Chief Inspector at Taiping Prison admits attempting to kick inmate without provocation

Chief Inspector at Taiping Prison, Shafril Azmir Mohd Shafie, admitted today that he had tried to kick a prisoner without provocation.

He also admitted to failing to document a riot that broke out in Hall B on Jan 17 and said he had lost control of the situation.

Shafril, 48, said the incident traumatised him and had left gaps in his memory.

He testified at the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia’s (Suhakam) public inquiry into alleged human rights violations linked to the incident.

Shafril initially denied being aggressive towards any prisoner that day, but changed his statement after being shown closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage.

He testified before an inquiry panel chaired by Suhakam chairman Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus and Dr Farah Nini Dusuki.

When asked by Suhakam’s assisting inquiry officer Mohd Faiz Abdul Rahman whether he had acted aggressively, Shafril replied, “As far as I can remember, no.”

But when shown the footage of himself attempting to kick an inmate, he replied, “Yes, that’s me.”

Asked if officers – dressed in body armour and armed with riot shields, pepper spray and batons – had been told to expect resistance, Shafril said, “No, we were just told to be prepared.”

He said (Deputy Director of Taiping Prison) Shahrul Izzat Hamid had briefed them only to be on standby.

When asked if there had been instructions to act aggressively, Shafril denied it, but admitted that wardens had lost control of the situation.

Asked whether he had issued any order to stop the Control and Prevention Unit (UKP) guards from hurting the prisoners, Shafril said he could not remember, adding that even if he had, it was possible the others did not hear him due to the noise.

“I can’t remember what I did, and I don’t remember 100 per cent what happened on Jan 17,” he said. “I still can’t accept what happened that day. It weighs heavily on me.”

The inquiry, now in its second phase, is aimed at determining whether any human rights violations were committed in the incident, identifying those responsible, and recommending measures to prevent a recurrence.

During the first phase last month at Pusat Koreksional Kamunting (Kemta), 18 witnesses – including detainees – testified.

Inmates had alleged that over 60 prison wardens assaulted them using batons and tear gas.

On Jan 25, Twentytwo13 reported that 62-year-old Gan Chin Eng had died from abdominal injuries caused by blunt trauma during the incident.

Earlier today, Taiping Prison’s chief registrar Ahmad Shaiful Rafie, 45, told the panel that although health screenings were required, no individual checks were carried out on Jan 16 for the 104 detainees transferred from Batu Gajah Correctional Facility.

He said the transfer was due to overcrowding at Batu Gajah.

Ahmad Shaiful, who was on duty on Jan 16 and 17, agreed with Hishamudin that it was his responsibility to ensure the screenings were conducted at the point of entry.

Hishamudin: There were many detainees (104), and no individual screenings were done. What is the correct procedure?

Ahmad Shaiful: The screening is done individually.

Hishamudin: So, no individual screenings were carried out on Jan 16?

Ahmad Shaiful: I’m not sure. I was told there was a medical officer, but I did not see the officer myself.

He was also unsure if any screening took place on Jan 17.

He said while it was his responsibility, other departments were also involved.

He confirmed that the 104 detainees were placed in Hall B upon arrival.

When asked by assisting inquiry officer Simon Karunagaram if there were any incidents in Hall B that day, Ahmad Shaiful said there had been provocation.

He said he had gone to Hall B to identify eight detainees to be sent back to Batu Gajah for security reasons. Five of them belonged to the ‘Gang 5 Beradik’, and the remaining three had previous records.

“When I got there, Inspector Ahmad Rizal (Razali) was already with the detainees. There had been an exchange of words, and I asked him to leave.”

Simon: Why did you ask Inspector Rizal to leave?

Ahmad Shaiful: So it would be easier for me to extract the eight detainees and return the situation to normal.

Simon: Were those eight involved in the exchange?

Ahmad Shaiful: I don’t think so.

Simon: What time did this happen?

Ahmad Shaiful: About half an hour after they arrived.

Simon: Did they threaten or provoke Rizal?

Ahmad Shaiful: I’m not sure, but I heard threats and lewd words. Things like, “Dalam you punya, luar kita punya. (Inside belongs to you, outside is ours).”

Simon: Did Rizal say anything harsh?

Ahmad Shaiful: Not that I heard.

Hishamudin then referred to the CCTV footage.

Hishamudin: You told Rizal to leave, but his body language – raising his hands – suggested he was unhappy. Would you agree that’s not proper for an officer?

Ahmad Shaiful: Yes, I agree.

Hishamudin: Was he spitting?

Ahmad Shaiful: Yes, correct, Datuk Seri.

Hishamudin: And raising a finger?

Ahmad Shaiful: Yes.

Hishamudin: Isn’t that lewd?

Ahmad Shaiful: Yes.

He agreed that as a trained officer, Rizal should have managed his emotions better.

Regarding Jan 17, Ahmad Shaiful said he entered Hall B after hearing loud noises. He was later informed that another provocation had taken place. “If there is no wind, the trees will not sway,” he remarked.

He agreed with Hishamudin that even if provoked, officers must act within the limits of the Penal Code and not harm detainees.

Lawyer T. Shashi Devan, representing 99 detainees including Gan’s family, suggested that the Jan 17 incident stemmed from inmates refusing to move from Hall B to Block E.

Hishamudin: The detainees did not want to move because Block E was unsuitable. That’s what they said previously.

Ahmad Shaiful: Yes, I agree.

Shashi: Because they were concerned about their human rights?

Ahmad Shaiful: I disagree.

Shashi told the panel that documents presented last month – including reports from the Perak Public Works Department dated Oct 21, 2022, and the Perak Prison Department – stated that Block E was unsafe for occupation.

Ahmad Shaiful confirmed he had briefed the panel about the condition of Block E and said only the lower portion was unsafe.

Simon also proposed that the panel allow journalists and members of the public to listen to audio recordings of the CCTV footage referenced in the inquiry. There were no objections from any party, including the Prisons Department and the Bar Council.

Such access was not granted during the previous hearing.

The inquiry at Suhakam’s headquarters in Kuala Lumpur continues tomorrow.

Main image: Suhakam chairman Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus and Dr Farah Nini Dusuki.