Animal activist, NGO seek court order to prosecute man who tortures monkeys

KUALA LUMPUR: An animal activist and a non-governmental organisation have filed a lawsuit seeking a court order for the Attorney General's Chamber (AGC) to prosecute a man who tortures and kills baby monkeys and posting them on Telegram application for entertainment purposes.

Dr Kartini Farah Abdul Rahim, 50, and Hak Asasi Hidupan Liar Malaysia Global (Hidup) as applicants filed an application for judicial review through Messrs Raj & Sach at the High Court here, naming the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM), AGC and the Malaysian government as the first to third respondents.

Based on the documents obtained by the media, Dr Kartini applied for an order to set aside the AGC's decision dated April 5 to take no further action on the police report made by the applicant, in addition to applying for an order instructing the AGC to charge the individual under the appropriate law.

Dr Kartini claimed that on Jan 20, she received information from two animal lovers associations from the United Kingdom and the United States about a group that celebrated the torture of monkeys, as what the said individual had been doing, adding that the group has a large following on Telegram.

"The video recordings show long-tailed macaques being subjected to extreme violence such as having their neck cut with scissors, being burnt while still alive and the animals’ fingers cut one by one by the man in his house toilet.

"On the same date (Jan 20), I lodged a police report at Section 9 Shah Alam police station in Selangor which contained detailed information about the individual involved and during the police investigation, the man admitted to torturing the baby monkeys," she said.

However, Dr Kartini claimed that the police released the individual without any charges being brought against him.

She also claimed that on April 5, her lawyer received a letter from the Criminal Investigation Division, Shah Alam district police headquarters informing that the investigation paper for her police report had been referred to the deputy public prosecutor, but it had been classified as no further action (NFA).

"My lawyer has sent a letter to the AGC to find out on what grounds was the police report classified as NFA, but on May 22, the AGC Prosecution Division informed that it is not the AGC’s practice to give reasons for an NFA decision," she said.

She claimed that the AGC's decision to classify her police report as NFA was unreasonable and procedurally wrong because the individual had confessed his actions to the police.

Lawyer Rajesh Nagarajan, who represented both applicants, when contacted by Bernama confirmed that an application was filed. - Bernama