Suhakam has instructed the Taiping prison department to bar all upcoming witnesses in an ongoing public inquiry into alleged human rights abuses at the prison from accessing the related CCTV footage.
The inquiry follows claims that around 60 prison wardens assaulted more than 100 inmates at Taiping prison on January 17. Suhakam is currently investigating the alleged abuse, which is believed to have resulted in the death of one inmate and injuries to several others.
Suhakam chairman Hishamudin Yunus and commissioner Farah Nini Dusuki are leading the panel overseeing the inquiry, with Hishamudin expressing concern that allowing witnesses prior access to the CCTV recordings could compromise the accuracy of their statements.
He issued the directive after it was revealed that prison officer Mustakhim Abdul Rahim had viewed the classified footage in advance, along with an officer named Rizal and three others identified only by their nicknames.
Mustakhim admitted to viewing the footage with the approval of a deputy prison director, citing the six-month gap since the incident and his need to “refresh his memory”.
However, Hishamudin and Farah questioned why such access was permitted, pointing out that the footage was classified and should not be used to influence or prepare witness testimony.
Hishamudin emphasised that advance viewing of the CCTV recordings would undermine the integrity of the inquiry.
“If every witness is allowed to view the CCTV beforehand, they’ll come in well-prepared — not to uphold justice, but to protect themselves,” he said.
The panel further ruled that any notes brought into future sessions must be vetted, after observing that Mustakhim’s responses appeared scripted rather than based on genuine recollections of the event.
Mustakhim was also issued a warning by Hishamudin and Farah midway through today’s inquiry after he persistently denied involvement in the events shown in the CCTV footage.
According to the footage, a man identified as Mustakhim by 10 different witnesses — both officers and inmates — was seen beating and kicking prisoners.
Mustakhim, however, repeatedly denied being the individual captured on video, stating, “It looks like me, but it isn’t me.” He also claimed the footage was “too blurry” for him to confirm the identity of the person shown.
Throughout the session, the panel noted that Mustakhim frequently responded with, “I don’t know” or “I’m not sure,” and claimed he could not recall many details of the incident.
When pressed about his alleged memory lapses – including his failure to recall key actions such as kicking or hitting inmates – Mustakhim said his attention had since shifted to other matters.
“I went on holiday on Jan 20 for three weeks, so my focus was on my family,” he said.
Hishamudin and Farah warned that a police report could be lodged against Mustakhim if he continued to withhold or distort the truth despite the evidence presented.
The inquiry resumes tomorrow.
