Court rules Razak Baginda ‘complicit’ in Altantuya’s murder

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court had ordered political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda and a few others to pay RM5mil in damages to the family of slain Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu because he had chosen not to testify under oath.

High Court judge Justice Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera ruled that the court had no choice but to infer that the evidence if given under oath, would have been adverse to Abdul Razak.

Justice Vazeer said that there were questions that needed answers, and they could only be answered by Abdul Razak, the third defendant in the civil action brought by Altantuya’s family.

“There is a clear oblique motive on the part of the third defendant in electing to submit that there is no case to answer and thereby not testifying under oath or calling witnesses on his behalf.

“In the circumstance, the court is entitled to invoke adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950,” he said in a 90-page judgment released last week.

Section 114(g) allows the court to presume the likelihood of any fact based on common natural events, human behaviour, and public and private activities as they relate to the specific facts of the case.

On Dec 16, 2022, Justice Vazeer, now a Federal Court judge, allowed Altantuya’s family’s suit and ordered the defendants to jointly pay the plaintiffs RM5mil in general, aggravated, and exemplary damages.

ALSO READ: Govt, Razak Baginda appeal against court ruling in Altantuya case

Apart from Abdul Razak, the family named Chief Insp Azilah Hadri, Kpl Sirul Azhar Umar and the government as the first, second and fourth defendants respectively.

The judge ordered the four defendants to pay RM25,000 in costs each.

Justice Vazeer said Abdul Razak was “complicit” in the killing, as he was the only link between the deceased and the first and second defendants.

The judge said the first and second defendants did not know the deceased while Abdul Razak had wanted the harassment and embarrassment by the deceased to stop.

“In the circumstance, I find that the plaintiffs have successfully proved on a balance of probabilities that the third defendant had a culpable role in the death of the deceased.

“If not for the third defendant, the first and second defendants would not have taken the deceased in their car from the third defendant’s residence and ultimately kill her. The circumstantial evidence of conspiracy is overwhelming.

“When the evidence is considered as a whole, I find that there is a case for the third defendant to answer in respect of both causes of action, the unlawful causing of the death of the deceased and the tort of conspiracy to kill the deceased,” Justice Vazeer.

The court also found that the evidence presented by the plaintiffs, both direct and circumstantial, collectively converge and overwhelmingly proved the conspiracy between the first, second and third defendants to cause the unlawful death of the deceased.

“Thus, I find that the plaintiffs have successfully established their case against the first, second, and third defendants,” he added.

ALSO READ: Background on Sirul and the Altantuya case

In granting the compensation, the court said the RM5mil sum was “fair and adequate” to be awarded globally as vindicatory damages.

“This serious wrong done to the deceased by serving police officers must be condemned in the strongest terms, and an adequate award of damages to vindicate the gross violation of the deceased’s constitutional right to life would be an appropriate remedy,” Justice Vazeer said.

On June 4, 2007, Altantuya’s parents – Dr Shaariibuu and Altantsetseg Sanjaa and their grandson Mungunshagai Bayarjargal – filed a RM100mil suit against the defendants, seeking RM100mil in damages.

In their statement of claim, the plaintiffs said the model’s death resulted in them suffering mental shock and psychological trauma, and sought compensation as well as exemplary and aggravated damages.

Abdul Razak was initially charged together with Sirul and Azilah but he was acquitted at the end of the prosecution’s case on Oct 31, 2008, after the court did not find prima facie against him.

Meanwhile, Sirul and Azilah were both convicted in 2009 for Altantuya’s murder.

In 2013, the former policemen won their appeals at the Court of Appeal but in 2015, the Federal Court upheld the High Court’s conviction and reinstated the death penalty on both men.

Click here for the full text of the judgement.