After 64 years, UK reopens case for Batang Kali Massacre (Malayan Emergency)

[Rogue Trader]

Updated: 08 May 2012 04:06 | By pa.press.net
​

Massacre inquiry legal bid to begin

Lim Ah Yin recalls the killings in Batang Kali in 1948

A High Court challenge of the Government's refusal to hold a formal investigation into a massacre of Malaysian rubber plantation workers by British troops in 1948 is set to start.

A lawyer representing relatives of the victims claims successive UK governments covered up the killings of the 24 unarmed Malaysian rubber plantation workers.

At a two-day judicial review hearing, the victims' families will challenge the current Government's refusal last November to hold a formal investigation into the massacre.

The incident, involving a platoon of Scots Guards, happened on December 12 1948, while British troops were conducting military operations to combat the post-Second World War Communist insurgency of the Malayan Emergency. Soldiers surrounded the rubber estate at Sungai Rimoh in Batang Kali and shot dead 24 people before setting light to the village.

Commentators have described it as one of the most controversial incidents in British military history. It has also been referred to as "Britain's My Lai massacre".

John Halford, one of the families' UK-based lawyers, said: "What happened at Batang Kali was an extremely serious human rights abuse on any view at all. It was a massacre of 24 unarmed people who weren't in any sense combatants, weren't offering any kind of threat to the British troops who killed them. That in itself is serious enough, but what then followed was a cover-up that has basically lasted the following 60 years to this day, where the British Government has denied that anything untoward happened at all."

Mr Halford said the official account of what happened was that the victims were attempting to escape when they were shot and "brought their deaths upon themselves". He added: "The truth is that these people were killed ruthlessly in a series of what can only be described as executions by British troops, probably in reprisal for things that had happened earlier on in the Malayan Emergency, even though those killed weren't responsible in any way for that. What's happened ever since is that officials - essentially British officials - have conspired to maintain the official account and suppress that very basic truth that these killings were unlawful and could never be justified."

Former British defence secretary Denis Healey instructed Scotland Yard to set up a special task team to investigate the matter while Labour was in power, but an incoming Conservative government dropped it in 1970 due to an ostensible lack of evidence.

Mr Halford said the reason for the termination of the inquiry would be revealed in the High Court hearing, which the families hope will lead to a public inquiry. The case will be heard by Sir John Thomas, president of the Queen's Bench Division, sitting with Mr Justice Treacy.

A Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) spokeswoman said: "This event happened over 60 years ago. Accounts of what happened conflict and virtually all the witnesses are dead. In these circumstances it is very unlikely that a public inquiry could come up with recommendations which would help to prevent any recurrence. The families of those who died have chosen to take legal action to challenge this decision and so it would be inappropriate to comment further now legal proceedings are under way."



​

 

[Rogue Trader]

Tuesday May 8, 2012

Batang Kali massacre: Justice for the dead

By MARTIN VENGADESAN and LIM CHIA YING
[email protected]

More than 60 years after British troops killed 24 villagers at Batang Kali, Selangor, the case against the soldiers is going to be heard in the British courts today.

IN 1948, the Malayan Emergency was just heating up. The country may have been weary of four brutal years of Japanese occupation during World War II, but the brief post-War dominance of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) was clearly at odds with the desire of the British authorities to reclaim a territory whose raw materials would help rebuild Britain itself.

By 1948, this had erupted into an undeclared war that would be waged until 1960. British forces sought to subdue the Communists, who had gained a degree of popularity for their resistance towards the Japanese. It didn’t help that in China, Mao’s Communist Party was on the verge of defeating the Kuomintang nationalist party.

Uneasy lie the dead: This cemetery in Batang Kali, Selangor, is where about half of the massacred victims were buried.

It was against this backdrop that the 7th Platoon of G Company, of the second battalion of Scots Guards unit of the British Army, belied its centuries-long reputation for honour. On Dec 12, 1948, under the leadership of Sgt Charles Douglas, the Guards surrounded a rubber estate near Batang Kali, Selangor. Looking for Communist guerillas who habitually moved in and out of the local population, they shot and killed 24 ethnic Chinese villagers before razing the village.

The next day, The Straits Times carried a report stating “Scots Guards and Police were today reported to have shot dead 25 out of 26 bandits during a wide-scale operation in North Selangor.” It called the killings the “biggest success as yet achieved in one operation in Malaya since the Emergency began.”

It was a bold-faced lie. The troops may have been acting on false information or may have panicked but there is little doubt that many innocent people were killed. Worse still, the incident was hushed up, only surviving as whispers through time.

There were, however, some survivors. One man fainted and was presumed dead, while some women and children of the men killed lived to tell the tale. According to them the Scots Guards had separated the men to be interrogated before the situation turned into a rampage of indiscriminate shooting.

This lush green spot is where dark deeds took place 64 years ago today.

“At the time we didn’t hear much,” recalls Prof Emeritus Tan Sri Dr Khoo Kay Kim. “We just heard some rumours. I would not call it the norm, but no doubt there was tension. What happened at Batang Kali was part of the complexity of society which can lead to such tragic situations. It is almost unavoidable in times of conflict and when there is hatred between ethnic and territorial groups. I see it as a conflict of cultures.

“From what I understand, they were innocent men. But the Chinese may well have reacted in a peculiar way that would have seemed suspicious to the British, who were paranoid and ignorant of local ways. The British always had problems with the Chinese community.

“That is why Governor Sir Shenton Thomas tried to come up with a programme to Anglicise the Chinese, but they were not easily controlled. At that point (in 1948) the Chinese were under the influence of the leftists and the secret societies. They were themselves enemies and in some ways it mirrored the conflict in China between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party.”

Prof Datuk Dr Shamsul Amri Baharuddin laments the tragic loss of life. “At the time the British would have had their own people on the ground. But informers can make the biggest mistakes, sometimes even on purpose. It is possible that the informer didn’t like these people. In this case, it is likely that the British acted on wrong information.

This is apparently the tombstone of the first victim, Luo Wei-Nan.

“It is difficult to be an informer/undercover agent because both sides will crucify you. In fact in the 1940s, the leader of the Communists, Loi Tak, was a triple agent, a Vietnamese who worked for the Japanese and the British while leading the CPM!

“The conditions of war generates different dynamics, which we can still see today in Afghanistan and Iraq where there are many vendetta killings and economic killings done under falsified circumstances.”

Leon Comber played a critical role in the formative years of the Malaysian police force’s Special Branch and spent many years countering the Communist insurgency. The author of Malaya’s Secret Police, 1945-1960: The Role Of The Special Branch In The Malayan Emergency has no light to shed on the Batang Kali incident but does concede that, at the time, there was much mistrust between the Chinese community and the British.

Comber had come over to Malaya as part of the re-occupying forces that took over as the Japanese surrendered. In 1946 he was appointed to the police force in Malaya. He served as OCPD (Officer in Charge of Police District) KL South; at that time KL was divided into north and south zones for policing.

The Emergency was a savage war in which an estimated 12,000 people died. Did Comber ever have to do anything he was ashamed of?

File photo from May last year when four claimants, (from right) Wooi Kum Thai, Loh Ah Choi, Lim Kok and Chong Nyok Keyu announced that they had been granted funds by the United Kingdom Legal Service Commission to take their case to British courts. Today, the four are in London for the beginning of their case.

“Personally I didn’t, nor did I order any men under my command to do so. But I certainly heard rumours about dubious interrogation techniques. Apparently the head of the Special Branch, Richard Craig, issued a pamphlet which referred to undesirable methods of obtaining information. I was taken aback when I heard that. But if my fellow colleagues knew anything, they kept it to themselves.”

Indeed, secrecy was very much the order of the day as the colonial government maintained strict control over the media to ensure that only their viewpoint got through to the people. Little was known at the time of the Malayan Emergency’s many flash points like the standoff in Bukit Kepong, Johor, on Feb 23, 1950, between police officers and Communist guerillas that ended with more than 20 fatalities on each side. Across the pond, on Dec 3, 1949, the British governor of Sarawak, Sir Duncan Stewart, was stabbed to death by teenage Malay nationalist Rosli Dhobi.

A few years after the Batang Kali massacre, the Briggs Plan was put in place to win the hearts and minds of the local population. Devised by General Sir Harold Briggs shortly after his appointment in 1950 as the Emergency’s director of operations, the plan comprised the forced resettlement of rural Chinese population into “New Villages” where education, health services and homes with water and electricity were provided. Even as the Emergency continued and news remained tightly controlled, the Batang Kali massacre reared its ugly head from time to time. Soon after the incident, in 1949, an investigation by the Attorney General, Sir Stafford Foster-Sutton, concluded that the villagers would have escaped with their lives if not for the soldiers opening fire – yet, no action was taken.

In fact, only the soldiers themselves were questioned as witnesses; no villager was asked for testimony. The cover-up echoed that of another British colonial massacre in Amritsar, India, in 1919 when Colonel Reginald Dyer ordered the shooting deaths of hundreds of unarmed Indian civilians.

Following the My Lai massacre in the late 1960s during the Vietnam War, when US troops unable to distinguish friend from foe slaughtered all the villagers in My Lai, the Batang Kali incident was revisited by British newspaper The People. Then British Secretary of State for Defence (from 1964 to 1970) Denis Healey set up a team to investigate the incident. But the case was soon dropped for “lack of evidence”, despite statements made from former members of the patrol that made it clear they had been ordered to lie about the killings during the 1949 investigation.

Still later, in 1992, In Cold Blood, a BBC documentary was aired about the killings, making it obvious that a travesty had occurred, not just with the killings but with the cover-up that followed. Journalists Ian Ward and Norma Miraflor also painstakingly put together Slaughter And Deception At Batang Kali (Media Masters, 2009), another work that endorses this viewpoint.

MCA Public Services and Complaints Department head Datuk Seri Michael Chong became involved with the case during the filming of In Cold Blood.

“It is not only me who is fighting this case,” he says. “Over the years many fought it. Even (Malaysia’s first Prime Minister) Tunku Abdul Rahman fought it before independence. But when I came to it in 1992 it had been forgotten. All the time there had been a ding-dong and finally after a change of government in the UK, the case was closed.

“In late 1992, a group of BBC journalists came down with a few ex-Scot Guards who were all in their 70s or 80s. They were not involved in the massacre but had been asked by their Commanding Officer to help with the post-massacre clean-up. They came and asked the villagers to remove the bodies. After so many years they felt bad.”

Chong was outraged by the injustice and decided to act. “Along with the lawyers Vincent Lim and Datuk Lim Choon Kin, I took an interest. We went to see the place and met the survivors. In 1993 we called a press conference and, with the victims’ descendants, we lodged a police report in Batang Kali.

“After that, we drafted a letter to Her Majesty the Queen to investigate this old case and seek for justice. We went to see the then High Commissioner, H.C. White, and were given assurances that the letter would be passed to her. Meanwhile, we also worked with the police. I was cautioned by the Malaysian police not to stir up this sentiment.
“To be very frank, some leaders also asked me why I wanted to bring up this old matter. They neither supported me or were against me at first. But later on they gave me their moral support.

“For me, this has never been about the publicity. I just want justice for the victims. I want the British Government to recognise and admit that such an incident happened. They were all shot in the back of the head from a close distance. This is cold-blooded murder. They were never Communists, but simple rubber-tappers. They were not even sympathisers.”

Eventually, through the perseverance of people like Chong, the British Government relented and agreed to hear the case.

Lawyer Quek Ngee Meng is part of a new generation of Malaysians who feel that there is no statute of limitations on justice.

“Back in 2004 my father, the late Quek Cheng Taik, used to visit the hot springs in Ulu Yam near Batang Kali to treat an illness. He used to go from Serdang to that area and eventually bought a house in Ulu Yam. He listened to the stories of villagers.

“It is still a talked-about topic there more than 60 years on. Those killed were from Ulu Yam. If you go there you won’t miss the cemetery. Every Qing Ming (a day to pay respect to one’s ancestors) they go back.

“They still feel it. It is still a stigma. The official account says they were suspected of being bandits. When we followed the case, we found a lot of cover-ups.”

But what can be accomplished after so many years?

“I think the first thing is an admission and an apology” says Quek. “The victim’s families also lost their bread-winners so we are also seeking compensation.

“Over here there are still about five witnesses to what happened. In Britain some soldiers are still alive. I think there are more than 10 on the British side. There are many who have passed away in Malaysia, most recently Tham Yong in 2010. But we documented their testimony.

“When pursuing this case, the famous human rights law firm Bindmans backed us and were willing to procure legal aid. Before they (the United Kingdom Legal Service Commission) granted us that aid, though, they checked that we needed the funds. They also checked if there was any merit in the case. Their estimate is a 50% to 60% chance,” says Quek.

Today and tomorrow, the team in London will be applying for a judicial review to quash the earlier decision by the British Government not to investigate the tragedy.

Quek says incidents like Batang Kali were not necessarily unique at the time. “There are many other cases of injustice during the Emergency. You must understand, this was at a time when the British thought all Chinese were Communists. The Chinese had to prove they were not Communists.

“But even in such circumstances you must follow the rule of law. If they are identified by informers they should have been detained and questioned. But they were not.”

Quek makes a final point about the upcoming trial. “We made a lot of progress with the (British) Labour Government, but since the Conservative-led coalition took power, they have not been so straightforward with us.

“They have made a lot of representations using technical points trying to claim that it was the Selangor Government who had jurisdiction and we should take action against the Sultan instead of them!

He adds that, “This is a landmark case with an individual suing the British Government, and I am looking forward to the trial.”

It remains to be seen if justice will indeed finally be served.

 

[captainxerox]

the truth is literally dead and buried. who is to know what happened?

 

[Rogue Trader]

Tuesday May 8, 2012

Agony of massacre victims' descendants

By MARTIN VENGADESAN and LIM CHIA YING
[email protected]

They want proper closure and compensation.

NOTHING can shatter one’s world as much as the brutal murder of a loved one. The tragic account of beheaded headman Lim Tian Swee is one that still remains fresh in the memory of son Lim Kok – even 64 years after the horrific massacre that took place on Dec 21, 1948, in Batang Kali, Selangor.

Lim Kok was about nine years old when he received news from other villagers that his father had been decapitated and his head thrown into the river.

“My father was working as headman of a rubber tapping estate – which was managed by a distant granduncle – who paid salaries to the workers and looked after their welfare,” says Lim, 73. “He was my family’s sole breadwinner. Life became tough for us all after father was gone. My mother had to seek the help of friends and relatives to raise the rest of us. I was sad, yet I was also too little to understand any fear that came from the implications of my father’s killing.”

Chong Koon Ying at her father’s grave.

After the murder, Lim, who is the eldest of he children, went to stay with the granduncle in Kuala Lumpur where he studied. His mother, however, stayed behind in Ulu Yam Baru to look after her other children. The granduncle helped subsidise Lim’s living expenses and studies and the boy would return on and off to Ulu Yam Baru to see his mother and siblings.

“Thanks to some funds and assistance from this granduncle too, we managed to provide my father with a proper burial according to Buddhist rites ... even if the head could not be traced.”

Lim returns to the burial ground every year to offer prayers to his father during Qing Ming (a festival during which people pay respect to their ancestors).

He is one of four descendants who left Malaysia for London to attend today’s judicial review test case to hear a proper investigation into the massacre by British soldiers of 24 unarmed villagers at Batang Kali in 1948.

Wong Then Loy was just a child when he helped his father collect the victims’ bodies for burial.

“My only wish is for the trial to grant us sufficient compensation and a proper apology for the misdeed that was unleashed against the 24 people.

“Coming back to Batang Kali is a grim reminder of the suffering and misery that we had to endure and the poverty that my siblings, especially, had to grow up with – after all these decades, we are hopeful that fairness and justice will prevail,” he said before leaving for London.

Ulu Yam Baru village headman cum the Action Committee Condemning the Batang Kali Massacre chairman Chin Fo Sang recalls listening to stories of how the villagers were rounded up and divided into five different groups before being executed. “After they were all killed, some of the bodies were left by the riverside and others placed in groups inside plantations.”

Chin, 64, was only about two months old when the episode unfolded back in December 1948. Many of the tales were related to him by his parents, relatives and villagers much later.

The clear gentle waters of the river into which Lim’s father’s severed head was thrown belie the horror swept away by torrents of time. The head, says Chin, was washed down to a Malay village where it was discovered by horrified local women. “They threw it back into the river and it was never seen again. This is why till today, Lim’s father is without a head,” says Chin.

That serene-looking river is where Lim Kok’s father’s head was thrown into.

Chin leads us back a short distance away where a single wooden house stands amidst thick foliage and shrubs mixed with a few banana trees. “This is the site where the first victim, Luo Wei-Nan, was executed. The story goes that the soldiers herded him here before shooting him in the back. The bullet penetrated through the body and left such a gaping puncture that his internal organs all spilled out,” Chin says softly, the horror still clear in his voice.

Chong Koon Ying was 11 when her father Chong Man was shot. “We heard a lot of gunshots – the booming noise they made – but we were not allowed to see what happened. I could see thick smoke billowing about right after, though.

“Later, a lorry whisked all the women and children away and we were not allowed to even go back to our houses to collect any of our clothes or belongings.

“We were left homeless overnight after our village was set ablaze. Some people who saw us seated aimlessly on the streets (in the nearby town they had been taken to) took pity on us and found us a decrepit house for shelter.

“Because there were so many families cramped into one small space, the children had to sleep on the floor while my mother slept seated on a stool.”

Choking with emotion, Chong says she was married off at 16 while her siblings had to be given away for adoption as her family had nothing to survive on.

“We had to be split up when food and everything else became scarce,” says Chong, now 73. “I tried finding my sister but to no avail. And when I found my brother, he was badly beaten up. I could never forget how my heartbroken mum died when she found out.”

Chong who is now living in KL, having shifted after her marriage, says her children and grandchildren have been told of this savage murder that tore families apart and left traumatised women and children incapacitated.

“What else can I ask for now except for cash compensation. My parents are gone; at the very least, monies should be paid for the hardships and our pain, although no amount can bring them back.”

There is an interesting story surrounding the last surviving witness to the massacre, Tham Yong, who died in 2010. Her fiance was one of the 24 shot dead while his brother was the victim who fainted and happened to survive the massacre. Tham Yong later married him and son Chong Nyok Keyu is now taking up the fight following her passing.

Another witness is Wong Then Loy who was just eight when he helped his dad to collect the corpses, a week after the massacre.

“The bodies had rotted, some had dried up; some even had huge maggots crawling out,” recalls Wong, 73. “As a kid, I wasn’t afraid of seeing the worms since I was used to following my father deep inside the jungle before we were chased out to stay in the new villages.

“Of course, I also didn’t know exactly what had happened except that they were dead bodies. My father related to me the stories later while I also gathered bits of excerpts from wives of the deceased and some neighbours.”

His father helped to engrave names on the tomb stones after the dead had been identified by their relatives. Some remained unidentified and unclaimed so they were buried together in one plot – Wong recalls some of these were young men, barely 20.

“The poorer families could not afford coffins so their loved ones were buried without any, while some others made the funerary box by nailing planks together,” he remembers.

The original victims are long gone, but the voices of these departed souls have certainly not been silenced. Their next-of-kin are determined to secure justice for this massacre that took place in the jungle a whole lifetime ago.

Representing them are four claimants at today’s judicial review application in London: Chong Nyok Keyu, Loh Ah Choi (nephew to the first victim to be shot, Luo Wei-Nan), Lim Kok, and Wooi Kum Thai.


This article, together with a video documenting the Batang Kali massacre site and interviews with the descendants, can be downloaded from The Star Apps’ May 2 issue.

 

[Rogue Trader]

the truth is literally dead and buried. who is to know what happened?

Witnesses .

 

[captainxerox]

Witnesses .

witnesses vs scots guards accounts - after 64 years, embellishments and self-justification on both sides likely. however in uk mod's advantage to close the case and remove the blight. the court case would be long drawn and whether witnesses got stamina and money to pull thru. i doubt it.

 

[scroobal]

This is a well known incident. There are enough materials in private and public records and archives and there are also enough people still alive from both sides to address it. There was also a lot of comms traffic between KL/Singapore and London to indicate a lot.

It was no different to My Lai in the manner that it was done. Community leaders at a Federal level were also aware of it. As the emergency was pretty much a propaganda campaign as it was a game of hide and seek, tactically it was not advantageous to bring it out at that time.

The conflict has now ended, it time to bring these arseholes to justice. If they can spend time chasing Nazi till today because the Jews are influential and rich, it has to be done. These are innocent villagers.

They should also address the issue of beheading communist including girls on the pretext of confirming identity.

As both sides are guilty as hell for the atrocities, there should be a war crimes tribunal to address this. Unfortunately one side has been given immunity and is now travelling the world and giving lessons and lectures.

the truth is literally dead and buried. who is to know what happened?

 

[Rogue Trader]

As both sides are guilty as hell for the atrocities, there should be a war crimes tribunal to address this. Unfortunately one side has been given immunity and is now travelling the world and giving lessons and lectures.

More like immunity for both sides.

He said he's got no issues going under a war tribunal if the other side is subjected to the same.

 

[scroobal]

No immunity given to the British at all. They can be prosecuted. I am still in favour of prosecuting the British because of the wanton slaughter of innocent people. If the Americans can do it, why not the British.

I will also have no issue going to war tribunal when I got blanket immunity. Also he is in possession of dirty secrets involving people still in govt in this country. During the Canberra de-brief, he never answered any questions about Singapore and the person they sent as the countries rep did not even both asking relevant questions. It was telling.

More like immunity for both sides.

He said he's got no issues going under a war tribunal if the other side is subjected to the same.

 

[Rogue Trader]

Come on. He's not the only one with dirty secrets. Every side is waiting for the other to die first so that it will be buried forever.

 

[Rogue Trader]

Malaysians lose 'massacre' court case in Britain
(AFP) – 17 hours ago

Chong Koon Ying (C) said she was "disappointed" with the finding (AFP, Carl Court)

LONDON — Relatives of 24 Malaysian rubber plantation workers killed by British troops in 1948 on Tuesday lost their High Court battle for a full inquiry by the British government.

Britain said last November it would not hold a formal probe into the Batang Kali killings in British-controlled Malaya, but the families' lawyers claim there is enough evidence to justify an independent inquiry.

British soldiers surrounded the Sungai Rimoh rubber estate in Batang Kali on December 12, 1948, shot the 24 workers and set the village on fire, London's High Court heard.

The incident, which has been referred to as "Britain's My Lai" after the infamous Vietnam War massacre, happened during the so-called Malayan Emergency, when British troops conducted military operations against communist insurgents.

The court heard that Britain's 1964-1970 Labour government had launched a police investigation into the deaths, but the incoming Conservative administration dropped it in 1970, claiming a lack of evidence.

The current British government argued that the decision not to hold an inquiry was reached lawfully.

"There are no grounds for disturbing their conclusion," Judge John Thomas said on Tuesday.

But lawyers for the victims' families claim that statements given by soldiers to the original investigation showed they admitted unlawful killing.

"We are appealing," said John Halford, a solicitor representing the families. "As long as the injustice remains, the families will be pursuing legal action."

A relative of one of the victims of the killings said he was disappointed by the judge's decision.

"I am disappointed with the finding that no inquiry is required," said Chong Koon Ying -- whose father Chong Voon was killed -- in a statement released by lawyers.

"The truth has not been fully revealed."

The families hope an investigation could lead to an apology and reparations.
​

 

[Force 136]

Reuters say something different....


Britain held responsible for 1948 mass killing in Malaya

By Estelle Shirbon

LONDON | Tue Sep 4, 2012 1:10pm EDT

(Reuters) - Britain was responsible for the 1948 killing of 24 unarmed Malayan civilians who were shot dead by British troops during a campaign against Communist insurgents, a London court ruled on Tuesday, contradicting the official government position.

The mass killing in the rubber plantation village of Batang Kali, in what was then the British Protected State of Selangor, has caused six decades of controversy and remains an issue in Malaysia where many believe it was a cold-blooded massacre.

The official version at the time was that the 24 victims were insurgents or their supporters who were killed while attempting a mass escape.

But that account was challenged by witnesses, and in 1970 some of the soldiers involved told a British newspaper the killings had been pre-meditated and they had been ordered to cover up the truth.

"There is evidence that supports a deliberate execution of the 24 civilians at Batang Kali," said a written judgment delivered on Tuesday by two senior High Court judges.

The case is the latest to dredge up dark episodes of Britain's colonial past in court. Judgment is awaited in a separate claim by three Kenyans who say they were tortured under British orders during a 1950s insurgency.

Such cases are closely watched because any success, symbolic or material, is likely to encourage other former colonial subjects to come forward with their grievances.

The four claimants, who lost close relatives in the shootings, went to court to try and force the government to launch an inquiry. Their case, supported by 568 Malaysian organizations ranging from schools to temples and professional groups, was heard at the London High Court for two days in May.

In its judgment, the court rejected the claimants' argument that the government had a legal duty to hold an inquiry. Lawyer John Halford said they would appeal against the decision.

But in a victory for the claimants, the court rejected the government's argument that under treaties in force at the time, the soldiers were under the command of the local sultan and that responsibility for their actions had passed to Malaysia.

That means that in theory, survivors could attempt to sue for damages. However, Halford told Reuters this was not being considered at present.

YOUNG MEN

"This case has never primarily been about compensation. What we think should happen in the first place is that the government should accept the findings of the court as to what happened, which it never has done hitherto, and apologize to the families," he said.

The British government does not endorse a specific view about what happened in Batang Kali on December 12, 1948, but refuses to hold a public inquiry, arguing it would not get to the bottom of disputed events that took place 63 years ago.

The 40-page court ruling brought some comfort to the claimants, criticizing attempts in the 1940s, 1970s and 1990s to investigate the shootings as flawed, and stating that some facts could no longer seriously be disputed.

The patrol of 14 Scots Guards, led by a 22-year-old sergeant, was made up mostly of young men on military service with no training in counter-insurgency warfare.

Acting on a tip off that Communist insurgents were active in the area, the patrol arrived in Batang Kali on December 11, 1948, and shot dead a young man that evening. They then separated women and children from men and locked them up in separate huts.

On December 12, the women and children were loaded onto a lorry and driven a short distance away. In their absence, a hut with 23 men inside was unlocked and within minutes all of them lay dead. The villagers' huts were torched and the patrol left.

Ten days after the event, the British owner of the rubber plantation where Batang Kali was located challenged the official version that the dead were "bandits", saying those killed had been loyal employees with a record of good conduct.

The episode has been repeatedly revisited since then in newspaper articles, TV documentaries and even police inquiries in both Britain and Malaysia, but the authorities in London have never changed the official record of what happened.

"We are considering all aspects of the High Court's judgment including the observations made regarding the capacity in which the soldiers acted," a government spokesman said.

"This was clearly a deeply regrettable incident and we extend our sympathy to the families and survivors for the loss of life and suffering."

(Editing by Janet Lawrence)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/04/us-britain-malaysia-killings-idUSBRE8830VG20120904

 

[Rogue Trader]

Reuters say something different....

This is very weird... many conflicting reports on the net about the hearing...

 

[Force 136]

Good lah - you read AFP, i read Reuters.......

Together we get a better picture......