Excessive force, rights breaches found in Taiping Prison incident, says Suhakam

KUALA LUMPUR: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has found that Prisons Department personnel committed constitutional and human rights violations during a transfer operation at Taiping Prison.

The findings, delivered following a public inquiry into the Jan 17, 2025 incident, detailed systematic use of excessive force that breached Articles 5 and 8 of the Federal Constitution – on the right to life and equality – and failed to meet the standards of four major international human rights instruments.

Delivering the inquiry’s decision, Suhakam chairman Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus said systemic negligence and inaction by senior prison leadership directly contributed to the violations and the death of 61-year-old detainee Gan Chin Eng.

The commission identified critical violations under Article 5 (right to life and personal liberty) and Article 8 (equal protection of the law) of the Federal Constitution.

The actions of prison staff also breached Article 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the United Nations’ Nelson Mandela Rules governing the health and safety of detainees, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT).

“The public inquiry panel found that excessive physical force was used by a large number of prison personnel against the high court detainees (TMT) during the transfer operation from Hall B to Block E on Jan 17, 2025. This violence also affected the group of detainees housed in Block B,” Hishamudin said.

According to the panel, the violence involved severe beatings using gazetted weapons and security equipment. Detainees were punched, kicked, dragged, trampled and sprayed with pepper spray while handcuffed and seated in a row.

Prison officers attempted to justify the violence as “minimum force” — defined as any force that does not cause death.

Rejecting this explanation, the panel said it was unacceptable given the severe lacerations and fractures sustained by detainees.

“The actions of the prison officers, who lost self-control and acted as if they had ‘gone berserk’ during the transfer operation, clearly demonstrate that the interpretation of ‘minimum force’ was merely used as a defensive excuse to justify actions that exceeded legal boundaries and violated human rights,” he said.

The inquiry found that prison personnel systematically flouted standard operating procedures, misusing batons, pepper spray and protective gear.

Equipment meant for riot control, such as body armour and shields, was instead used to intimidate detainees and protect officers while assaults were carried out.

“The public inquiry panel emphasised that weapons and security equipment should only be used in urgent circumstances to control the situation and for security purposes.

“However, the panel determined that these weapons and security equipment were used arbitrarily and irresponsibly during the incident on Jan 17, 2025,” he said.

Addressing the cause of the standoff, the panel ruled that detainees’ refusal to move to Block E was not an act of defiance or insubordination, but a reasonable reaction to a facility that was filthy, unsafe and unfit for human habitation.

“Block E was found to be non-compliant with building safety standards, including failure to undergo safety and fire inspections by the Fire and Rescue Department, thereby increasing safety risks in the event of a fire,” the Suhakam chairman added.

The panel noted that the rushed and failed transfer involving 60 personnel was marred by ineffective, one-sided negotiations, the lack of a cooling-off period, and a weak chain of command, which allowed officers to act with impunity.

The inquiry placed direct blame on senior leadership, specifically Taiping Prison director Nazri Mohamad and deputy director Shahrul Izzat Hamid.

Shahrul, who was operations chief, wrongly treated the situation as a detainee-led riot — a claim the panel dismissed — while failing to follow standard procedures, allowing unchecked violence, and neglecting to report the crisis to Nazri.

Compounding the physical abuse was a pattern of medical negligence and institutional cover-up.

The panel found that injured detainees were denied immediate medical attention, and hospital transfers were delayed to conceal the extent of the violence.

Medical personnel also misdiagnosed serious injuries, such as rib fractures, as minor muscle pain, and used security body scanners instead of proper medical X-rays to examine detainees.

To shield the prison from accountability, medical staff falsified records by backdating treatment entries and attributing injuries to “riots” or “accidental falls”, reflecting a compromised “dual loyalty” where institutional protection was prioritised over professional ethics.

“The public inquiry panel found that the TMT medical cards contained treatment dates that were inconsistent with the actual dates of treatment.

“There were visible alterations to the dates on the TMT medical cards, where the originally recorded treatment dates had been amended to the date of the incident,” Hishamudin said.

In the aftermath, prison management subjected detainees to degrading treatment, denying hygiene, clean clothes and bedding, while isolating them from families to conceal the abuse.

Prison personnel also filed false police reports blaming detainees for the violence.

Key evidence, including photos and videos from a duty phone, was deleted, while CCTV footage was stored without timestamps, raising suspicions of manipulation.

“The destruction of evidence potentially constitutes a criminal offence under Sections 201 and 204 of the Penal Code,” Hishamudin added.

The inquiry focused on the death of Gan Chin Eng, which the panel declared a severe human rights violation.

“The public inquiry panel determined that the death of detainee Gan Chin Eng was a severe human rights violation resulting from excessive guard violence — established by circumstantial evidence — which was severely compounded by unconscionable delays in transporting him to Taiping Hospital.

“Additionally, the panel concluded that prison officers and medical staff committed gross medical negligence, including abandoning a critical Gan to untrained detainees and failing to provide emergency oxygen, which directly breached their duty of care and contributed to his death,” he added.

The panel also found that prison personnel gave false and contradictory testimonies to Suhakam and used euphemisms to mask the excessive force captured on CCTV.

A total of 50 witnesses testified during the public inquiry.

© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd

المصدر: New Straits Times