was asked this question, that’s what I’ll say.
Selventhiranathan: How about this one: ‘Adakah Encik Khairuddin dengar-dengar macam mana pegawai SPRM buat interrogation? (Did Mr Khairuddin hear how MACC officers did their interrogations?)’
Abdul Kadir Sulaiman (commissioner): We have not even asked this question. We did not use the word ‘interrogate’ the whole time.
Selventhiranathan: Are you being taught how to answer the questions? Is that how you know what we are going to ask?
Khairuddin insisted that the notes were his own.
Teoh, a political aide to Selangor executive councillor Ean Yong Hian Wah, was found dead on July 16, 2009, on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam.
He was interrogated the night before by MACC officers at their office, located on the 14th floor of the same building. They were investigating alleged misuse of state allocations.
On Jan 5 this year, coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas returned an open verdict after an inquest, ruling out both suicide and homicide.
Subsequently, the government caved in to public pressure and established the commission now in session. It is investigating both the cause of Teoh’s death and MACC’s interrogation methods.
The inquiry is scheduled to end on April 25 but Foong said today the commission has applied for an extension.
Unsatisfactory answers
Earlier, Khairuddin, who was the guard on duty (from 12am to 8am) on the morning Teoh’s body was found, was reprimanded by the commission for being unable to give satisfactory answers.
Khairuddin has been a security officer with MACC since 1984 and was transferred to the Selangor office at Plaza Masalam in 2005.
During questioning by conducting officer Awang Amardajaya Awang Mahmud, Khairuddin said he had never heard or seen any witnesses who were bruised or injured in the office.
Awang: Did you hear people talking, shouting, fighting, or any noises, or anyone falling (out) on July 16, 2009?
Khairuddin: No
Khairuddin admitted that he had dozed off intermittently during his watch but had seen a Chinese man walking to-and-fro at the MACC office after 1.30am.
He said he later saw two of the officers involved in Teoh’s case, investigating officers Mohd Anuar Ismail and Raymond Nion Anak John Timban, at 5am and 6am respectively.
However, Cheow pointed out to Khairuddin that he never mentioned these two officers in his first police statement.
Cheow said Khairuddin also made several other contradictory statements.
“There is a lot of discrepancies. In your first statement to the police, you didn’t mention seeing any Chinese man. In your second statement, you said it was Teoh Beng Hock. Then you said the security (guard) before you, Amran, told you there were many officers. You left that out in the first,” Cheow said.
Khairuddin, however, blamed the police officer who took down his statement for not asking or adding in extra facts, including the part where he was sure the person he saw was Teoh.
Khairuddin was also taken to task for failing to investigate who was the unknown Chinese man who was in the office late in the night, though he earlier admitted it was not a common occurrence.
He said he did not suspect anything as the person “looked good” and was in a “good condition”.
Cheow: If it was me, I would be scared. Is it true that you saw him. Or you’re just making up stories?”
Khairuddin: It’s true I saw him. I am speaking sincerely.
When repeatedly questioned on whether he saw or heard any other officers going in and out of the office, Khairuddin said he did not.
This prompted a visibly frustrated Foong to say: “We received a lot of evidence that many officers passed by you. Why are you now saying you didn’t see anyone?”
Khairuddin: Your honour, officers have passes and don’t need my help (opening the doors).
Abdul Kadir then told Khairuddin: “Just tell us. The purpose we’re sitting here is to find out the truth. We don’t know because we were not there. Just tell us. Don’t be afraid. We should be afraid of Allah instead.”
Foong: Are you afraid of losing your job?
Cheow: You look nervous, are you afraid?
Khairuddin: No, because I am telling the truth.
Foong: Our impression is that you know a lot but you are not telling us. You are a security guard. Someone came to the office, an outsider, and you don’t even ask? The entire time you only walked a short distance to check; are you not supposed to patrol the whole office?
Cheow: You are just a security guard, not involved in the operations. But if you’re found to be giving false testimony, then you could be involved, think properly.
Khairuddin also maintained that he did not see the then MACC Selangor deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim that night. (Hishamuddin had earlier testified that he left the office at 6.15pm).
It was then suggested that it was either Hishamuddin or Khairuddin who was lying.
Khairuddin was also reprimanded for his failure to investigate a bag, believed to be Teoh’s, when he testified that he had seen it on top of a sofa in the office.
Selventhiranathan: What if there was a bomb in the bag? You saw a stranger, then a bag, but you just left it there. How can you be a security (guard) if you don’t know what happen?
Khairuddin: I thought it was an officer’s bag. So I just left it there.
Foong: Are you even fit to be a security guard?
Khairuddin: (Silence).
Excerpts from the ‘script’:
“Saya lihat dia baik, dia tidak mencurigai angapan saya dia adalah saksi walau pun dia kesaorangan ketika itu” (I see that he is well, he was not suspicious and I considered him a witness although he was alone at the time).
Mana En Khairuddin tahu dia tidak mencurigai? (How did Mr Khairuddin know he is not suspicious?)
Saya tidak dengar bunyi apa-apa ketika pelawat lalu di bhg pentadbiran (I did not hear any noises when the visitor walked pass the administration division)
Pegawai ada pas sendiri tak perlu minta bantuan (officers have their own passes and don’t need to ask for assistance).
Saya meronda di bahagian pentadbiran sahaja ditempat lain tiada, sebab ia berdekatan tempat tugas saya, pada mlm. Kejadian saya tidak buat rodaan, hari lain ada (I patrolled only the administration division area and not other places because that was near my duty place at night. During the incident, I did not patrol, but on other days I do).
Saya ditugaskan mengawal kawasan pejabat harta benda kerajaan (I am tasked to guard government property at the office).
Mengawasi pintu utama keluar dan masuk (to monitor people coming in and out of the front entrance).
Pelawat yg nak berurusan dgn pegawai (visitors who want to deal with officers)
Tugas pegawai ada tugasnya sendiri. Soal tugas macam mana saya tidak tahu. Tiada arahan tugas pengawal terlibat soal saksi dan okt.(Officers have their own tasks. The question of what duties I don’t know. There is no order that security guards are involved in questioning witnesses and okt).
Adakah en khairuddin dengar-dengar macam mana pegawai sprm buat entrugaet(sic). pada malam itu tak dengar apa-apa? tiada.(Did Mr Khairuddin hear how officers do interrogations? On that night you did not hear anything? No.) -FMT
Ulasan GB
Setelah GB berdoa di SINI, nampaknya tembelang semakin pecah.
Seorang pak guard SPRM rupa-rupanya telah diajar bagaimana untuk menjawab di depan Suruhanjaya Siasatan Teoh.
Dan GB yakin skrip-skrip ini juga disediakan untuk semua mereka yang dipanggil untuk siasatan.
Sudah ada komplot peringkat tertinggi bagi "menipu" Suruhanjaya Siasatan, dan kita YAKIN, penipuan ini berlaku semenjak sebelum inkues diadakan.
