IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CO/1827/2011 THE QUEEN on the application of (1) CHONG NYOK KEYU (in his own right, and as the personal representative of THAM YONG deceased) (2) LOH AH CHOI (3) LIM KOK (4) WOOI KUM THAI Claimants -and- (1) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN & COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS (2) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE Defendants CLAIMANTS’ SKELETON ARGUMENT For hearing: Tuesday 8 May 2012 (2 days) TIME ESTIMATE: 1. Hearing: 2 days 2. Pre-reading: 1-2 days BUNDLES: Trial Bundle Vol.1 (V1): tabs A (V1/A) to F (V1/F) Trial Bundle Vol.2 (V2): tabs G (V2/G) to U (V2/U) Authorities Bundles (A1, A2) SUGGESTED PRE- READING/VIEWING: 1. The skeletons 2. Amended Grounds for Judicial Review (V1/A/76-99) 3. Amended Grounds of Resistance (V1/A/101-118) 4. WS for Claimants (V1/C/23-52) and Defendants (1/C/78-81) 5. DVD of BBC ‘In Cold Blood’ (in envelope at V2/N) 6. Slaughter & Deception at Batang Kali (“SD”) (book served separately) 7. LBC 3.9.10 [V1/E/304-349] 8. Submission to Ministers #1 22.11.10 (V1/B/1-11) 9. Decision letter #1 29.11.10 (V1/B/12-29) 10. Submission to Ministers #2 24.10.11 (V1/B/30-31) 11. Decision letter #2 4.11.11 (V1/B/37-39) - 1 - Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 4 2. THE FACTUAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................... 6 Overview............................................................................................................................. 6 A. Prior to 1948 ............................................................................................................................ 7 The village of Batang Kali.................................................................................................. 7 Origin of British rule........................................................................................................... 7 B. 1948-1949 ................................................................................................................................ 8 The Malayan Emergency.................................................................................................... 8 The Batang Kali killings ................................................................................................... 14 The purported investigation and public statements........................................................... 22 Retrospective change in the law ....................................................................................... 31 C. 1970 ....................................................................................................................................... 35 The People revelations...................................................................................................... 35 The decision to conduct a UK criminal investigation....................................................... 45 Referral to the Metropolitan Police................................................................................... 47 The Metropolitan police interviews.................................................................................. 50 Termination of the investigation....................................................................................... 55 The focus and aftermath of the criminal investigation ..................................................... 60 D. 1992 ....................................................................................................................................... 62 The BBC documentary ‘In Cold Blood’ ........................................................................... 62 Government response to the programme at the time ........................................................ 64 E. 1993........................................................................................................................................ 66 Review by the CPS of the 1970 decision.......................................................................... 66 Petition to the Queen......................................................................................................... 68 Royal Malaysian Police Investigation .............................................................................. 70 F. 1994-1996............................................................................................................................... 76 Failures to supply the Malaysian police with the British material and to seek the Malaysian material to assist with decision making in the UK............................. 76 The termination of the Malaysian Police investigation .................................................... 78 Further affirmation of the official account........................................................................ 81 G. 2008-Present .......................................................................................................................... 81 Second Petition to the Queen............................................................................................ 81 Response to the Petition.................................................................................................... 82 First Pre-Action Protocol Letter: April 2009.................................................................... 82 Reconsideration and the subsequent process: 24 April 2009............................................ 82 Provisional reconsideration decision: August 2009.......................................................... 82 Efforts to obtain disclosure and accumulate the relevant available material: 2009-2010. 84 Second letter before claim: September 2010 .................................................................... 84 The First Decision: November 2010................................................................................. 85 The Claim for judicial review........................................................................................... 87 The Second Decision: November 2011 ............................................................................ 87 Disclosure of the Ministerial submissions ........................................................................ 88 Amendment to the Detailed Grounds of Claim and Resistance........................................ 89 H. Conclusion of this Part........................................................................................................... 89 3. SUBMISSIONS I: DOMESTIC PUBLIC LAW................................................................................. 90 - 2 - Overview........................................................................................................................... 90 A. The official account is unsustainable and yet it has steadfastly been maintained from 1948 to today............................................................................................................ 92 The official account is not sustainable.............................................................................. 93 The further evidence ......................................................................................................... 98 B. Even the official account would involve action contrary to law, which illegality has never been acknowledged......................................................................................... 101 Common law and Military law in 1948 .......................................................................... 101 Customary international law........................................................................................... 101 Local Emergency Regulations ........................................................................................ 103 Failure to properly consider the issue by the previous investigations ............................ 105 Failure of the Defendants to properly consider the issue................................................ 106 C. The 1948 ‘investigations’ and public announcements served to cover up an incident which was known to be deeply troubling.......................................................... 107 D. The 1970 and 1993 investigations were aborted in circumstances indicative of political interference ....................................................................................................... 109 The termination of the 1970 investigation...................................................................... 109 The treatment of the petition and the Malaysian investigation in 1993-1996................. 110 Relevance of the detail.................................................................................................... 111 E. Requirement for independent and thorough scrutiny........................................................... 112 F. A continuing wrong.............................................................................................................. 112 G. Problems, purposes and benefits.......................................................................................... 112 Purported problems with the evidence............................................................................ 113 Costs…............................................................................................................................ 113 Alternative models of investigation................................................................................ 114 Purpose of the inquiry....................................................................................................