October 9, 2010
Tengku Muhammad Fakhry Petra: Confined by Police without Proper Cause
by Bernama (10-08-12)
The Sultan of Kelantan’s brother, Tengku Muhammad Fakhry Petra told the High Court today that he had not committed any criminal offence on July 30 2009, the day he was confined by Police. Tengku Muhammad Fakhry, 34, testified that he was neither informed of any criminal wrongdoing nor the reason for his detention by the police in the Istana Mahkota grounds, in Kubang Kerian, Kelantan.
“I was confined for at least an hour by the Police and not allowed to leave the Palace grounds that day,” he said during the proceedings against Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar and three others related to his alleged wrongful confinement on July 30 2009. He added that his lawyer, Datuk Mohd Haziq Pillay, was also in the car with him at the time.
The fifth plaintiff’s witness said that just before he was detained by the Police, he had driven out the Bentley Brooklands car that belonged to his father, Sultan Ismail Petra, from the Palace garage.
Tengku Muhammad Fakhry said prior to that day his father had instructed him to drive the car down to Singapore.However, as he was about to drive the car out of the palace grounds a Volvo had blocked his way and the main gates were closed.
Tengku Muhammad Fakhry described the situation as scary saying he saw several armed Policemen moving in and out of the Palace.
During cross-examination by senior federal counsel, Azizan Md Arshad, who represented the defendants, Tengku Muhammad Fakhry said he was not aware of the order issued by his brother, the acting Sultan of Kelantan at the time, Tengku Muhammad Faris Petra, prohibiting him from taking the car out of the palace.
He also refuted Azizan’s suggestion that the Police had actually prevented the Bentley Brooklands from being taken out of the Palace grounds and had not confined him.
The plaintiff filed a RM150 million suit on December 9 last year, naming the IGP; the Kelantan Sultan’s chief personal bodyguard, ASP Norazman Ismail; Kelantan police chief at the time, Datuk Abdul Rahim Hanafi, and the Royal Malaysian Police as the first to fourth defendants respectively.
In his statement of claim, Tengku Muhammad Fakhry alleged that he was wrongfully confined on July 30, 2009 in the compound of Istana Mahkota, Kubang Kerian as he was about to leave in a Bentley Brooklands car.
He is seeking RM100 million in general damages, RM50 million in aggravated and exemplary damages, interest at a rate of four per cent, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.
The trial before Judge Datin Zabariah Mohd Yusof resumes tomorrow (October 9, 2012). — Bernama
Din Merican: the Malaysian DJ Blogger 
Saksi pertama defendan, DCP Datuk Abd Rahim Hanafi yang ketika itu Ketua Polis Negeri Kelantan, berkata tidak ada sebarang arahan untuk menghalang Tengku Muhammad Fakhry daripada keluar atau masuk ke pekarangan Istana Mahkota.
Abd Rahim, yang kini bertugas sebagai Ketua Polis Negeri Pulau Pinang, juga mengakui anggota polis dibekalkan “senjata api” semasa bertugas, tertakluk kepada Perintah Tetap Ketua Polis Negara.
Punca pergaduhan dan penahanan sebegitu rupa disebabkan :
Pada 9 malam 29 Julai 2009, beliau telah dihubungi Nik Shafriman, yang menyampaikan titah “Pemangku” Sultan supaya tidak membenarkan Tengku Muhammad Fakhry membawa keluar kereta tersebut. Mahkamah diberitahu semalam 9 Oktober 2012–http://m.malaysiakini.com/news/211241
Pada September 8, 2011 Tengku Muhammad Fakhry mendakwa, kekandanya ( Sultan Kelantan baru ) itu tidak mempunyai hak ke atas kereta berharga lebih RM1.6 juta yang didaftarkan atas nama ayahanda mereka, Sultan Ismail Petra. Tambahan pula terdapat unsur sabotaj sehingga menyebabkan cukai jalan bagi empat buah kereta berkenaan tidak dapat diperbaharui, ini tidak akan berlaku (common sense) jika kereta tersebut kepunyaan Sultan Kelantan baru. http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/175142
“I was confined for at least an hour by the Police and not allowed to leave the palace grounds that day,” he said.
—————
At this point there was no arrest. He could have walked out. Why didn’t he do that? If he was prevented from leaving he was entitled to ask if he was under arrest. If there is an arrest then he would have to be told grounds for his arrest. The police must have reasonable grounds for his arrest. He would have to be told the grounds for his arrest. If there was an arrest if he called for his lawyer, all questioning must cease. He may want to cooperate with the police if they are only there to interview him.
Somebody walk me through Malaysia’s Criminal Procedure Code here.
Over here any violation of the Fifth Amendment means the evidence obtained is inadmissible in court. Period.
The facts are not clear and the government may well have a defense against alleged unlawful confinement if the detention is not long enough to be viewed as an arrest. No arrest, and there is no need for reasonable suspicion of anything. He could have asked to be allowed to leave. But did he? He thought he was under arrest. That is not good enough.
Why are the policemen so dumb and funny at the same time? The commandoes are all armed with automatic weapons and all drawn ready to fire and shouting “Keluar! Keluar! Keluar! Keluar!” but there lies HRH The Sultan motionless, covered with a blanket to keep warm and obviously very sick, macamana lah dia bisa keluar, bodoh!
Somebody should post the video showing how Interpol intercepted Slobodan Milosovic’s car and got him arrested and then show that video to the policemen in Kota Bahru how it is done in 1 minute or less with not a single shot fired yet secured… macam itu lah baru professional!
Wah!! Dey can do dat to the royal personages. What hope dere is den for ordinary Bolehlanders. Specially if dey are from Bersih.
Third world police force. Very brave when behind guns and numbers. Try dat with dem Indons or hardcore criminals. Heard they looked on while a man was being beaten up by thugs right inside a balai. Just last wik.
The bodyguard of his brother,Sultan Muhammad was shot dead.From the ballastic report,police knew where the bullet came from..He was lucky the AG close the case.This is the family fued.Why involved the police and IGP.
___________
The Police and the IGP have no business to be involved in a Royal Family matter. The Police cannot humiliate the ailing Sultan of Kelantan in the way they did (watch the youtube).The show of force by the UTK was unnecessary.–Din Merican
Here’s how I read it.
Apparently somebody saw it fit to send Malaysia’s so-called SWAT team (or some Gerak Kilat nonsensical nonsense) to defuse some kind of situation deemed by retards in blue as a threat to security. Whose security is the issue.
The retards in blue in charge of training should not only re-look at the training manual of these SWATs but may want to be more selective in their recruitment. Perhaps select only those with IQs above the sub-normal. Clearly this is the problem. Their robotic response to a situation told to them as being fraught with danger but clearly wasn’t is obvious. A few of them appear to be on steroid. What we are seeing is the response of law endorcement officers when facing situations of inherent danger. The only danger here is of a sick individual falling out of the car dead from a heart attack.
This is good material for SNL.
He is seeking RM100 million in general damages, RM50 million in aggravated and exemplary damages, interest at a rate of four per cent, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.
———————-
At best nominal damages. But guess who ends up paying for the bill? Even the lawyers representing the plaintiff may not get their dues.
During cross-examination by senior federal counsel, Azizan Md Arshad, who represented the defendants, Tengku Muhammad Fakhry said he was not aware of the order issued by his brother, the acting Sultan of Kelantan at the time, Tengku Muhammad Faris Petra, prohibiting him from taking the car out of the palace.
————————-
If it is a case of the owner of a property revoking his consent regarding the use of his property all he has to do is give notice. Here he alleged he had no notice – a question of fact.
The primary issue is whether the plaintiff was unalwfully confined. Being briefly retained in one’s home in the course of a police investigation is confinement? This is a major hurdle the plaintiff will need to cross to get to where he wants to go.
Search and seizure laws in Malaysia do not protect the accused as they do elsewhere. Due process rights of the citizen are in constant jeopardy and are often abused by the police. This is where reform is needed.
“Over here any violation of the Fifth Amendment means the evidence obtained is inadmissible in court”. -Mr Bean
Over here (in Malaysia) any violation of the Federal Constitution means the evidence is admissible in court if obtained by the Attorney-General’s office. Period.
Mr Bean, there is no use is trying to put a legal argument in cases involving the royalty here.
What you are watching is Royal Wayang Kulit. In the case of Kelantan, it is called Makyong.
The PDRM is using a Howitzer artillery to kill a fly. Just get a court bailiff escorted by 2 policemen to serve the restraining order, no need to bring in the SWAT team.
We are not dealing with JI or some terrorist group, just a low IQ prince trying to send his father the Sultan to seek medical treatment. Guess this is what we call a palace coup.
Point taken, Frank. But even in Bolehland, Makyong has to be played out and played out properly. This doesn’t even come close.
The issue before the court is was what happened meets the legal definition of confinement in the legal sense of the word; and was it unlawful?
Kathy the only other legal eagle in the room may want a shot at this.
If you are suspected of shop lifting in a department store and is asked to follow to see a security officer in his room so questions could be asked and answers noted, is there a case of unlawful confinement?
Here the guy is in his own house.