‘Adib inquest sets bad precedent, cops should complete probe’

(FMT) – A lawyer has questioned the need for an inquest into the death of fireman Muhammad Adib Kassim, saying the case should be handled by police who have wider powers to investigate and scrutinise evidence.

M Visvanathan said a police investigation would be more comprehensive in determining the cause of Adib’s death.

“In a police investigation, they could detain suspects, record statements, seize exhibits, visit the crime scene and even take DNA samples of suspects,” he told FMT.

Adib died on Dec 17, three weeks after he was allegedly assaulted by a mob outside the Seafield Sri Maha Mariamman temple in Subang Jaya.

Visvanathan, who heads a group called Eliminating Death and Abuse in Custody (Edict), said police must wait for Adib’s post-mortem report which would reveal if there was foul play.

“The report is crucial as it will reveal what kind of injuries he suffered and whether he was assaulted or died due to crush injuries,” he said.

Deputy Health Minister Lee Boon Chye yesterday said the report was expected to be ready in one month as that period was necessary in case blood tests were required for analysis by pathologists.

Earlier today, Home Minister Muhyiddin Yassin announced an inquest to shed more light into the circumstances surrounding Adib’s death.

Visvanathan said an inquest could not be held since the police have already classified the case as murder and have started their probe.

“An inquest is held only to determine how, when, where and in what circumstances death took place,” he said, adding that all these questions had been answered by police.

He said the only question that needed answers was who committed the offence.

He said an inquest was not the forum to determine if a specific person was criminally liable for the death.

Visvanathan said Adib’s case was going to set a precedent as in future family members would clamour for an inquest for any unsolved murder.

He said an inquest was a fact-finding mission and the coroner at best would declare that someone was “criminally concerned” and police would have to investigate further.

“The public prosecutor will then peruse the investigation papers to see if anyone could be charged for an offence,” he said, adding he had yet to come across such prosecution in the past.