Will continued silence from authorities prompt Suhakam to launch inquiry into death, alleged brutality in Taiping Prison?

Four months have passed since 62-year-old Gan Chin Eng died at Taiping Prison following an alleged episode of brutality – and the silence from the authorities has been deafening.

This inaction may prompt the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) to launch a public inquiry into the incident.

It is understood that discussions are underway within Suhakam to initiate such an inquiry, following serious allegations that some 100 inmates were assaulted by more than 60 prison wardens using batons and tear gas.

The incident, which took place at Malaysia’s oldest prison on Jan 17, reportedly left Gan with an “abdominal injury caused by blunt trauma”. He died after being rushed to Taiping Hospital. Twentytwo13 was thefirst to reportabout the case.

The mother of one inmate had previously told Twentytwo13 that herson was among those beaten – allegedly while handcuffed, with his face covered with a T-shirt. She also claimed that her son did not receive proper medical treatment, and was only given stitches at the prison for head injuries.

Despite the gravity of the allegations, the Home Ministry, Health Ministry, Prisons Department, police, and Attorney-General’s Chambers have remained largely silent.

The only known development came from Perak police, who told this publication last month that they had submitted investigation papers to the state legal department. However, both the state legal department and the Attorney-General’s Chambers have declined to comment on the case’s status.

Suhakam officers visited Taiping Prison and the Batu Gajah Correctional Facility between Feb 24–27 and March 10–14. Theirinvestigation covers the alleged brutality, Gan’s death, and the overall conditions within the prison.

Suhakam has said it will soon release its findings.

Should an inquiry proceed, Suhakam is expected to assess whether any human rights violations occurred. The scope could also include reviewing standard operating procedures, access to healthcare for inmates, prison conditions, and institutional transparency.

The Prisons Department had previously acknowledged that there was “some provocation” during the Jan 17 incident but did not provide further details. It merely stated that it would not compromise on safety and would take action if there was carelessness or a failure to follow procedure.

It is worth noting that several of the inmates involved – including Gan – had not been convicted, and were being held on remand pending trial.