The Malaysian government has come under attack once again over the stringent Internal Security Act (ISA), not from a detainee's family but from the Malaysian Bar Council chief.
Noted jurist of Indian origin Ambiga Sreneevasan has criticised the government for extending, without citing sufficient grounds, detention of terror suspects held under the ISA. She said this had had a negative impact on the family of detainees.
'There are sufficient provisions under the penal code to charge terrorist suspects, yet we have been witnessing that the two-year detentions given under ISA are being extended with no fresh reasons given. This has negatively impacted on the family of detainees,' Sreneevasan said at a discussion on 'ISA: Abolish or Review'.
Citing a high court judgement of last October, she held out the hope for abolition or review of the ISA.
Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Mohamad Hishamudin Mohhamad Yunus had awarded 2.5 million ringgit ($800,000 approx) in damages to political activist Abdul Malek Hussein after ruling that his arrest and detention under the ISA were made in bad faith, The Sun newspaper reported Friday.
The judge had added that the detention was clearly for a political purpose, and was not based on genuine concern for national security, Sreneevasan said.
Given the recent legal developments in cases where detention without trial was being challenged, she said: 'Malaysia must also move forward in removing legal provisions for detention without trial in the Emergency and Public Ordinance and the Dangerous Drug 1995 and abolish the ISA which is being used to stifle dissent.'
Sreneevasan pointed to rulings elsewhere. Last year, the US Supreme Court ruled that foreign detainees held in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba had the right to appeal to US civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges.
The court specifically struck down a provision of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that denies Guantanamo detainees the right to file petitions to determine whether a prisoner is being held illegally.
There are an estimated 70 ISA detainees held at the Kamuntin Detention Centre. Besides Islamist militants belonging to Jama'ah Islamia and other organisations, there are five activists of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf).
The Hindraf-5 - M. Manoharahan, Ganabati Rau, Vasanth Kumar, R. Kengadharan and P. Uthayakumar - were detained after they staged a protest rally last November, highlighting what they perceive as discrimination in jobs and education of the two million-plus Tamil Hindus in the country.
The government has not heeded appeals for their release and has secured extension of their detention saying that they had tried to disturb peace between the majority Malays, the 33 percent Chinese and eight percent Indians.
In April, a royal decree by King, who is the constitutional head, confirmed their detention for two years.
Malaysia Sun
20/06/08
PEOPLE'S POWER
There is a difference between UMNO and Barisan Nasional. I want to make it clear that it is not the Barisan Nasional (BN) government, but the UMNO government. It is not the government, but UMNO. Barisan Nasional is a coalition of unequals, not equals. UMNO is the big brother in BN. Therefore UMNO must be held responsible; and more importantly, UMNO must not be allowed to hide behind the BN banner. UMNO is the enemy, not BN.
ReplyDeleteI have come to the conclusion that the easy solution is to completely defeat UMNO in the next elections.
In the 2004 elections (11th General Election), the voters gave good support to Mr.Abdullah Badawi. But reforms did not come. Why? Probably because UMNO had done well in the elections. If UMNO had done well in the elections, then the election results tell UMNO that the voters are satisfied with the status quo. If the voters are satisfied with UMNO, then no reforms are necessary. In the 2008 elections (12th General Elections), UMNO did not do well, but she managed to win. UMNO did lose the 2/3 majority in the Parliament, but she did win, nevertheless. Will UMNO undertake reforms now? I would not be surprised if she did not. Why should she? UMNO is still the winner in the elections; and she can plan to rise and may even succeed to rise again. So, as long as she wins, she will never undertake the reforms. So, how do the voters get the reforms that they need? The voters will get the reforms when UMNO is completely defeated in the 13th General Elections. If UMNO wins zero seats in the next elections (13th General Elections), then some other party would have to rule Malaysia. Let us call it Party B. If UMNO is completely defeated in the next elections (13th General Elections), then Party B would rule Malaysia. Would Party B undertake reforms? If Party B does not undertake reforms, then voters would know what to do.
There is no doubt that UMNO has used gerrymandering to strengthen herself. If we removed gerrymandering from UMNO, then there would be a reduced UMNO. So the non-UMNO voters of Malaysia have good reasons to vote against UMNO.
It is possible that UMNO has used the Police Force to strengthen herself. The Police Force is required to be neutral. But is the Police Force neutral? I appeal to the Police Force to be neutral.
UMNO is a race based political party and also the big brother of BN. So, the complete defeat of UMNO in the next elections is the only way to get reforms. The complete defeat of UMNO in the next elections is the only way to get a new beginning.
UMNO is inclined to believe that Malaysians cannot do anything if they are in any way dissatisfied. The voters, however, have to send a strong message to UMNO that the voters can do something: the voters can vote.
So, the next step for Malaysians is to completely defeat UMNO in the next elections.