As I commented in my last post, I am really very disappointed that the RCI to be set up would not look into the cause of death of the late Teoh Beng Hock.
The RCI that is to be constituted would not look into the cause of how TBH died, but rather the procedural aspects of MACC.
Anyone would have thought that by looking into the cause of death of a witness ( not even a suspect, but just a witness , mind you) in the custody of a law enforcement unit such as MACC, the RCI would have cover the procedural aspects of how that enforcement agency acts.
For a witness to die in the custody of a law enforcement, no stones must be left unturned to find out the cause of why and how he died, otherwise people would simply lose all faith in the system.
No one is above the law. So if there is any wrong doings that had resulted or contributed in the death of a witness helping an investigation, then whoever was involved in the wrongdoings must be found and made to face the music. This is the basic of rule of law and a country can only reach the rank of the advanced nations by practicing rule of law. Without this, there will never be accountability and credibility.
A RCI is an very powerful tool, if allowed to function independently and if its findings are made to be binding. If it is not allowed to find out the cause but just to overhaul the procedural aspects of MACC, then i think most Malaysians will be disappointed.
All these disappointments are going to cost the ruling coalition dearly in terms of urban support in the next GE.