.jpg)
[KEMAS KINI] Persoalan Ku Li Tentang Kematian TEOH BENG HOCK
YM Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah melalui blognya telah menyentuh tentang misteri kematian Teoh Beng Hock. Menurutnya, “Dia (Teoh) disoal atas kemungkinan penyalahgunaan dana oleh majikannya, seorang exco negeri, untuk membeli bendera untuk sambutan Hari Merdeka tahun lalu. Jumlah dana yang menjadi pertikaian ialah RM2 400. Dia telah disoal siasat selama lapan jam sepanjang malam.”
Dalam membicarakan isu tersebut, beliau juga telah mengutarakan lima persoalan untuk dihujahkan oleh pembaca di blognya.
Dalam membicarakan isu tersebut, beliau juga telah mengutarakan lima persoalan untuk dihujahkan oleh pembaca di blognya.
LIMA PERSOALAN YANG DITIMBULKAN IALAH:
1. Persoalan tentang kematian Teoh tidak boleh ditutup dengan pernyataan bersifat amaran “bertanggungjawab menyebabkan masyarakat keliru” kerana masyarakat sememangnya keliru. Kita keliru tentang bagaimana seorang lelaki muda yang idealistik yang mempunyai pelbagai perkara untuk dilakukan dalam hidupnya masuk ke pejabat SPRM sebagai saksi dan dijumpai mati pada keesokan harinya.
2. Persoalan tentang kematian Teoh tidak boleh ditolak ketepi dengan arahan bersifat paternalistik, iaitu “biarkan pihak berkuasa menyiasat” kerana kematian Teoh tampaknya adalah hasil daripada “membiarkan pihak berkuasa menyiasat” kes tersebut...
3. Persoalan tentang kematian Teoh tidak boleh dihalang dengan amaran supaya “tidak membuat sebarang spekulasi” apabila pihak berkuasa yang melakukan siasatan tampaknya sudah membuat ramalan, mendahului siasatan mereka bahawa tiada unsur khianat terlibat dalam kes ini, dan sesetengah pemimpin tampaknya mempunyai maklumat istimewa bahawa Teoh telah melompat sehingga menyebabkan maut atas kerelaan dirinya.
4. Persoalan tentang kematian Teoh tidak wajar dihindari dengan menggunakan taktik murahan, iaitu menjadikannya isu perkauman sedangkan isu kematian Teoh menyentuh semua rakyat di negara ini. Tiada sesiapa yang mahu hidup di bawah badan kerajaan yang tidak boleh dipercayai untuk bertindak bebas dan menjelaskan sesuatu kebenaran.
5. Persoalan tentang kematian Teoh tidak boleh dihalang dengan larangan keras kerana hal ini berkaitan dengan integriti dan kebebasan institusi yang menjadi hak rakyat. Para menteri mungkin terlupa siapa yang meletakkan mereka dalam kerajaan dan membayar gaji mereka...
(Terjemahan "segera", maaf jika ada kata/frasa yang kurang tepat. Walau bagaimanapun, saya ada menyertakan artikel asal yang saya salin & tampal di bawah ini.)
[RAZALEIGH.COM] "Mr Teoh Beng Hock’s death marks a watershed in the attitude of the public towards their government. The government has plumbed a new low in loss of credibility. Many people have come up to tell me in anger or despair that they feel their country has gone off the rails. People who previously considered themselves apolitical have been roused into active engagement.
There have been too many deaths under custody. But this death is particularly disturbing because Mr Teoh died after interrogation by a specially commissioned watchdog agency, inaugurated with fanfare last year by the outgoing administration. The very agency set up to combat the abuse of power has become in the public eye a symbol of the abuse of power.
Mr Teoh was a mere witness. He was questioned about the possible misuse of funds by his employer, a state assemblyman, to buy flags for the last Merdeka celebrations. The sum in question was RM2,400. He was questioned for eight hours through the night. He was found dead the following day outside the MACC’s headquarters.
Mr Teoh, 30, would have registered his marriage last weekend. His fiancée is two-months pregnant.
If the Perak debacle reminded us of the importance of the Constitution, the death under suspicious circumstances of Mr Teoh Beng Hock has brought home in a heart-wrenching way how much we need our public institutions to be independent and law-abiding. A shocked public is demanding answers, and rightly so.
Questions about how Mr Teoh died cannot be shut down with the usual warning that it is “liable to confuse the public” because the public is already confused. We are confused about how an idealistic young man with everything to live for can enter the headquarters of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission as a witness one day and be found dead outside the next.
Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be swept aside with the paternalistic instruction to “leave it to the authorities to investigate,” because the death of Mr Teoh appears to be just the result of “leaving it to the authorities investigate.” It is precisely the independence of the investigating authorities that people are questioning.
Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be suppressed with the warning “not to speculate” when the investigating authorities were apparently able to prognosticate, ahead of their own investigations, that foul play was not involved, and some leaders appear to have special knowledge that Mr Teoh jumped to his death of his own accord.
Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be evaded with the low tactic of racializing the issue because the death of Mr Teoh touches us all as citizens, brothers and sisters and fathers and mothers. None of us wants to live under a government apparatus that cannot be trusted to be independent and to tell the truth.
Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be suppressed with authoritarian prohibitions because they are about the integrity and independence of institutions that belong to the people. Those ministers who talk down to the people may have forgotten who put them into government and pays their wages, and whose questions they were put there to ask. And to answer.
To ask such questions is not to “politicize” the issue but to exercise our ownership of an issue that touches each and every one of us as citizens: our basic institutions are rotted out, and we are headed down the path of a failed state.
It is our right and indeed our duty as citizens to keep asking questions when someone dies under circumstances that put the entire government under a shadow. As we ask these questions let us accept our joint responsibility to push uncompromisingly for an overhaul of the key institutions that have rotted through under exactly the kind of authoritarianism that would prohibit discussion of the circumstances of the death of Mr Teoh Beng Hock.
(Published in Sin Chew Daily, July 22, 2009)"
Berkaitan:
* Witneses Shouldnt End Up in Coffins
No Comments »
|
Catatan
Leave a comment
Sila lontarkan pandangan anda sama ada melalui komen di blog atau di laman Facebook.
Berikanlah pandangan yang bertanggungjawab,tidak berunsur fitnah, tanpa menggunakan kata-kata lucah & kesat melampau (dilepaskan jika sesuai), dan semolek-moleknya biarlah berkaitan dengan isi artikel.
Kepada "Anynomous", sila letakkan nama pena anda. Jangan berani bersuara, tetapi takut memperkenalkan diri!
PERHATIAN:
Komen yang disiarkan di blog atau di laman Facebook tidak semestinya menggambarkan pandangan atau pendirian Duniacacamarba (DCM).
Blog ini TIDAK BERTANGGUNGJAWAB terhadap setiap pandangan atau pendapat yang diutarakan melalui laman sosial FACEBOOK atau yang terlepas siar di RUANG KOMEN blog. Komen itu adalah pandangan peribadi pemilik akaun.
Terima kasih.