Adib’s family slam IGP for ‘irresponsible’ remarks on fireman’s death, poor understanding of case details

Mohd Kassim Abdul Hamid, father of the late fireman Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim, arrives for the public inquest at the Shah Alam Court March 21, 2019. — Picture by Mukhriz Hazim
Mohd Kassim Abdul Hamid, father of the late fireman Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim, arrives for the public inquest at the Shah Alam Court March 21, 2019. — Picture by Mukhriz Hazim

KUALA LUMPUR, July 12 — The next-of-kin of Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim said today they are disappointed with the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM) and Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador for urging a review of the investigation into the fireman’s death.

Expressing their disappointment, the family said they had initially placed high hopes that the authorities would undertake their investigation in a determined and transparent manner to identify Adib’s killer following the Coroner’s Court’s inquest verdict last year.

“It is very disappointing because the IGP’s remark in updating the investigation status had clearly exposed the ignorance demonstrated by the IGP and PDRM towards the detailed facts of the case.

“If the IGP had read in full the grounds of judgement and statement notes while scrutinising the court’s exhibits, we are confident that the IGP will never utter such irresponsible statements.

“This shows a facetious attitude towards conducting the investigations and instead provides an excuse of stumbling into a dead end while claiming they have exhausted all means without making a genuine effort to seek justice for Adib,” they said in a statement through their lawyers.

This comes after Abdul Hamid proposed the setting-up of a review committee to dig further into the sequence of events that led to the severe injuries that killed Adib as the police did not have a strong case to charge anyone despite the inquest suggestion that Adib was the victim of a violent act.

In a September 2019 verdict, the Coroner Court had ruled that Adib’s death was due to a criminal act by two or three unidentified individuals.

The 24-year old sustained serious injuries during a riot on November 27, 2018 at the Sri Maha Mariamman Devasthanam temple in USJ25, Subang Jaya. He eventually succumbed to his injuries at the National Heart Institute on December 17, after three weeks of intensive care.

The family also said it strongly objected to any need to reconsider the alleged cause of death through a “review team” as it was already previously determined by the court, after Abdul Hamid noted conflicting opinions by the two forensic pathologists who testified in the inquest.

“It must be stressed here that the Coroner’s Court has already given its input on the cause of Adib’s death.

“Since the verdict has never been challenged by any parties through an appeal, then the police are obliged to investigate who were those who caused Adib’s death and not question whether Adib was killed or not,” they said.

The family also sought to address and correct several distorted facts issued by Abdul Hamid in his remark during the July 10 press conference that was clearly disrespectful and against the Coroner Court’s verdict.

“It is very unfair for the IGP to summarise that there was no statement that could be linked to Adib’s murder just because two firemen claimed they did not see what transpired during the incident.

“Moreover, it is ridiculous that the IGP tried to depict Adib as having not been assaulted just because there were no self-defence injuries on his body.

“All of these claims have been answered clearly in the inquest and the IGP’s action to raise them shows that PDRM failed to understand the chronology of the case,” they said, adding that Adib was already in an unconscious state due to internal injuries when he was assaulted based on the court’s finding.

The family also said that the IGP’s claim of having recalled all 30 witnesses who testified during the inquest was untrue because Adib’s father was never called for his statement up till this day.

Abdul Hamid had remarked that despite having recalled all 30 witnesses who testified during the inquest, plus a further 52 more, the police were still not able to determine whom to prosecute.

Related Articles