Look at this - Good work for the Court!!!

This news have been taken from The Star Online today...

Cops held negligent in 1983 shooting incident

By RAPHAEL WONG

PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal held that law enforcers had been negligent when they opened fire at four men at the Sungai Besi toll plaza on suspicion of their involvement in a kidnapping case 24 years ago.

Court of Appeal Justices Suriyadi Halim Omar, Hasan Loh and Vincent Ng unanimously allowed the appeal of Ngan Chong Meng, Ngui Pau Kheong, Lim Chye Thiam and Chai Chit Moey for their claim for damages against suspended Commercial Crimes Investigation Department director Comm Datuk Ramli Yusoff, who was then an Assistant Superintendent, and the Government The three-man bench set aside the High Court’s decision and ordered that the quantum of damages be assessed by the High Court.

On March 25, 1997, the High Court ruled that the police had breached their duty of care in opening fire at the four men in a car at the toll plaza but dismissed their negligence claim by virtue of Section 5 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979, which states that no action or other legal proceedings should be brought against public officers provided the act was done in good faith.

The four men were shot by police in a car at the toll plaza while travelling to Singapore on March 24, 1983, the police acting on information that the passengers in a car bearing registration number WAH 6022 were armed and dangerous kidnappers.

Ngan and Ngui were shot in the legs. The four were arrested and later released. No charges were brought against them.

The four filed the suit against the then ASP Ramli and the Government, claiming damages for failing to give any warning of their intention to open fire, failing to give signs requiring the vehicle to stop for inspection and causing them to suffer injuries, pain and shock.

The defendants, however, denied the allegation, saying that the men were shot because they failed to stop when ordered to.

On Nov 2, Comm Ramli was suspended indefinitely, following charges against him under the Anti-Corruption Act.

Earlier, the appellate judges questioned the police procedure when apprehending the four men.

Justice Suriyadi said that based on the photographs tendered as exhibits, there was no evidence to show that the police had shot at the car tyres to stop the vehicle.

Senior Federal Counsel Rozi Bainon agreed with Justice Suriyadi that nearly all the bullets shot by the police were aimed at the body of the car.

SFC Rozi added that there was testimony from one of the witnesses, a policeman, that there had been no intention to kill or injure the four men.

Justice Suriyadi interjected:”Kalau lepas two atau tiga tembakan ok lah dalam jarak tertentu tapi ini lepas macam apa aje, macam nak bunuh orang” (If two or three shots were fired from a reasonable distance it would be acceptable but in this case, countless shots were fired as though there was an intention to kill.) Justice Vincent Ng then added: “This is like a cowboy town. We want to prevent this from happening. This could have been us in the car, who knows?” he said.

Counsel Karpal Singh appeared for the four men.