SUHAKAM Report of Public Inquiry into the Incidents During and After the Public Assembly of 28 April 2012 At PULAPOL 5.59 DSP Rajakopal A/L Arumugam (W46) who was the officer in charge at PULAPOL, testified before the Panel that the situation at PULAPOL was calm in the morning until 3.00 pm. 5.60 From the testimonies of Selamat bin Abdul Hamid (W30) and DSP Rajakopal a/l Arumugam (W46), all participants who were brought to PULAPOL were given food, water, space to perform their prayers and medical treatment. Welfare officers were also at hand to provide services at PULAPOL. According to the testimony by Arshad bin Abas (W5) who was injured, he was given minor treatment upon arriving at PULAPOL by the medical officer before being taken to HKL. There were separate areas for men, women and children. 5.61 Christopher Leong Sau Foo (W40) testified that he went to PULAPOL and was told that the police had been refusing those detained access to their family members and lawyers. He then went to the main gate to request for entry into PULAPOL but was refused. However, according to DSP Rajakopal a/lL Arumugam (W46), none of the detainees had asked him for access to their legal counsel. He also added that he did not allow the lawyers to enter as they had not provided the names of their clients. Further, the detention PULAPOL was for the purpose of documentation and to ascertain whether there were any grounds to levy charges against those who were being detained. As they had not been charged, according to W46, there was thus no need for them to have access to their lawyers. 5.62 The Panel notes that out of a total of 512 participants arrested and brought to PULAPOL, only one participant was charged and the rest were released. The Panel further notes that all detainees were released between 12.00 am and 5.00 am on 29 April 2012. 5.63 Notwithstanding the explanation by W46, the Panel would like to reiterate the provisions of Article 5(3) of the Federal Constitution under which any person who is arrested shall be informed as soon as may be of the grounds of his arrest and shall be allowed to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. Failure to allow those detained access to their lawyers is both a breach of the Federal Constitution and basic human rights principles. Agents Provocateurs 5.64 There were testimonies to the effect that there could have been persons who were present at the assembly that day who were neither the police nor participants of the assembly, but whose conduct and actions suggested that they could have 67