This is an open letter to Internal Security and Home Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar on the administrative detention without trial of blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin, journalist Tan Hoon Cheng (now released) and MP and state legislative councillor Teresa Kok.
The arrests and detention without trial and the circumstances leading to the same of the three under the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) last Friday are a source of grave concern for the rule of law and democratic values in Malaysia.
All three are reported to have been detained under Section 73(1) of the Act for purposes for police inquiry on grounds that there was reasonable cause to believe that they were acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the country.
Under the Act they can be detained for 60 days after which you, as minister, could sign a detention order for further detention up to two years, which could further be renewed. All such detention is without trial and without any form of judicial supervision.
A further cause for concern is over the show-cause letters sent to three newspapers by your ministry to explain within one week their alleged manipulation of sensitive issues, reporting a racially sensitive statement made by a politician belonging to the dominant political party currently in control of the government and for reporting that the Inspector-General of Police had been “paralysed” after undergoing bypass surgery.
Those notices were served on the newspapers under the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984, a legislation for annual licensing of newspapers by the Executive.
Obviously, if their explanations are not found satisfactory by you, the annual licences issued for these newspapers would be revoked. The decision to revoke is final and under the Act cannot be questioned “by any court or any ground whatsoever”. Service of such notices leaves a chilling effect on freedom of the press.
With regard to the arrest and detention of Raja Petra, there are two charges for sedition and criminal defamation pending against him for the very news items posted in his blog.
Without waiting for the trials on these charges, detaining him administratively would be seen as interfering in the due process of the court and prejudging the criminal charges and could amount to contempt of court. Such detention could also be seen as preventing him from adequately preparing his defence to the two charges.
In the case of journalist Tan Hoon Cheng, although it is a relief that she has been released after 18 hours of detention, yet to subject her to such arrest and detention under the ISA for having recorded and reported accurately in the newspaper what is now alleged to be sensitive is beyond belief.
The person who uttered the alleged sensitive remark, Datuk Ahmad Ismail, is currently under investigation for sedition. To date, it is reported that the police had not completed their investigations. Yet, how in the interim, the journalist who reported his remark could be a threat to the security of the state is most puzzling.
How did the police come to believe that she could be a threat to state security when the investigations were incomplete? Your clarification at your press conference last Saturday that she was detained partly because of “alleged threats on her personal safety” is untenable.
Resorting to arbitrary detention under such a draconian legislation to provide such protection is shocking indeed. And that from a government which has been resisting legislation to provide whistle-blowers protection.
Why the journalist who merely reported the statement was subjected to such detention when the person who uttered the statement is still not charged under the Sedition Act is yet to be explained. Your contention is that Ahmad has been suspended for three years from holding posts in his political party meant that action has been taken against him.
This is most unsatisfactory.
The suspension from his political party, Umno, was an internal party procedure. No action as yet has been taken against Ahmad by the state for an offence against the state. In any event, the fact that Umno suspended him must necessarily mean that what Tan reported was true and correct.
In the case of Kok’s detention, you were reported to have said in the press conference that “she started a very sensitive issue with the question of the azan and it should be stopped”. She vehemently denied these allegations from the beginning and from media reports of various persons, including the mosques concerned, there appears abundance of evidence to support her denial.
Yet to date no action seems to have been taken against the former menteri besar of Selangor, Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo, who lost his seat and his government in the March 8 general election.
It was he who made the allegations against Kok which were reported in a vernacular newspaper. Should he not be investigated for the offence of false news under Section 8(A) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, if not detained under the ISA?
The newspaper which originally published the news may have committed the same offence. It is learnt that a police report has been lodged against Khir. What is the state of the investigations? Why detain Kok in the interim? It is also learnt that to date Kok is denied access to her parents and counsel.
These latest developments are reminiscent of what happened in Malaysia in 1987 when 106 people were detained under this draconian legislation and four newspapers banned. Those detentions led in the following year to the government’s assault on the independent judiciary.
It is also reminiscent of how internal dissensions in Umno spilled over to violations of human rights and fundamental liberties and rule of law in the nation with the guardian of these values, namely the judiciary, severely damaged and still not recovered.
There is something most unsettling over the conduct of the police on the investigations of the police reports lodged and the selectivism applied in the actions taken thus far.
As I mentioned in my earlier letter addressed to you on March 24, 2008 regarding the continued detention of the five Hindraf leaders under the ISA, detention without trial offends the first principle of the rule of law.
I urge you to without delay take appropriate action to release Raja Petra and Kok from detention. I also urge you to withdraw the three show-cause notices served on the newspapers.
I am copying this letter to the chairperson of the United Nations Human Rights Council, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth in which bodies Malaysia is much involved. It is to bring to their attention the fragility of the rule of law in Malaysia and how it is deteriorating. With these developments, Malaysia’s role in these bodies is tenuous.
I hope Malaysia is called upon to account for the violation of the rule of law, human rights and democratic values before these bodies. The Malaysian government must be ashamed of itself. The developments must be a source of embarrassment to Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal who only last month was elected chair of the Exco of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.
Datuk Param Cumaraswamy
Datuk Param Cumaraswamy, former UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers.
PEOPLE'S POWER
No comments:
Post a Comment