EDITORIAL
Unreasonable hours

2009/11/21

THE judicial review of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur draws attention to a lacuna in Section 30(3)(a) with regards to the hours of the day or night when "a person ordered to attend an examination" could be questioned. The court's answer is that witnesses can only be interrogated during normal working hours. Common sense would appear to tell us that when that "person" is a witness, it is only fair and humane not to "examine" him or her until the wee hours of the morning or without sufficient rest, food and water. Certainly, it is incumbent on the courts to protect the liberties and rights of the people, including shielding them from cruel and degrading interrogation which hounds them to the point of exhaustion. That said, however, the problem is that while the ruling appears to be a welcome attempt to protect witnesses and regulate investigations, there are undesirable consequences. For one thing, even those statements, freely offered, at all hours of the day and night could become inadmissible and result in a stay of proceedings. Those who discharge a very difficult task under tough and high-pressure conditions could now be liable for unlawful detention. The ruling, unfortunately, ignores the fact that in combating corruption, strong laws are as vital as the wide powers at their disposal because these represent a proportionate response to a dark, stealthy, insidious crime. This is tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We are dealing with a different type of situation where one size does not fit all. Office hours become unreasonable hours when getting accurate, timely, relevant information of the kind that is integral to the detection, investigation, prosecution and conviction of those charged with corruption.

What is most disappointing is that the fixation on one point of law misses the bigger problem of the "third degree", that is to say, the lengthy, continuous unrelenting periods of interrogation, and the types of pressure tactics and other excesses that could go on, not just for hours but days and weeks on end, that we should guard against. This is why it is vital to review the code of practice and standard operating procedures for investigations to ensure avoidance of arbitrariness, respect for human rights, the observance of due process, and the defence of the rule of law. Our standards in this respect must be exacting. We cannot accept any notion that everything is permissible for the graft-busters in the interest of bringing the crooked to justice.