Justice Ravinthran Paramaguru will rule on July 17 whether the prosecution has a prima facie against Korp Hassan Basari.
Hassan, 58, was accused of committing the offence at the Lahad Datu police Special Branch office between January and March 3.
In submissions at the close of the prosecution's case Thursday, deputy public prosecutor Datuk Nordin Hassan said there was sufficient evidence to show that Hassan was aware about the impending intrusion but failed to inform his superiors about it.
Nordin said the prosecution's first protected witness had testified that he (the witness) had alerted Hassan in January this year that some 1,500 men of self-styled Sulu Sultan Ismail Kiram were gathering at Semunul island in southern Philippines.
The witness further told the court that he had reminded Hassan to inform his superiors about the matter.
Nordin said intercepted calls from the two cellular phones used by Hassan also showed that the Special Branch officer was aware that some 400 people had gathered at Bongao in Southern Philippines to prepare to enter Sabah to assist the 200 Sulu intruders at Kampung Tanduo.
Nordin said the intercepted calls also showed that Hassan knew Ismail Kiram's intentions to "claim" Sabah and if the Malaysian government refused to comply, he (Ismail) would cause chaos.
Hassan also had ample opportunities to raise the alert about the intruders including at a Lahad Datu Special Branch briefing on March 3 - a day before he was arrested. Still he did not pass on any information to his superiors, Nordin added.
Hassan's counsel Ram Singh pointed out that the prosecution had relied heavily on Hassan's intercepted telephone calls and certain "sensitive" documents handed over to the Malaysian security officials by Sulu gunmen leaders.
Ram said Hassan was being made to be nothing more than a "scapegoat" in respect of the charge against him.
He pointed out that the first protected witness had also testified that he met Insp Yusri and Insp Syazwan, Hassan's superiors, at the Lahad Datu Special Branch to work and cooperate in matters related to national security.
Both were however not called by the prosecution to testify.
"We submit that Yusri knew or had information from the first protected witness of the national security threats or possible intrusion of men wearing jungle fatigues coming in from Philippines," Ram argued.
"We also submit that the accused had been made a scapegoat for Yusri and Syazwan's carelessness after they were told of national security issues by the first protected witness," Ram added.
He said it was also doubtful if a Kuala Lumpur-based Special Branch administrative assistant could idetify the voices in the intercepted telephone calls by just undergoing three months of training to record dialogues through listening devices.
"We submit that the contents of the dialogues typed by the second protected witness are not the truth as to what she intercepted and listened," Ram added.
He pointed out that the first protected witness had also testified that he met Insp Yusri and Insp Syazwan, Hassan's superiors, at the Lahad Datu Special Branch to work and cooperate in matters related to national security.
Both were however not called by the prosecution to testify.
"We submit that Yusri knew or had information from the first protected witness of the national security threats or possible intrusion of men wearing jungle fatigues coming in from Philippines," Ram argued.
"We also submit that the accused had been made a scapegoat for Yusri and Syazwan's carelessness after they were told of national security issues by the first protected witness," Ram added.
He said it was also doubtful if a Kuala Lumpur-based Special Branch administrative assistant could idetify the voices in the intercepted telephone calls by just undergoing three months of training to record dialogues through listening devices.
"We submit that the contents of the dialogues typed by the second protected witness are not the truth as to what she intercepted and listened," Ram added.
The Star
0 comments:
Post a Comment