SUHAKAM Public Inquiry on "Bloody Sunday" - Day 5

SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS

Today is the 5th day of the inquiry. The inquiry will continue on the following days:

October 16, 17 & 18

Today’s witnesses:

1. Teh Chun Hong (W24)
2. Amran Zulkifli (W25)
3. Wong Keen Yee (W26)
4. Omar Tan Abdullah @ Tan Soi Kow (W27)
5. Chief Inspector Pusparajan Kaliapan (W28)

FRU Chief Inspector: ‘The FRU Training Manual on dispersing assemblies do not provide for kicking, dragging or shoving people using the FRU shield, hitting people on the head with the baton or the butt of the gas gun’.

On day 5 of the public inquiry the sworn oral testimonies of witness no. 24 to 28 were recorded with details as follows.

24^th witness: I was hit once and kicked twice by two FRU Personnel

Teh Chun Hong (hereinafter referred to as Teh) was the 24^th witness called to testify in the inquiry. Teh confirmed that he participated in the PROTES demonstration that was staged in front of KLCC on 28 May 2006.

According to Teh, while he was listening to Ronnie Liew, a PROTES Coalition speaker deliver his speech, water canons were suddenly unleashed on the crowd. Teh proceeded to inform the Panel that at that moment he and some other demonstrators standing in the same vicinity instinctively hovered together in an attempt to shield themselves from the water. The effort proved futile for Teh as he was ultimately drenched wet.

Teh also mentioned that the loud reverberations of a helicopter that appeared intermittently at the premises was operated at an unusually low height and drowned out the instructions issued by the authorities.

Soon after the water cannon were unleashed, Teh noticed a group of FRU personnel each clad in a navy blue uniform and a red helmet approaching the group of demonstrators with whom he was standing. The said FRU Personnel had in their hands an instrument described by Teh as a ‘flexible red baton’. On seeing these personnel, Teh and the other demonstrators began efforts to disperse but they were still attacked by the said personnel. Teh explained that he was hit once with the baton and kicked twice by 2 personnel. Teh sustained bruises to his shoulders and leg as a result of the said attack. According to Teh, 2 other demonstrators with him at the time, identified as Wong Keen Yi and Lee Huat Seng, were similarly attacked and injured by the said personnel.

Teh sought traditional treatment for his injuries. He did not lodge a police report on the incident.

25^th witness: ‘FRU Personnel hit me repeatedly on my shoulders and on my head’.

Amran Zulkifli (hereinafter referred to as Amran) was the 25^th witness called to testify in the inquiry. Amran is 38 years of age and an entrepreneur residing in Sungai Petani, Kedah. Amran testified that on the day in question he and his 10 year old child were in the vicinity of the PROTES Demonstration as they had planned to visit Petrosains KLCC.

According to Amran, they arrived at the premises at approximately 9:00 a.m. when he noticed the assembly. Curious to determine the reason for the assembly, he decided to observe the events that were transpiring. On discovering the purpose Amran decided to suspend his plans and proceeded to join the demonstration with his child whilst holding a placard. According to Amran at this stage a speech was being delivered by a female student however this was not entirely audible due to loud reverberations from a helicopter that appeared intermittently. It was operated at an alarmingly low height.

Amran also stated that he was aware that the authorities at the premises were issuing instructions to the crowd however these were similarly inaudible in view of the noise from the crowd and helicopter. Soon after the second set of instruction was given by the authorities, Amran and his child were drenched with water unleashed from a water canon. Amran then noticed the police making random arrests and it was at this stage that he decided to abandon the demonstration.

However, as he and his child proceeded towards the entrance of KLCC with a view to resume plans to visit Petrosains KLCC, Amran was suddenly attacked by FRU Personnel who repeatedly hit him on his shoulders whilst shouting ‘Balik! Balik!’ Fearing for the safety of his child, Amran quickly reached out to take hold of his child only to be struck again by the said personnel. On this occasion Amran was hit on the head that caused profuse bleeding and led to him losing grip and sight of his child. Amran stated that at this point he observed the situation at the KLCC vicinity to being in a state of utter chaos as people were attempting to secure their safety whilst hurriedly rushing in various directions. Consumed with fear Amran proceeded to run from the vicinity of KLCC. Amran told the Panel that he could not identify the officers who hit him as they stood behind him whilst they attacked him. He also stated that he did not retaliate against the FRU aggression, that he was perhaps a target in view of his large build (115 kg) and that he was not aware that he was not allowed to enter the KLCC.

With the assistance of Nasaruddin, Amran sought medical attention at Pusat Rawatan Islam (PUSRAWI), Jalan Tun Razak for the injuries he had sustained. He received 5 stitches. Amran was subsequently reunited with his child at the said hospital and later lodged a report on the incident at the Tun Razak Police Station.

26^th witness: ‘As I set out to leave the premises, I was unexpectedly attacked by FRU personnel’.

Wong Keen Yi (hereinafter referred to as Wong) was the 26^th witness called to testify in the inquiry. Wong is 23 years of age. He is a member of Malaysia Youth and Students Democratic Movement (DEMA). Wong confirmed that he participated in the PROTES Demonstration that was staged in front of KLCC on 28 May 2006.

Wong testified that on the day in question, his attention was focused on the speeches that were being delivered by the PROTES Coalition speakers. He told the Panel that he never heard any warnings or instructions from FRU or any other authorities deployed to the premises. He also mentioned that the helicopters deployed to the location were operated ‘just above the trees’.

According to Wong, while listening to Ronnie Liew delivers his speech, he suddenly noticed water cannon being unleashed. Although the Wong successfully evaded contact with the water unleashed, he had resolved to abandon the demonstration at that stage. As he set out to leave the premises, he was unexpectedly attacked by an FRU Personnel with an instrument described as a ‘red baton’. Wong sustained bruises to the right side of his neck as a result of the said attack. According to Wong, at the said time in question, he also noticed 2 other demonstrators, Lee Huat Seng and Teh Chun Hong being kicked by FRU Personnel.

Wong sought medical attention at Hospital Kuala Lumpur for the injuries he sustained. He did not lodge a police report on the incident.

27^th witness: ‘After the authorities issued instructions to attack! (Serang!), I saw Zahir Hassan being hit by FRU Personnel’.

Omar Tan Abdullah @ Tan Soi Kow (hereinafter referred to as Omar) was the 27^th Witness called to testify in the inquiry. Omar is 52 years of age. He is a committee member of the PROTES coalition and an employee of Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Omar confirmed that on the day in question, he was at the PROTES demonstration as he was assigned to the task of observing the demonstration, ensuring the welfare of the demonstrators and monitoring any urgent arrests.

Thus upon arriving at the premises, Omar proceeded to inspect the vicinity. Based on Omar’s testimony the 1^st instruction issued by the authorities was clear. The crowd was asked to disperse using the precise words, ‘Bersurai! Bersurai!’. The said instruction was issued twice although in the second instance it was not entirely clear. Soon after, the authorities instructed FRU Personnel to attack. The exact words used were ‘Serang!’. Thereafter water cannon were unleashed. During this time and at intermittent stages, a helicopter was seen hovering over the assembly.

Once the attack on the assembly commenced, Omar saw Zahir Hassan (W17) being hit by FRU Personnel. As Zahir’s 2 children were with him at the time, Omar immediately took steps to secure them to safety by escorting them across the road in the direction of Duta Vista.

In respect to the attacks on Amran (25^th witness), Omar mentioned that he did not see the attack although he heard about it subsequently. He then proceeded to state that Amran has been to demonstrations in the past including those staged in March 2006 on the sharp hikes in fuel prices. He told the panel that Amran is a protest mobilizer for the northern region. He is experienced in demonstrations and that his presence on the day in question was not surprising to him.

Omar, at the conclusion of his testimony stated that based on his experience in monitoring demonstrations, urgent arrests would not have been necessary as the PROTES Demonstration on the day in question was staged in a peaceful manner. This fact notwithstanding several members and supporters of the PROTES Coalition were nonetheless attacked and arrested on the day in question. Omar was unable to comprehend the basis of the aggression that was asserted by the authorities in this instance.

28^th witness: ‘I heard the OCPD instructs Air Unit 1 “Udara 1, turun bawah lagi”

Pusparajan a/l Kaliapan (hereinafter referred to as Rajan) was the 28^th Witness called to testify in the inquiry. Rajan is 40 years of age and holds the post of Chief Inspector, FRU, Kuala Lumpur. Rajan confirmed that on the day in question he was at the PROTES Demonstration in the official capacity of Commanding Officer for the purposes of dispersing the assembly.

Rajan testified that on 27 May 2006 he received instructions to report to the OCPD of Dang Wangi to stop the PROTES Demonstration that was deemed an illegal assembly. Rajan explained that by virtue of S. 27 of the Police Act 1967 an illegal assembly is defined as an assembly that takes place without a licence being issued for the said purpose.

FRU Troop 4B Unit 4 was assigned to assist Rajan with the task in hand. The said troop consisted of 64 male FRU Personnel including Rajan. They were equipped with a revolver, a gas gun, a rifle, a red baton of rattan make and a plastic shield. The FRU also deployed a fleet of vehicles to the premises and these included a command vehicle, water canons, logistics lorries for equipment and a land rover.

Thus at approximately 9.55 a.m., Rajan and his troop arrived at the premises. Rajan noted that in addition to the 63 FRU Personnel organised to disperse the assembly, approximately 100 uniformed & civilian clothes police officers were also at the premises. In respect to the assembly approximately 300 – 400 demonstrators were noted at the premises.

Rajan then proceeded to report to the OCPD and IPD Ketua Bahagian Ketenteraman Awam of Dang Wangi to receive further instructions. His instructions were to have his personnel on ‘standby’ to disperse the assembly. Rajan then briefed his troop informing them that they were to disperse the assembly using minimal force. The troop was then split into 3 sections with each section consisting of 18 men and told to take their positions.

Minimal force would involve instructions to the demonstrators to leave the premises without any body contact. In the event that the instructions are not heeded, unleashing the water canons would be the next step taken under the definition of minimal force.

Conversely, in instances where force is authorised, unleashing water & gas from the canons on the assembly which in effect causes skin irritation would have been sanctioned.

Rajan also explained that the baton and shield were available to FRU personnel for protection against violent crowds. For example in the event demonstrators made threats or threw stones, the FRU personnel were to use the baton and shield to protect themselves.

Rajan confirmed that the crowd on the day in question was not violent and not deemed a threat as such the troop was instructed to use minimal force only.

Rajan proceeded to inform the Panel that the troop deployed on the day in question had been adequately trained on using the equipment provided to them and on dispersing assemblies. The training manual in handling such matters do not provide for kicking or dragging people, shoving people using the FRU shield, hitting people on the head with the baton and hitting people with the butt of the gas gun. Rajan confirmed that these measures are positively not among the FRU procedures in dispersing an assembly and agreed to submit a copy of the FRU Training Manual for the Panel’s reference.

Rajan went on to state that during the demonstration he and the OCPD positioned themselves on top of the Command Vehicle so as to be facilitated with a clear view of the events that were ensuing and to provide further instructions to the troop. Rajan proceeded to emphasise that on the day in question his role as Commanding Officer was for all intents and purposes a conduit for taking instructions from the OCPD and communicating these to the FRU troop. Thus each time a new instruction came forth, Rajan would ring a bell to get the attention of the troop and instruct them accordingly.

In respect to the instructions that were issued to have the assembly disperse, Rajan said that instructions to the crowd to disperse were issued on 4 separate occasions and on each occasion the instruction was repeated 3 times. The chronological orders of the said instructions were as follows:-

1^st instruction: 10:40 a.m. Repeated 3 times

2^nd instruction: 10:42 a.m. Repeated 3 times

3^rd instruction: 10:43 a.m. Repeated 3 times

4^th instruction: 10:45 a.m. Repeated 3 times

Rajan also stated that during the time he was issuing the instructions to the crowd he noticed Tian Chua and another person within the assembly seeking additional time from the OCPD. Although the OCPD appeared to have gestured his consent to the people making the requests, based on the video footage recorded, Rajan was not informed of any additional time that was to be granted. Rajan also acknowledged that during the time he was instructing the crowd the helicopter, which was also under the control of the OCPD was in close range to the assembly and that the reverberations were indeed loud. Rajan also told the Panel that he heard the OCPD say ‘Udara 1 turun bawah lagi’.

According to Rajan, as the crowd failed to comply with the instructions to disperse even after the 4^th set of instructions were issued, the OCPD instructed him to have the water canon officers commence action. At 10:46 a.m. the water canons were unleashed on the assembly. This was done on 2 separate occasions before the police commenced urgent arrests. Soon after the assembly dispersed.

Rajan stated that the events that transpired on the day in questions were diarised in detail and chronological order and it was agreed that a copy of the same was to be submitted to the Panel for their reference.

Rajan stated that he never witnessed any abuses of power by FRU Personnel or any other authorities stationed at the premises on the day in question. However, when the panel asked Rajan to comment on the brute force used by FRU personnel on the day in question as depicted in the photographs and video footage retained in evidence, Rajan responded as follows:-

1. That he did not recognize most of the FRU personnel depicted as abusing their power;
2. That some force by FRU personnel is justified in certain instances as each situation and type of crowd must be assessed independently;
3. From the time FRU personnel began instructing the crowd until the water canons were unleashed, approximately 40 minutes had elapsed. The crowd clearly disregarded the instructions and as such further action was needed; and
4. Those photographs may not depict with accuracy the actual event that transpired.

In essence, it was observed that after the said photographs and video footage were revealed to Rajan he began contradicting the testimony he provided at the beginning of the session to a significant degree. He was also unable to provide the panel with a comment on the photograph shown to him depicting the head injuries sustained by Amran and could only submit that he only heard about Amran’s injuries the next day.

In conclusion, Rajan said that on the day in question the OCPD gave him instructions to have FRU depart from the premises at 11:25 a.m. and this was duly executed at 11:30 a.m.

Session adjourned.

Prepared by,

Gowri Balasubramaniam