ISA Repeal: Zaid Ibrahim's open letter to PM

Tuesday September 30, 2008 MYT 7:43:00 PM - The Star Online

Zaid Ibrahim's open letter to PM

29 September 2008

YAB Dato' Seri Abdullah Badawi
Prime Minister of Malaysia
5th Floor, East Wing
Perdana Putra Building
Putrajaya
Malaysia

Dear Mr Prime Minister

In our proclamation of independence, our first Prime Minister gave voice to the lofty aspirations and dreams of the people of Malaya: that Malaya was founded on the principles of liberty and justice, and the promise that collectively we would always strive to improve the welfare and happiness of its people.

Many years have passed since that momentous occasion and those aspirations and dreams remain true and are as relevant to us today as they were then. This was made possible by a strong grasp of fundamentals in the early period of this nation. The Federal Constitution and the laws made pursuant to it were well founded; they embodied the key elements of a democracy built on the Rule of Law. The Malaysian Judiciary once commanded great respect from Malaysians and was hailed as a beacon for other nations. Our earlier Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn were truly leaders of integrity, patriots in their own right and most importantly, men of humility. They believed in and built this nation on the principles and values enunciated in our Constitution.

Even when they had to enact the Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960, they were very cautious and apologetic about it. Tunku stated clearly that the Act was passed to deal with the communist threat. "My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the Government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silent lawful dissent", was what the Tunku said. Our third Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn reinforced this position by saying that the ISA was not intended to repress lawful political opposition and democratic activity on the part of the citizenry.

The events of the last three weeks have compelled me to review the way in which the ISA has been used. This exercise has sadly led me to the conclusion that the Government has time and time again failed the people of this country in repeatedly reneging on that solemn promise made by Tunku Abdul Rahman. This has been made possible because the Government and the law have mistakenly allowed the Minister of Home Affairs to detain anyone for whatever reason he thinks fit. This subjective discretion has been abused to further certain political interests.

History is the great teacher and speaks volumes in this regard. Even a cursory examination of the manner in which the ISA has been used almost from its inception would reveal the extent to which its intended purpose has been subjugated to the politics of the day.

Regrettably, Tunku Abdul Rahman himself reneged on his promise. In 1965, his administration detained Burhanuddin Helmi, the truly towering Malay intellectual, a nationalist who happened to be a PAS leader. He was kept in detention until his death in 1969. Helmi was a political opponent and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered to have been involved in the armed rebellion or communism that the ISA was designed to deal with. This detention was an aberration, a regrettable moment where politics had been permitted to trump the rule of law. It unfortunately appears to have set a precedent and many detentions of persons viewed as having been threatening to the incumbent administration followed through the years. Even our literary giant, 'sasterawan negara' the late Tan Sri A Samad Ismail was subjected to the ISA in 1976. How could he have been a threat to national security?

I need not remind you of the terrible impact of the 1987 Operasi Lalang. Its spectre haunts the Government as much as it does the peace loving people of this nation, casting a gloom over all of us. There were and still are many unanswered questions about those dark hours when more than a hundred persons were detained for purportedly being threats to national security. Why they were detained has never been made clear to Malaysians. Similarly, no explanation has been forthcoming as to why they were never charged in court. Those detainees included amongst their numbers senior opposition Members of Parliament who are still active in Parliament today. The only thing that is certain about that period was that UMNO was facing a leadership crisis. Isn't it coincidental that the recent spate of ISA arrests has occurred when UMNO is again having a leadership crisis?

In 2001, Keadilan 'reformasi' activists were detained in an exercise that the Federal Court declared was in bad faith and unlawful. The continued detention of those that were not released earlier in the Kamunting detention facility was made possible only by the fact that the ISA had been questionably amended in 1988 to preclude judicial review of the Minister's order to detain. Malaysians were told that these detainees had been attempting to overthrow the Government via militant means and violent demonstrations. Seven years have gone and yet no evidence in support of this assertion has been presented. Compounding the confusion even further, one of these so-called militants, Ezam Mohamad Noor, recently rejoined UMNO to great fanfare, as a prized catch it would seem.

At around the same time, members of PAS were also detained for purportedly being militant and allegedly having links to international terrorist networks. Those detained included Nik Adli, the son of Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat the Menteri Besar of Kelantan. Malaysians were made a promise by the Government that evidence of the alleged terrorist activities and links of these detainees would be disclosed. To date no such evidence has been produced.

The same formula was used in late 2007 when the HINDRAF 5 were detained. Malaysians were told once again that these individuals were involved in efforts to overthrow the Government and had links with the militant Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam of Sri Lanka. To date no concrete evidence have been presented to support this assertion. It would seem therefore that the five were detained for their involvement in efforts that led to a mobilisation of Malaysian Indians to express, through peaceful means, their frustration against the way in which their community had been allowed to be marginalised. This cause has since been recognised as a legitimate one. The HINDRAF demonstration is nothing extraordinary as such assemblies are universally recognised as being a legitimate means of expression.

In the same vein, the grounds advanced in support of the most recent detentions of Tan Hoon Cheng, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra Kamarudin leave much to be desired. The explanation that Tan Hoon Cheng was detained for her own safety was farcical. The suggestion that Teresa Kok had been inciting religious sentiments was unfounded as was evinced by her subsequent release.

As for Raja Petra Kamarudin, the prominent critic of the Government, a perusal of his writings would show that he might have been insulting of the Government and certain individuals within it. However, being critical and insulting could not in any way amount to a threat to national security. If his writings are viewed as being insulting of Islam, Muslims or the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he should instead be charged under the Penal Code and not under the ISA. In any event, he had already been charged for sedition and criminal defamation in respect of some of his statements. He had claimed trial, indicating as such his readiness and ability to defend himself. Justice would best be served by allowing him his day in court more so where, in the minds of the public, the Government is in a position of conflict for having been the target of his strident criticism.

The instances cited above strongly suggest that the Government is undemocratic. It is this perspective that has over the last 25 plus years led to the Government seemingly arbitrarily detaining political opponents, civil society and consumer advocates, writers, businessmen, students, journalists whose crime, if it could be called that, was to have been critical of the Government. How it is these individuals can be perceived as being threats to national security is beyond my comprehension. The self-evident reality is that legitimate dissent was and is quashed through the heavy-handed use of the ISA.

There are those who support and advocate this carte-blanche reading of the ISA. They will seek to persuade you that the interests of the country demand that such power be retained, that Malaysians owe their peace and stability to laws such as the ISA. This overlooks the simple truth that Malaysians of all races cherish peace. We lived together harmoniously for the last 400 years, not because of these laws but in spite of them.

I believe the people of this country are mature and intelligent enough to distinguish actions that constitute a 'real' threat to the country from those that threaten political interests. Malaysians have come know that the ISA is used against political opponents and, it would seem, when the leadership is under challenge either from within the ruling party or from external elements.

Malaysians today want to see a Government that is committed to the court process to determine guilt or innocence even for alleged acts of incitement of racial or religious sentiment. They are less willing to believe, as they once did, that a single individual, namely the Minister of Home Affairs, knows best about matters of national security. They value freedom and the protection of civil liberties and this is true of people of other nations too.

Mr Prime Minister, the results of the last General Election are clear indication that the people of Malaysia are demanding a reinstatement of the Rule of Law. I was appointed as your, albeit short-lived, Minister in charge of legal affairs and judicial reform. In that capacity, I came to understand more keenly how many of us want reform, not for the sake of it, but for the extent to which our institutions have been undermined by events and the impact this has had on society.

With your blessing, I attempted to push for reform. High on my list of priorities was a reinstatement of the inherent right of judicial review that could be enabled through a reversion of the key constitutional provision to its form prior to the controversial amendment in 1988. I need not remind you that that constitutional amendment was prompted by the same series of events that led not only to Operasi Lalang but the sacking of the then Lord President and two supreme court justices. Chief amongst my concerns was the way in which the jurisdiction and the power of the Courts to grant remedy against unconstitutional and arbitrary action of the Executive had been removed by Parliament and the extent to which this had permitted an erosion of the civil liberties of Malaysians. It was this constitutional amendment that paved the way for the ouster provision in the ISA that virtually immunises the Minister from judicial review, a provision which exemplifies the injustice the constitutional amendment of 1988 has lent itself.

I also sought to introduce means by which steps could be taken to assist the Judiciary to regain the reputation for independence and competence it once had. Unfortunately, this was viewed as undesirable by some since an independent Judiciary would mean that the Executive would be less 'influential'.

I attempted to do these things and more because of the realisation that Malaysia's democratic traditions and the Rule of Law are under siege. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with giving everyone an independent Judiciary and the opportunity to a fair trial. This is consistent with the universal norms of human rights as it is with the tenets of Islam, the religion of the Federation. Unchecked power to detain at the whim of one man is oppressiveness at its highest. Even in Israel, a nation that is perpetually at war, the power to detain is not vested in one man and detention orders require endorsement from a judge.

If there are national security considerations, then these can be approached without jettisoning the safeguards intended to protect individual citizens from being penalised wrongfully. In other jurisdictions involved in armed conflicts, trials are held in camera to allow for judicial scrutiny of evidence considered too sensitive for public disclosure so as to satisfy the ends of justice. If this can be done in these jurisdictions, why not here where the last armed struggle we saw, the very one that precipitated the need for the ISA, came to an end in the 1980s? Any doubts as to the continued relevance of the ISA in its present form should have been put to rest by the recommendation by the National Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) that the ISA be repealed and an anti-terror legislation suited to the times enacted in its place. Containing as it did a sunset clause in its original times, the ISA was never intended to be a permanent feature on the Malaysian legal landscape.

Through its continued use in the manner described above and in the face of public sentiment, it is only natural that the ISA has become in the mind of the people an instrument of oppression and the Government is one that lends itself to oppressiveness. Its continued use does not bode well for a society that is struggling to find its place in the global arena. It does not bode well for the democracy that is so vital for us to develop sustainably.

Mr Prime Minister, I remember very clearly what you once said; that if one has the opportunity to do what is good and right for the country, then he must take on the task. I respect you deeply for that and if I were confident that I would have been able to do some good for Malaysia, I would have remained on your team. Sir, you are still the Prime Minister and you still have the opportunity to leave your footprint in Malaysian history. I urge you to do so by repealing the ISA once and for all.

Let us attempt to fulfil that solemn promise made by our beloved first Prime Minister to the people of this country.

Yours sincerely

ZAID IBRAHIM
Kuala Lumpur

COMMENTS:-

My sincere salute to YB Zaid Ibrahim for his sincerity and great effort to reform the judicial system and to abolish the ISA in Malaysia. Mr. Prime Minister, you have to take the opportunity to leave the footprint as the PM who repealed the ISA if you are truly upholding the aspirations of Bapa Malaysia. The abuse of ISA is too obvious for political stability and not for national security. Hence it has violated the original intention of the lawmakers who passed the ISA in 1960. This breach of trust to the Malaysians is beyond imagination and undemocratic indeed.

Mr. Prime Minister, you do not have much time to remain in power as the PM. So you have to act fast in order to make it to history book and many future generations will remember your good deeds in this world. Allah will be pleased with you too. Wishing you Selamat Hari Raya Adil Fitri.

Minister: Kok not a threat to public order

Excerpt from The Star Online - Saturday September 20, 2008

Minister: Kok not a threat to public order

PUTRAJAYA: Police released Seputeh MP Teresa Kok from the Internal Security Act (ISA) detention as they were satisfied she was not a threat to public order.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said her release from detention was not because police could not build up a case against her but because they were satisfied that she did not threaten national security.

"That was the principle behind her arrest and I believe that is also the reason why police have decided to release Kok," he told reporters yesterday after presenting Hari Raya goodies to 289 ministry staff.

Kok, 44, who is also Kinrara assemblyman was released at 1pm yesterday after being detained for one week. Last Friday, Kok, Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamarudin and Sin Chew Daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng were arrested under the ISA.

Comments:-

In the first place, ISA should not be used on MP without prior investigation on the report available in hand as whether or not it is a libel & malicious statement or truthful evidence that warrants to take action. Now it shows the Police is on "fishing expedition" to scare those who want to change the government.

I am of the opinion that as a rule of law, the Police are under the protocol to report or seek consultation with the Home Minister before detaining or releasing the detainee. Such remarks by Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid is a blatant denial of his responsibility or control over the decision making of the Police. The Police Chief is not having aboslute or independent power who can perform his duty the way he likes. Now if the government is sued for wrongful detention under ISA and if it is found quilty as charged, then who will pay for the losses? From the tax payers' monies as a result of the professional negligence of the Police? It is not as simple as that. Unless the PM has lost control of the Police Dept, there is no reason that prior consultation is not required.

The denial of responsibility of the Home Minister shows he is not committed to perform his work well. So now it is the Police who is to be blamed for all the arrests under ISA??? I do not think so. The BN govt have to answer it  as why ISA is used and not the other laws. The People are waiting for the answers from the PM and not from his Home Minister who left the task all to the Police. Then what is Home Minister paid for??? We want to know all the duties and responsibilities of a Home Minister to check whether or not he is fully responsible. He can talk as he likes but his job description will corner him to the wall. Let the journalists pose sharp questions to him so that he cannot deviate from it.

 

Obviously the unlawful detention of MP Teresa Kok under ISA is for political reasons and not for national security.

Comments on "Detention is Political"
September 19th, 2008 by frontbench

Teresa Kok’s press statementI have been released after being detained in solitary confinement in a 6-by-8 holding cell for seven days under the Internal Security Act (ISA). I was informed by the police that they detained me under section 73(1) of Internal Security Act 1960, which means I have incited racial and religious tension and conflict.

After being detained for seven days under the guise of so-called investigations, the police failed to produce any evidence or proof of me being involved in the activities of causing racial and religious tension. They were only able to ask me few questions based entirely on the false and malicious article written by Zaini Hassan under the topic ‘Azan, Jawi, JAIS, UiTM dan ba-alif-ba-ya’ that was published in Utusan Malaysia on Sept 10, 2008.

The three main questions that the investigation officers asked me were:

1. whether I have mobilised a group of residents at Bandar Kinrara to present a petition to oppose to the azan at the Bandar Kinrara mosque;

2. whether I have made a statement that 30 percent of the Selangor Islamic Department (JAIS) allocation is to be given to other non-Islam religious bodies; and

3. whether I have opposed to the Jawi-wording road signages in Kuala Lumpur.

I denied the first two accusations as I did not do any such things as accused. I also told them that the issue of opposing Jawi road signages in Kuala Lumpur were done in January/February 2008 at the request and following the pressure of resident associations.

The resident associations, particularly in Taman Seputeh, were most unhappy because many of the road signages were changed arbitrarily by DBKL a few months before and changed again soon after, this time with Jawi wordings. They were strongly opposed to this kind of wastage of public funds by DBKL.

I was quite surprised that there were no other questions posed to me besides these few main questions.

The ISA is meant to detain people who threaten national security. The three issues stated above have nothing to do with national security. If the police wanted to carry out investigation on me, they can always ask me to give statements in any of the police station and there was absolutely no need to detain me under the ISA for seven days. This is a phenomenal abuse of the power of police under the ISA.

Besides, it is nonsensical for the police to detain me under the ISA merely based on the unsubstantiated article written by an irresponsible columnist in Utusan Malaysia. How can they regard that article as the gospel truth without investigating the writer in the first place? How can Utusan Malaysia publish it without verifying the facts?

I wish to ask the police whether they have called Zaini and Utusan Malaysia’s editors for questioning before and after my detention.

I know that the imam of Bandar Kinrara mosque has publicly denied that I was involved in the Puchong residents petition against azan of his mosque on Sept 13. I am also quite surprised to read in the New Straits Times dated Sept 19 that the official of the Bandar Kinrara mosque was called by the Dang Wangi police for statement recording only yesterday afternoon.

Why did the police do it so late, one week after I was arrested? Why didn’t they check their facts first before they arrest me and put me behind bars?

I see my detention as a ploy by Umno to try to cover up the embarrassment and the outrage of the racist statements made by (ex-Bukit Bendera Umno division chief) Ahmad Ismail in Penang. I wonder why did they choose an innocent person like me as I have never made any racist statements or racist speeches in the past?

I have lodged the police report on Sept 17, 2008 against Utusan Malaysia, Zaini and Dr Mohd Khir Toyo for criminal defamation. I would therefore urge the police to investigate Utusan Malaysia’s editors, those racist bloggers and Khir Toyo under the Penal Code.

As I have mentioned in my previous lawyer’s visit, I will sue Utusan Malaysia, Zaini and Khir Toyo. I have also instructed my lawyers to sue the Malaysian government for my unlawful arrest and detention.

As I am free from ISA detention today, I also call for the release of Raja Petra Kamarudin, the Hindraf Five and all other 60 over detainees under the draconian ISA.

I would also like to thank all politicians in the ruling parties as well as in the Pakatan Rakyat, NGOs, churches and all social organisations who have campaigned and prayed for my release.

TERESA KOK
Seputeh MP
Selangor senior exco
Kinrara state assemblyperson

Comments:-
1) Obviously the Police had failed to investigate and record the statements from the victimizers who made false report before detaining the victim under ISA. Simple investigation of asking 3 questions to verify the facts can be made within 15 minutes and to release MP Teresa within 12 hours even if ISA was invoked. What on earth is Police detaining her for 7 days? How efficient and professional are Police to handle the investigations?

2) Why the Police only record the statement from the official of the Bandar Kinrara mosque was called by the Dang Wangi police for statement recording only on Sept 18, 2008 while the detention was made on September 11, 2008 even before the report was verified to be true and admissible as evidence?

3) Why the Police did not detain the instigator, former Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo for writing malicious article in his blog and the Chief Editor of Utusan Malaysia and its columnist Zaini Hassan for publication of the same article with intention to disrupt national security through racial misunderstanding and hatred? If Sin Chew Newspaper and other 2 Chinese dailies were served with show cause letter, why Utusan Malaysia is not served with show-cause letter even after the Police found no reason to detain MP Teresa Kok any longer? It means the report in Utusan Malaysia was false otherwise there is good reason to detain her under ISA and not to be released after 7 days.

4) The abuse of ISA had violated the Federal Constitution of the freedom to practise of religion , i.e, to attend Sunday service weekly, church activities like Bible Study, Youth Group and to read the Holy Bible daily (only upon demand, a Bible was given to Teresa). It also breaches freedom of association of an individual to move freely to gather together with family members, friends, church members and so on.


Kok freed, to sue Government for arrest
The Star Online September 20, 2008
Teresa Kok released from ISA detention

KUALA LUMPUR: Seputeh MP Teresa Kok was released yesterday after being detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for seven days.

Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar confirmed that police found no reason to detain her any longer.

Savoring her freedom: Kok waving as she leaves the Bangsar police station in Jalan Travers, Kuala Lumpur, Friday while accompanied by her personal assistant Mandy Ooi and lawyer Sankaran Nair.

Kok, 44, who is a senior Selangor executive councillor, was arrested on Friday last week following allegations that she had urged several mosque officials to turn down the loudspeakers for the azan prayers.

“I have instructed my lawyers to sue the Government for my unlawful arrest and detention,” said Kok.

She said she had lodged a police report against Utusan Malaysia and its columnist Zaini Hassan and former Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo for criminal defamation on Sept 14, and that she would sue them.

Kok called her ISA detention “nonsensical” and a “phenomenal abuse by the police”.
Arrested along with her were Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamarudin and Sin Chew Daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng. Tan was released 18 hours after her detention but Raja Petra is still being detained.

During her detention, Kok said the police had asked her whether she had mobilised a group of residents at Bandar Kinrara to present a petition to oppose the azan at the Bandar Kinrara mosque; whether she had stated that 30% of the Selangor Islamic Department (Jais) allocation is to be given to other non-Islamic religious bodies; and whether she had opposed the Jawi road signs in Kuala Lumpur.

“I denied the first two accusations, and I also told them that the issue of opposing the Jawi road signs was done in January or February. This was done at the request of residents’ associations who opposed the wastage of public funds as the road signs had only been changed a few months before,” said Kok.

“They (police) asked me the same questions twice and nothing else. I told them my version and even offered to type out my statement, which I did when they gave me a laptop,” she said. Asked if the police told her why she was released, she said: “No.”

Comments:-“Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar confirmed that police found no reason to detain her any longer.”

Why can’t Police tried other option to record the statement from the trusted Member of Parliament by requesting her to appear at the appointed time and date for recording and verifying the report in the newspaper Utusan Malaysia before invoking the ISA on her?

As MP elected by the majority of the People, she deserve the respect and trust of the Police to exercise caution and use amicable means first before the draconian ISA which is an Inhuman Stupid Act to humiliate the politician and journalist who carry out their duties respectively.


Teresa Kok's Release Decided Entirely By Police, Says Syed Hamid

PUTRAJAYA, Sept 19, 2008 (Bernama) -- Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said the release of the Seputeh Member of Parliament, Teresa Kok, from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) was decided entirely by the police without referring to him or requiring his approval.

He said he was in fact informed of the matter after Kok had been released, and believed that the release was made after police investigation revealed that the detention was no longer necessary."I don't ask questions (to the police) because when it comes to police exercising their power, I let them do their work without any hassle.”

Comments:-
Who authorize the use of ISA in the first place? If Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid did not authorize the use of ISA in the first place or if the Prime Minister of Malaysia was unaware of the ISA being used against the civilians, how can the PM be in control of the welfare of the country? The denial of Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid to be in command of the Police action is both a shame and lacking integrity to hold the post of Home Minister. If this serious matter is beyond or without his control, then he can quit the Post within 24 hours???

Police action is accountable to Home Minister who in turn is accountable to the Prime Minister. Although under ISA Section 73(1) any police officer can detain any person without any warrant of arrest, there are conditions to be fulfilled such as the security of Malaysia or part thereof is at threat. Furthermore I presume there is protocol that the Police Chief would seek consultation with the Home Minister. Syed Hamid cannot deny he was not involved but let Police to abuse the ISA even when there is no phemonenal sight that the security of Malaysia or part thereof , is under threat.

Firstly there is no mass street protest against MP Teresa Kok on the allegations against her that would trigger natiowide demonstration and that she as Seputah MP has clarified that she was not involved in petition for reducing the volume of loud speaker from the mosque. The mosque officials came to clarify the issue too. So why can't the Police act on intelligent information gathered to complete the investigation first and are satisfied that there is concrete evidence of her involvement before taking action?

Secondly, where is the proof that such small issue which can be resolved amicably by cordial discussion will led to threat to national security? If the Utusan Malaysia had excercised caution not to play with racial and religious sentiments, this ISA detention would not happen.

Thirdly, why the instigator or author of the blog who posted the malicious article is not detained under ISA when the same law which is applied to Member of Parliament (MP), has been found not quilty?

Why the Sin Chew Newspaper press and 2 other Chinese dailies were served with show cause letter for the publication of true report of what Ahmad Ismail said during the Permatang Pauh by-election while Utusan Malaysia which published the false & malicious report against MP Teresa Kok that led to her detention under ISA is not served with show-cause letter?

Why Ahmad Ismail who made racist remark on the Chinese community is not detained under ISA while the Chinese reporter Ms. Tan who merely report the true words of Ahmad Ismail was detained under ISA??? If party’s policy is above country’s law, then Ahmad Ismail’s 3 years suspension from holding UMNo post is acceptable. But party’s law is not above country’s law of ISA! This is an obvious example of impartial application of ISA on the innocent civilians while the victimizers are scot-free.

Is the Police upholding justice to detain the victims under ISA while the offenders or victimizers are free from discipline or punishment under the law?There is only one reason for this harsh and unfair display of police action, the Prime Minister is indecisive or unable to command the Police force to uphold justice.

ISA History
MALAYSIA: Denial of right to freedom of association and expression, continuous arrests under the ISAUPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM Forwarded Appeal 9 July 2001 -----------------------------------------------------------
FA-05-2001: Second student leader arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) MALAYSIA: Denial of right to freedom of association and expression, continuous arrests under the ISA -----------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends, Regarding continuous crackdown in Malaysia, we are forwarding the following appeal by SUARAM, one of prominent human rights group in Malaysia. Recently two student leaders were arrested under the ISA. The students join the six other political prisoners (Tina Chua, Mohamad Ezam Mohd. Nor, Saari Sungib, Hishamuddin Rais, Lokman Adam and Badaruddin Ismail) who remain in custody under the ISA. Please send your protest letter to stop the continuous crackdown on opposition, human rights and student group. Thank you for your action. Urgent Appeals Desk Asian Human Rights Commission
-----------------------------

Second Student Leader Arrested under ISA! BACKGROUND Mohamad Fuad Mohd Ikhwan, president of the Student Representative Council of University Malaya, was arrested at about 4.30pm yesterday (6 July 2001) under the Internal Security Act (ISA), which allows for detention without trial! According to information received by Suaram, Mohamad Fuad’s family received a phone call from DSP Lee of the Bukit Aman Police Headquarters at about 5.45pm yesterday informing them that Mohamad Fuad was arrested under ISA section 73(1).

Mohamad Fuad is believed to be arrested while driving his motorcycle alone. His vehicle is believed to be kept now in the Travers police station. This is a second ISA arrest on student activists following the recent crackdown on student movement against the notorious ISA and the deteriorating human rights and democracy situation in Malaysia by the government.

Earlier, a student leader from Institut Kemahiran Mara, Khairul Anuar Ahmad Zainuddin was arrested under ISA on 5 July 2001 at the Dang Wangi police station. He was accompanying six student activists who were told to present themselves there in connection with an anti-ISA demonstration in front of the National Mosque last June 8.

The student’s anti ISA demonstration was held on June 8 and participated by around 400 students from different universities all over the country. The demonstration ended up with seven student activists arrested by the police. They were beaten under police custody. They were released on June 9 on police bail and asked to report back to the police station on July 5. In a report today, the Inspector General of Police, Norian Mai was quoted that Khairul Anuar was arrested because he is suspected to be involved in activities posing threats to the national security and a fire, which razed Tunku Canselor Hall in University Malaya on July 2.

However, the Fire and Rescue Department has yet to complete their investigation on the fire. Both Khairul Anuar Ahmad Zainuddin and Mohamad Fuad Mohd Ikhwan are now being held incommunicado by the police at undisclosed detention center. Both are denied of their rights to legal representation and access to their family. It is believed that more students will be arrested under the draconian ISA as the police have started to raid a few students?residence in Bangi and Kelana Jaya area since last Wednesday. Suaram believe the ISA arrests are made to crackdown on the student movement and silence student activism in campus.

Suaram is very concerned with the safety and well being of the students detained incommunicado under ISA as ISA detainees had been subjected to serious physical and mental torture in the past.

The Internal Security Act, 1960 Section 73(1) Internal Security Act: "Any police officer may without warrant arrest and detain pending enquiries any person in respect of whom he has reason to believe-
a. that there are grounds which would justify his detention under section 8; and
b. that he has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof."

Sect 8. Power to order detention or restriction of persons. "(i) If the Minister is satisfied that the detention of any person is necessary with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to the maintenance of essential services therein or the economic life thereof, he may make an order (hereinafter referred to as a detention order) directing that person be detained for any period not exceeding two years."

(Note from SUARAM: the detention order can be renewed by the Minister, which is not uncommon, hence making detention indefinitely.)

Why the ISA is a Draconian Law Since 1960 when the Act was enacted, thousands of people including trade unionists, student leaders, labour activists, political activists, religious groups, academicians, NGO activists have been arrested under the ISA.

The ISA has been consistently used against people who criticise the government and defend human rights. It has been the most convenient tool for the state to suppress opposition and open debate.

The Act is an instrument maintained by the ruling government to control public life and civil society.

The ISA provides for 'preventative detention' without trial for an indefinite period.

The ISA violates fundamental rights and goes against the principles of justice and undermines the rule of law.

The ISA goes against the right of a person to defend himself in an open and fair trial. The person can be incarcerated up to 60 days of interrogation without access to lawyers.

A person detained under the ISA is held incommunicado, with no access to the outside world. Furthermore, lawyers and family are not allowed access to the detainee. Torture goes concurrently with ISA detention.

Former detainees have testified to being subjected to physical and psychological torture. This may include one or more of the following: physical assault, sleep deprivation, round-the-clock interrogation, threats of bodily harm to family members, including detainees' children. Prolonged torture and deprivation have led to detainees signing state-manufactured 'confessions' under severe duress.

ACTION REQUIRED
- Demand for the immediate release of all those detained under ISA.
- Express gravest concern over their well-being.
- If those detained have violated any laws, charge them in an open and fair court.
- Condemn the use of ISA and call for the Government to repeal the ISA immediately.
- Condemn the abuse and disrespect of the right to assemble peaceably.
- Call on the Malaysian Human Rights Commission to intervene and restore democracy and human rights.

Source: http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2001/123/

Comments: ISA is also used on students in the country. What is ISA originally meant for? Better enact Anti-Terrorism Law to replace ISA enacted in 1960 for terrorists and not for civilians.

How can PM deserve credit when it was the Police's decision to release Teresa?

September 19, 2008 23:13 PM

Teresa Kok's Release Shows PM's Sincerity, Seriousness - Gerakan

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 19 (Bernama) -- In welcoming the release of Seputeh MP Teresa Kok from ISA (Internal Security Act) detention today, Gerakan expressed its appreciation for Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's sincerity and seriousness over the matter.

"In a way, the government has responded to the strong public opinion on the arrest of individuals under the ISA," its acting president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon said in a statement Friday.

Comments:

 

That is not the effort of PM as his ministers said it was soley the Police's decision from the investigation. So why Gerakan is thanking PM???

 

 

September 19, 2008 19:18 PM

Teresa Kok's Release Decided Entirely By Police, Says Syed Hamid

PUTRAJAYA, Sept 19 (Bernama) -- Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said the release of the Seputeh Member of Parliament, Teresa Kok, from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) was decided entirely by the police without referring to him or requiring his approval.

He said he was in fact informed of the matter after Kok had been released, and believed that the release was made after police investigation revealed that the detention was no longer necessary.

"I don't ask questions (to the police) because when it comes to police exercising their power, I let them do their work without any hassle."

"And if they feel there is no need to make any recommendations (to detain further) and they are satisfied, they will release in accordance with the powers that they have," he told reporters after presenting contributions to the ministry's staff, here Friday.

Comments: Read who is in command???

"I don't ask questions (to the police) because when it comes to police exercising their power, I let them do their work without any hassle." says Datuk Seri Syed Hamid. If he said "I let them do their work", it meant he was in control over the Police. Or else he can instruct the Police to release MP Teresa Kok earlier. Why he did not act base on the Police Report against the instigator Selangor Opposition Leader Mohd Khir Toyo for defaming Kok by alleging that Kok had supported a petition by the Chinese in Kinrara against the azan (call to morning prayer) in their area.

Can ISA be used on Civilians without Home Minister's approval???

DPM Najib Hopes Teresa Kok's Release Will Abate Furore Over ISA

PEKAN, Sept 19 (Bernama) -- Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak hopes that the release of Seputeh member of parliament Teresa Kok from the Internal Security Act (ISA) Friday will help subdue the furore over detentions under the Act.

The deputy prime minister said he welcomed Kok's release if the police felt that it was the appropriate thing to do.

"It's the police's decision and I welcome it if it's apt. At the same time, it shows that the government places importance on peace and security in the country," he told reporters after the handing over of "zakat" (tithe) for the Pekan parliamentary constituency here.

 

September 19, 2008 19:18 PM

Teresa Kok's Release Decided Entirely By Police, Says HM Syed Hamid

PUTRAJAYA, Sept 19 (Bernama) -- Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said the release of the Seputeh Member of Parliament, Teresa Kok, from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) was decided entirely by the police without referring to him or requiring his approval.

He said he was in fact informed of the matter after Kok had been released, and believed that the release was made after police investigation revealed that the detention was no longer necessary.

"I don't ask questions (to the police) because when it comes to police exercising their power, I let them do their work without any hassle.

Comments:-

Both DPM and HM said the Police act on their own discretion on MP Teresa Kok. What on earth are Police using ISA to detain without Home Minister's approval???

It is unlikely to believe that the Police can invoke the ISA if Home Minister did not endorse it or sign the order. Investigate into the practice of invoking the ISA. Who initiate it or invoke the ISA and whom to detain? Some one must give order and someone must approve it before it is to be carried out. Of course once the ISA Order has been signed or approved, then the Police will carry out the task based on directive. There is no way, the Police can invoke the ISA against any politicians as they like. So Syed Hamid should stop bluffing or telling half-truth.

ISA is under the order of Home Minister who reports to DPM or PM. So PM cannot be ignorant as who invoke the ISA, who will be detained and on what charges they will be detained.

 

 

Kit Siang ticks off Pak Lah for veiled threat

Thursday September 18 2008
Banner
Kit Siang ticks off Pak Lah for veiled threat

IPOH, Sept 18 — Veteran DAP leader Lim Kit Siang today took the Prime Minister to task for describing opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as a threat to national security and the economy, saying the PM should not abuse the use of the ISA to deal with the opposition.

Lim said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's statement has given rise to speculation that an Operation Lalang 2 crackdown and Anwar's arrest under the ISA were in the offing.

Lim, who was detained twice under the ISA, in 1969 and 1987, said he too was accused on both occasions of being a "threat to national security!"

Denying that the opposition was a threat, he stressed that they were only threats to the political security of Barisan Nasional leaders.

 

Comments:-

 

DAP Leader Lim Kit Siang is really good to point out the misinterpretation of "national security" by PM Datuk Seri Ahmad Badawi. It is the effort of PM to interpret national security in his own way to safeguard his personal interest to remain in power. So by using ISA on civilians, PM is anti- democracy when the democratic process is used to ovethrow the weak government. Yet PM alleged that DSAI is a threat to national economy and security!!! There is no uproar against DSAI, no riot, no civil commotion from the Rakyat because of DSAI speeches. So how could he be a threat to national security which is in fact a threat to political security of weak BN govt with no two-third majority!!!

 

PM Datuk Seri Ahmad Badawi is playing the political games just like his predecessors who abused the ISA for personal interest and not for the interest of national security. PM must stop blaming other people like DSAI and have to accept full responsibility for abusing the ISA and detaining the MP Teresa Kok and Blogger Raja Petra. He must be asked to explain as why ISA is used to detain Sin Chew Reporter Ms. Tan for 18-hour, whose report was true and without malice? Yet the racist Ahamd Ismail is left free and not detained under ISA for a single hour!. The suspension of his UMNO post for 3 years is based on party leaders' decision and a party discipline against him. Why ISA is not used against him if the BN govt is truly fair to all races? Why apply the ISA impartially on an innocent civilians without threat to national security since they are not armed with military weapons nor terrorists in the country???

 

Vote out the PM by vote of no confidence in the next Parliamentary sitting. Let's all MPs do it together!!!

 

Sinking Titanic - BN Govt

It is time to jump off the sinking titanic or prefer to die with it. See the day is dawning where voters are wiser and more mature than before. Non-performing politicians can take long leave as People will realise that they are useless and mere apple-polishers. Let's there be another political tsunami to sink this titanic. When the Parliament sitting resumes on Oct 13, hit hard with ISA issues and then call for votes against it. If BN ministers are all supporting ISA, then next election, call them betrayers to voters' wishes and unable to exercise their conscience like YB Zaid Ibrahim. I salute him for a politician of good principle and walk the talk. Those BN who are silent about ISA are good for nothing.

Let's push for vote of no confidence using the the ISA abuse on civilians and even MP YB Teresa Kok. How on earth the PM still said the ISA is good but it depends on the enforcement officers. If PM is detained under ISA one day, then he could taste the bitterness of ISA and we can say it to him: ISA is good for him.

Now PM had failed to perform as Minister of Finance and he blamed DSAI as a threat to national economy. As a matter of fact, the govt is weak becos of no two third majority yet he boasted it is strong. With the fortpolio swap with DPM, he is the Minister of Defence. It is dangerous for PM in this time of distress when DSAI is a threat to overthrow the govt. So he better be prepared to invoke the emergency laws any time when his position is under threat. This is bad move and a threat to the general public as emergency laws may be invoked insensibly just as he allowed the ISA to be used on innocent journalist and MP Teresa Kok. What on earth is he doing to the MP Teresa Kok and detained her in small cell which her mum said detained "in a cage 6x8ft like a dog"? How civilised is the PM to ill-treat a non-muslim MP? Does his religion permits bias treatment of other races? It seems UMNO and BN are anti-Islam because it always boasted Islam is a religion of Peace. Yet the believers permit the ISA detention without trial, which is both harsh and violate the basic human rights to remain innocence and seek legal redress in a fair trial in the court of laws.

Firstly MP is not a threat to national security because she is elected by the majority of People from her constituency. If she was a threat, then all the voters from her constituency should be detained under ISA too. It is just ridiculous for an MP to be detained under ISA. It makes no sense and no justice for any lawmakers to be treated as a "dog". Wake up all civilised MPs, speak up today and approach the Agong for assistance since MP had pledge before the Agong to serve the Rakyat. Now MP Teresa Kok is unlawfully detained under ISA. None of the charges against her is valid. As for the accusation that she disapproved the use of Jawi on road signs, it is a matter of the local council to discuss and justify for the Jawi to be used. Jawi is not a national language of the country; so it has no valid reason that she is anti-Jawi or anti-Malays. Jawi is originally used by the Arabs from Arabia but not the Malays from South East Asia. So when did Jawi become the national language of Malaysia??? What a foolish accusation!

Free MP Teresa Kok today! Let's all MPs speak up for her or remain silent forever! If the MPs remain silent today, it implies they are supporting the use of ISA on MP. That is ridiculos to count themselves as representatives for the Rakyat. Even the not so learned general public cannot tolerate injustice and abuse of the laws in the land, what more for learned politicians, MPs and Prime Minister!!!

20-point Agreement and Malaysia Day on Sept 16, 1963

The 20 points of agreement for Sarawak & Sabah (then called North Borneo) to join the federation of Malaysia, have almost been forgotten if not reviewed from time to time. It is time to review the 20-point agenda and other rules and conditions agreed upon when they became part of Malaysia in 1963.

There were laws and regulations in the 20-point agreement which were discriminatory against Sabahans and Sarawakians, including the 5% oil royalty paid to the Federal Government and the non-eligibility of their Heads of State to be appointed Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

The 20-point agreement, or the 20-point memorandum, is an agreement made between the state of North Borneo with what would be the federal government of Malayisa prior to the formation of Malaysia in September 16, 1963. A similar agreement was made between the state of Sarawak and the federal government but with certain differences in their 18-Points Agreement.

History
The agreement was written for the main purpose of safeguarding the interests, rights, and the autonomy of the people of Sabah upon entering the federation of Malaysia. Home to 28 culturally distinct ethnic groups, it is also considered the country's most ethnically diverse state, and is unique in that there is no single ethnic majority. The Iban, who are mostly agrarian and practice a form of Christianity mixed with traditional beliefs and rituals, comprise the largest ethnic group with approximately 30% of the population. The Chinese are next with some 27% of the population, followed by the Malays (23%). It was originally envisaged that Sabah & Sarawak each to be one of the four entities in the federation, the others being Malaya & Singapore. However as times passed, Sabah and Sarawak has ended up being merely one of the 13 States in the federation.

In view of the current issue in regard to the neglegence towards Sabah & Sarawak, we should SERIOUSLY reconsider the clause of the AGREEMENT.

The Agreement

Point 1: Religion
While there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in North Borneo, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to North Borneo

Point 2: Language
a. Malay should be the national language of the Federation
b. English should continue to be used for a period of 10 years after Malaysia Day
c. English should be an official language of North Borneo for all purposes, State or Federal, without limitation of time.

Point 3: Constitution
Whilst accepting that the present Constitution of the Federation of Malaya should form the basis of the Constitution of Malaysia, the Constitution of Malaysia should be a completely new document drafted and agreed in the light of a free association of states and should not be a series of amendments to a Constitution drafted and agreed by different states in totally different circumstances. A new Constitution for North Borneo (Sabah) was of course essential.

Point 4: Head of Federation
The Head of State in North Borneo should not be eligible for election as Head of the Federation

Point 5: Name of Federation
"Malaysia" but not "Melayu Raya"

Point 6: Immigration
Control over immigration into any part of Malaysia from outside should rest with the Central Government but entry into North Borneo should also require the approval of the State Government. The Federal Government should not be able to veto the entry of persons into North Borneo for State Government purposes except on strictly security grounds. North Borneo should have unfettered control over the movements of persons other than those in Federal Government employ from other parts of Malaysia into North Borneo.

Point 7: Right of Secession
There should be no right to secede from the Federation

Point 8: Borneanisation
Borneanisation of the public service should proceed as quickly as possible.

Point 9: British Officers
Every effort should be made to encourage British Officers to remain in the public service until their places can be taken by suitably qualified people from North Borneo

Point 10: Citizenship
The recommendation in paragraph 148(k) of the Report of the Cobbold Commission should govern the citizenship rights in the Federation of North Borneo subject to the following amendments:
a) sub-paragraph (i) should not contain the proviso as to five years residence
b) in order to tie up with our law, sub-paragraph (ii)(a) should read "7 out of 10 years" instead of "8 out of 10 years"
c) sub-paragraph (iii) should not contain any restriction tied to the citizenship of parents – a person born in North Borneo after Malaysia must be federal citizen.

Point 11: Tariffs and Finance
North Borneo should retain control of its own finance, development and tariff, and should have the right to work up its own taxation and to raise loans on its own credit.

Point 12: Special position of indigenous races
In principle, the indigenous races of North Borneo should enjoy special rights analogous to those enjoyed by Malays in Malaya, but the present Malays' formula in this regard is not necessarily applicable in North Borneo

Point 13: State Government
a) the Prime Minister should be elected by unofficial members of Legislative Council
b) There should be a proper Ministerial system in North Borneo

Point 14: Transitional period
This should be seven years and during such period legislative power must be left with the State of North Borneo by the Constitution and not be merely delegated to the State Government by the Federal Government

Point 15: Education
The existing educational system of North Borneo should be maintained and for this reason it should be under state control

Point 16: Constitutional safeguards
No amendment modification or withdrawal of any special safeguard granted to North Borneo should be made by the Central Government without the positive concurrence of the Government of the State of North Borneo
The power of amending the Constitution of the State of North Borneo should belong exclusively to the people in the state. (Note: The United Party, The Democratic Party and the Pasok Momogun Party considered that a three-fourth majority would be required in order to effect any amendment to the Federal and State Constitutions whereas the UNKO and USNO considered a two-thirds majority would be sufficient)

Point 17: Representation in Federal Parliament
This should take account not only of the population of North Borneo but also of its seize and potentialities and in any case should not be less than that of Singapore

Point 18: Name of Head of State
Yang di-Pertua Negeri

Point 19: Name of State
Sabah / Sarawak

Point 20: Land, Forests, Local Government, etc.
The provisions in the Constitution of the Federation in respect of the powers of the National Land Council should not apply in North Borneo. Likewise, the National Council for Local Government should not apply in North Borneo.

 

 

Note: The 20-point Agreement is the historical fact & no copyright attached; not mine too!

Still PM in waiting? Commentary by consultant editor Leslie Lau

Excerpt from "Still PM in waiting?"

SEPT 16, 2008 - No matter how you cut it, today was a bad day for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Watch this date, Sept 16, he has been telling Malaysians. I will take power by Sept 16, he kept repeating. Now, he says his Pakatan Rakyat (PR) alliance is ready to take power, and that it has the support of more than the required 31 Barisan Nasional (BN) MPs for it to form the federal government.

But he will not do it yet. He has a list of names which he will show only to the prime minister so that a smooth handover of power can be negotiated. One should always call a spade a spade. In this case, Anwar's claim is a game of charades which is being inflicted on this country. If he has the support there is no reason to believe he would not show the list of names to all Malaysians. For all those Malaysians who felt their intelligence insulted by Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar when he said Sin Chew Daily journalist Tan Hoon Cheng had been arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for her own protection, here is another one courtesy of Anwar.

 

 

COMMENTS:

 

Editor Leslie Lau must have misunderstood Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's pledge to form the new govt by Sept 16, 2008. Of course a pledge is the undertaking on his part to do so within his capability but not beyond God's will. I personally do not felt that Anwar is bluffing but he is excersing his faith and courage to form a new govt. While Datuk Seri Syed Hamid is a blatant liar not arising from faith but to deny responsibility; it is a shame to himself.

 

You should have future leaders who dare to fail and to set deadline to accomplish the things. Without goal setting, there is no definite target to aim. Keep trying for the Pakatan Rakyat. Someday you can see the realisation of the new govt. It is the wishes of the majority of the Malaysians!

 

Two MPs lodged report against Khir Toyo

Excerpt from The Star Online

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/9/16/nation/20080916140722&sec=nation
16-9-2008

 

No Action Taken on False Witness but victim detained under ISA despite mosque officials clarified that the victim was not involved.

PETALING JAYA: Kampung Tunku assemblyman Lau Weng San has lodged a police report against former Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo for allegedly making a false statement on his blog (www.drkhir.blogspot.com).

The contents of the blog posting was subsequently published in a Malay daily on Sept 9.

Lau said Dr Khir's statement and the report from the daily accused Seputeh MP Teresa Kok for being responsible in spearheading a campaign to ban the broadcast of the azan (Muslim call to prayer) on loudspeakers.

He lodged the police report at the police headquarters here about 11am Tuesday.

Lau said that the mosques had denied Kok's involvement in the allegation.

"This whole misunderstanding was even explained by a blogger (pembelamelayu.blogspot.com) and yet Dr Khir paid no attention to it and continued to slander Kok," he said.

Petaling Jaya OCPD Asst Comm Arjunaidi Mohamed confirmed that a report was lodged by Lau.

This is the second police report lodged against Khir Toyo.

On Sept 11, Kota Raja MP Dr Siti Mariah Mahmood lodged a police report against Khir Toyo on the same matter.

 

COMMENTS:-

 

What are the Police doing and whom are they serving? How could Police who get paid from tax payers monies are not serving the Public with justice but serve those who made false reports? Are police anti-DAP MP by proposing unlawful detention under ISA?

 

How could Syed Hamid Home Minister unable to exercise intelligent to stop using ISA? Who endorse the proposal before the Police act on the directive? Syed Hamid was a liar who said ISA gave protection to the Sin Chew Reporter Ms. Tan. The same ISA granted protection to MP Teresa Kok and Blogger Raja Petra??? The govt was in delusion and fear of collapse.

 

The main person who poses threat to national security is Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. So he might be detained under ISA too if foreign countries do not intervene. Now the world is watching on Malaysia which is suffering from politicial instability because the present govt has not two-third majority in the parliament. So using ISA to detain the MPs is a good measure to stay in power but a bad choice that abuse the human rights of a politician and lawmaker. How could a Member of Parliament elected by the People poses a threat of national security??? There is no basis to detain a MP or at least to accord the recognition that MP Teresa Kok has the command of majority from the Rakyat (People). The Police must be disciplined when the new govt come to power. Those top personnel in the police force will have to resign and replace by true law-abiding police. So those who serve the wrong politicians will make sure you are prepared to leave the force once the Pakatan Rakyat forms the new govt.

 

 

 

Anwar: We are ready to take over to form the new govt

Excerpt from Malaysianinsider.com http://m.themalaysianinsider.com/articles.php?id=9037-anwar-we-are-ready-to-take-over Anwar: We are ready to take over

By Shannon Teoh and Debra Chong PETALING JAYA, Sept 15, 2008 - Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim claimed tonight that his Pakatan Rakyat alliance is ready to form the government in the next 24 hours, but pointed out that the opposition was, however, prepared to delay the formation. Speaking at PR's Malaysia Day celebrations at the MBPJ Stadium in Kelana Jaya, he reiterated that the opposition coalition had the numbers in hand to form the next government. While Anwar made his claim, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi scoffed at the suggestion at a separate function tonight that the opposition was on the verge of forming the government.

Anwar, however, also suggested the change of government may not happen within the next day. He also made a raft of guarantees - to free all ISA detainees, reduce the cost of living immediately after taking his oath of office as prime minister. "Once I take the oath of office, we will free all the ISA detainees," he told the cheering crowd. Anwar also mocked Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar for suggesting Sin Chew Daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng was arrested to protect her from threats to her life. "When they arrested me they even asked me to take off my underwear. What kind of protection is that?" he said.

COMMENTS:

Whatever the past wrongful deeds of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had done, forgive him and support him to form the new govt for a trial, to see how well he can perform. People (Rakyat) have the power to vote them out if he did not perform. Now at least, let him form the new govt for a trial. Let the Rakyat (People) stand by him in the next 24 hours or days ahead to realise the dreams and wishes of the People.

As for the ISA detainees MP Teresa Kok & Blogger Raya Petra, they should be released immediately because they are not armed terrorists nor from any illegal party known in the country to pose a threat to national security. The ISA is meant to combat armed personnel such as communist terrorists who were from banned political party whose objective was to revolt and overthrow the govt by weaponry or by force. Those 2 civilians are not armed in any way except the knowledge to seek justice. By detaining them without trial, great injustice has been done; the govt resorted to the law of the jungle to punish those whom they dislike.

As for unlawful detention of Sin Chew Reporter Ms. Tan for 18 hours, great damage has been done in the country and in the field of journalism. Whatever the PM said he had big ears to listen, is proven untrue by using the ISA to silent the critics and even journalist whose report was true and transparent. People have to continue to fight on until the ISA has been amended to define those people who are considered a threat to national security must meet the terms of armed personnel from a banned or illegal organisation planned to revolt or overthrow the govt. If there is no such element to overthrow the govt by force, then ISA should not be unlawfully used on the civilians. The term civilians is clearly that they are not armed terrorists.

Why ISA is used on civilians who do not pose threat to national security?

ISA originally enacted to combat communism & terrorists is wrongly used on civilians.

 

Excerpt from The Star Online 14-9-2008

 

"Sin Chew Daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng was detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) because police received information that her life had been threatened", said Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar.

"Police wanted to get to the bottom of it," he said.

However, the minister vehemently denied that he had anything to do with the arrests and detention of Tan and two others — Malaysia Today news portal editor Raja Petra Kamaruddin and Selangor senior executive councillor Teresa Kok — under the ISA on Friday.

"I don't think we are being unfair or mistreated her in any way," he said when asked if Tan had posed a security threat in any way.

Asked why the police did not just ask Tan to come in for questioning instead of arresting her, Syed Hamid said it was always difficult when police had to deal with reporters.

On Raja Petra, he said the blogger had been given numerous warnings as well as been charged but he continued to create tension.

As for Kok, he said she had questioned the sensitive issues such as the azan (call for prayers for Muslims) and that could cause ill-will and disharmony.

On why Ahmad was not detained for making racist comments, he explained that Umno had already punished him by suspending him for three years and stripping him of his party posts.

Source:

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/9/14/nation/2026578&sec=nation

 

 

Comments:-

 

Firstly ISA is originally enacted to combat communism & terrorists nowsaday it is wrongly used on civilians with ill intention to silent the critics. It just shows that Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar was talking non sense when he commented that Sin Chew Reporter Ms. Tan was detained under ISA for 18 hours because her life was threatened! When Police is truly interested to protect her why use ISA which is meant to punish criminals but never meant to "protect" civilians. The original intention and primary purpose of ISA is to punish criminals and armed terrorists from known organisation to the public at large that it is truly will pose a threat to national security. But a journalist will pose what kind of threat to national security? The criminal is set free while the victim is detained under ISA as a lesson to silent the critic.

 

As for Teresa Kok, she is a Member of Parliament or lawmaker elected by the people, for the people and of the people to serve the country. Could a MP consider a threat to national security when she helps to residents over the loud azan or morning prayer from a mosque? Do unto other what you want other to do to you. It is inconsiderate to disturb the sleep of the residents by loud or long morning prayers when the basic rights of the non-muslims residents to enjoy good sleep have been deprived. Faithful believers will wake up for morning prayers even without be called for. Mostly morning prayers for 2-3 minutes will suffice as God see the heart and not the public display of one's religiousness.

 

While Raja Petra is outspoken for saying his piece of mind, there are laws to charge him in court if he did anything wrong. What has been rumoured must have some truth. As the saying goes, there is no smoke without fire; so with the smokes hovering before our eyes, the air must be cleared by legal action in court and not through ISA. To invoke the ISA is truly a coward and inhuman action of the govt to silent the critics. Inhuman Stupidity Act (ISA) is only exhibited by coward and uncilivised govt on the civilians who strive for truth and justice in the corrupted country.

 

The damage has been done by the BN govt beyond reconciliation. A new Malaysia is what the Rakyat (People) is hoping for in the days ahead.

Three 3 civilians unlawfully detained under ISA

The unlawful arrest of trio MP Teresa Kok, Sin Chew Reporter Tan & Blogger Raja Petra Reason for Teresa's arrest

Andrew Ong Sep 13, 08 3:37pm

Selangor executive committee member Teresa Kok was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) yesterday evening for allegedly causing tension and conflict among races as laid out in the notice issued by the police special branch to her next of kin. Malaysiakini.com http://malaysiakini.com/news/89643 Comments: September 13, 2008 Malaysian government has been condemned by the people (rakyat) to employ the Internal Security Act (ISA) as an abuse of the law for protecting the self-interest of the top 2 leaders namely Datuk Seri Ahmad Badawi and Najib. The government is on the verge of collapse into the hands of the Opposition Pakatan Raykat headed by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. The day is drawing near to September 16, 2008 whereby the path of New Malaysia is dawning. There is abuse of ISA because the racist remarks against the Chinese community by the former Bukit Bendera Umno division chairman Datuk Ahmad Ismail, has not been taken to task but reporter Tan Hoon Cheng, who wrote about the incident, has been arrested instead. http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/9/13/nation/2022362&sec=nation "The perpetrator who to conduct a nationwide roadshow on his remarks without any remorse is still at large," MCA vice-president Datuk Ong Tee Keat said in a statement yesterday. He said anybody in his right mind would certainly be stunned by such an arrest targeted at the reporter and not the perpetrator. MCA vice-president Datuk Seri Dr Fong Chan Onn said he disagreed with the use of the ISA on Tan. "As a reporter, Tan was only carrying out duties assigned to her. Her story had gone through the due editorial process before it was printed," he said. Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek said the arrest of Raja Petra Kamaruddin was judicious because he ridiculed Islam in his postings which could spark fury among Muslims. Gerakan president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, meanwhile, urged the Government to bring Raja Petra to trial in court under existing laws. "This is consistent with Gerakan's stand that the ISA should be reviewed, if not repealed," Dr Koh said in a statement. Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim condemned Raja Petra's arrest and called for his immediate release. "Raja Petra should be given access to proper legal counsel, and his wife and children should not be denied an opportunity to visit him while he is held captive," he said in a statement. DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang called for Raja Petra's release as there was no justification for his detention. He said Raja Petra should be charged in court if he had infringed the law, and not held in detention without trial. Under the Section, police are empowered to detain the trio for a period of 60 days after which the Home Minister can decide on further detention. Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar admitted that the decision to detain people and issue show cause letters would be unpopular and would be criticised but it had to be done. "While we may want to be popular, freedom without responsibilities has ramifications. "We have to take action to protect the wishes of the majority," he said. Sin Chew Daily News reporter Tan Hoon Cheng has been released. Penang state police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Wira Ayub Yaakub said Tan was sent to her house in Bukit Mertajam at 4.15pm. She was released Saturday after a one-day detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA). It was an act of intimidation to the journalists to shy from reporting the truth on racist remarks while prepetrator Datuk Ahmad Ismail is still free to make racist statements. The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has described the detention of Sin Chew Daily journalist Tan Hoon Cheng under the Internal Security Act as an act to intimidate the media. NUJ general treasurer Martin Vengadesan condemned Tan's detention as the Umno supreme council had already suspended its Bukit Bendera division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail for three years based on his statement. "We feel this detention is a case of shooting the messenger. We hope the authorities will release Tan soon," he said. The Malaysian Police and the government are clearly unfair to detain the civilians under ISA when these civilians have not committed any offence or charged in the court of laws. The abuse of ISA and Malaysian government is hereby condemned by the People at the highest degree and call for immediate change of government . September 16, 2008 is the day which marks the beginning of the struggle by the People for the new government free of corruption and abolition of ISA. In the civilised society of Malaysia where lawmakers made every law to deter and charge the offenders, it is unconceivable to use the babaric law of ISA to detain without trial where the justice cannot be applied and upheld. The Police is hereby called to explain as to why the racist Datuk Ahmand Ismail is still not detain under ISA when his statement has caused racial tension and national insecurity in the country? His statement on the Chinese as immigrants from China is a distortion of historical facts as the first batch of immigrants from China are basically dead while the new generations after 1957 are born and bred in Malaya or Malaysia and are citizens of the country by the operation of the law in the country. So by branding the Chinese in the country as immigrants or he subsequently clarified as "squatters "and should not have equal rights with the Malays is seditious and the racist remarks which warrants detention under ISA. The split between Gerakan and BN in Penang has proven the Datuk Ahamd Ismail is guilty of causing national insecurity and racial tension. The May 13 1969 should not be repeated by playing with racial issues. Once again the evidence of injustice and unfair application of the laws by the Malaysian police is clear by the comparison of the above persons involved.

1988 Judiciary MayDay still haunt people by injustice and corruption

What concrete actions have been taken to restore separation of powers between the Malaysian judiciary, police force & army and Malaysian Government?

 

Is ISA ready for new government to use it to detain without trial for the political foes to taste the bitterness of the law?

 

Why Tun Dr. Mahathir wants to migrate if he did nothing wrong when he was in power as PM of Malaysia? Who wants to stab him at his back for no harm being made to Anwar and the Malaysian judiciary system?

 

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

I concur with the views expressed in the Bar Council statement of 9 Oct 1988.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Charges against Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman

The first charge was for 'staying away and failing' to attend the Kota Baru Supreme Court sitting scheduled for the 2 July 1988 'without good reasons'.

The second charge was for 'ordering Supreme Court judges Datuk George Seah and Datuk Harun Hashim to leave their duties at the same Supreme Court hearing in Kota Baru without good and valid reasons'.

The Tribunal unanimously found that the above two charges against Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman had been established.

Comments on the tribunal's findings

Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman did 'stay away' from the Kota Baru Supreme Court sitting and he did order the other two Supreme Court judges to return to Kuala Lumpur for a possible special sitting. There is no dispute as to this. He had appeared before the Tribunal and had given his reasons. The Tribunal held that the charge of 'misbehaviour' on these two counts has been 'proved against Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman beyond reasonable doubt'.

BRAVEST AND MOST HONOURABLE JUDGES

"The effect of the whole Second Tribunal was to remove two Judges — Tan Sri Datuk Wan Sulaiman Pawan Teh and Datuk George Edward Seah Kim Seng and reinstate the other three. But the 5-man Second Tribunal was not unanimous in its findings. At least two members had doubts and did not recommend removal. One even held that in the case of Datuk George Seah that guilt was not even established! "But that did not matter. The decision was by majority vote. Like a trial, not an inquiry. "And two of the bravest and most honourable men in the history of the Malaysian judicial system were simply thrown off the Bench." ~ Excerpt from May Day For Justice (1989 : 235) May Day for Justice can still be purchased from: Pacifica Publications Suite 2B, 2nd Floor, Rumah Rohhas, 61 Jalan Raja Abdullah, Kampung Baru, 50300 Kuala Lumpur Tel: +60-(0)3-2691 7110 Fax: +60-(0)3-2691 7130 e-mail: justice@tm.net.my

Although we have not heard the arguments of Counsel for Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman and the Attorney-General, as the proceedings were in camera, one can take it that the law as to what constitutes 'misbehaviour' was dealt with in depth at the hearing….

In paragraphs 14.2 through 14.9 of its Report, the Tribunal noted the events in relation to the suspension of Tun Salleh leading to the Special sitting of the Supreme Court on 2 July 1988, having 'distilled' the facts from the various Press reports.

Two major events are clear, that is, (1) the Ex Parte application before Ajaib Singh J which in the mind of Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman was 'dragging on' and (2) the Tribunal proceedings which were 'speeding along'.

These two events were the main topic of conversation in all strata of Malaysian society at that period of time, especially among members of the legal fraternity. No one can deny that. The 'state of the Judiciary' was a matter of national importance and still is.

Paragraph 14.10 recorded that Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman said '...he thought that the proceedings before Ajaib Singh J were "dragging on", particularly, as they took the form of merely an Ex Parte Motion for leave to apply an Order of Prohibition ...'

The Tribunal accepted the evidence of Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman and in their assessment said (in paragraph 14.40): '...it would be naive indeed to conclude that this Respondent's conduct in cancelling his flight to Kota Baru and monitoring the proceeding in Ajaib Singh J's Court, was merely to satisfy his curiosity.

He displayed a deep and continuing interest in proceedings concerning a friend and long time senior colleague and whilst this may be understandably humane it was totally inexcusable especially in view of his status as a Judge of the Supreme Court.

It is difficult to resist the inevitable inference that he was indeed actuated by an improper motive and mindful that the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt, Tribunal so find.'

The Tribunal did not in its assessment comment on the manner or speed of the proceedings of the Tun Salleh Tribunal when dealing with what was called 'the third strand', Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman's 'improper motive' in cancelling his flight to Kota Baru and remaining in Kuala Lumpur to 'monitor' the proceedings in Ajaib Singh's Court.

This fact, in my view is a fatal misdirection in the minds of members of the Tribunal.

To right a wrong

These two parallel proceedings, Tun Salleh Tribunal proceedings and 'Ajaib Singh's Court hearing', stretching from the 28 June when Tun Salleh filed his Ex Parte application up to the Supreme Court sitting on 2 July must also be seen in the light of the appointment and composition of the Tun Salleh Tribunal and the objections of Tun Salleh and the Bar Council and also the reaction of the public. The Tribunal did not comment on this aspect.

Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman, like every right thinking and decent Malaysian was looking at the events of these past days with apprehension, to use an understatement.

I agree with the Tribunal's finding that Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman cancelled his flight to Kota Baru in order to remain in Kuala Lumpur to monitor Ajaib Singh J's proceedings not out of curiosity.

He did so in order to be in Kuala Lumpur to take appropriate action to prevent a possible miscarriage of justice which was of national importance.

Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman's motive was not improper as the Tribunal found. He was motivated by a noble thought, to right a possible wrong. His action was heroic.

In my opinion the conduct of Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman did not amount to 'misbehaviour'. His dismissal was not justified.

	Datuk George Seah (pic) acted spontaneously and with the correct motive - that is to be available in Kuala Lumpur to prevent a possible miscarriage of justice. - Chooi Mun Sou, Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya

Case against Datuk George Seah

Datuk George Seah was charged for 'staying away and failing to perform his duties at the Supreme Court hearing scheduled for July 2nd 1988 in Kota Baru'. The Tribunal, by a 4 to 1 decision found that this charge 'has been established beyond reasonable doubt'.

Comments on the tribunal's findings

I agree with the dissenting views of one member of the Tribunal - paragraph 16 of the Tribunal Report.

The dissenting member was correct in holding that the Respondent acted on the 'direction; of Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman in returning to Kuala Lumpur. He then went on to consider whether there was an 'improper motive' on the part of the Respondent in disregarding the instruction given by the Acting Lord President, through Dato Harun Hashim and concluded that there was no such 'improper motive'.

I would further add that Datuk George Seah acted spontaneously and with the correct motive - that is to be available in Kuala Lumpur to prevent a possible miscarriage of justice.

Like Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman and all right thinking and decent Malaysians, he was…'looking at the events of these past days with apprehension'.

The majority of the Tribunal quite correctly identified the crux of the matter in coming to their decision. They referred to the dilemma of Datuk George Seah: to answer either the directive of Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman 'to return to Kuala Lumpur as soon as possible to sit on a matter not yet before the Court or the other directive from the Acting Lord President (made through Datuk Harun Hashim) to remain in Kota Baru and preside at a scheduled sitting at which some 20 appeals (civil and criminal) had been fixed for hearing'. They concluded that 'there was no question but that the Acting Lord President's directive had over-riding effect'.

Five different hats

The majority members, however, failed to consider the position of the Acting Lord President.

FIVE DIFFERENT HATS

The cardinal principle in the administration of justice is that 'justice must not only be done but must be manifestly seen to be done'. Thus any judge or arbitrator appointed to determine any conflict or to judge a matter must meticulously avoid being in a position of conflict. Tan Sri Hamid was clearly in various situations of conflict. He was wearing five 'hats': as Chief Justice of Malaya, as acting Lord President after the suspension of Tun Salleh, as chairman of the Tribunal, as a material witness in two of the charges against Tun Salleh and, as the Defendant in the application of Tun Salleh to prohibit the Tribunal from proceeding. Chooi Mun Sou

Tan Sri Hamid was wearing five hats (see box). He was a 'disqualified person'.

The evidence before the Tribunal showed that Tan Sri Hamid knew of the proposed sitting in advance and he did not directly instruct Datuk George Seah to remain in Kota Baru.

Tan Sri Hamid also knew that Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman was in Kuala Lumpur in readiness for the proposed sitting. He did not directly instruct Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman to proceed to Kota Baru.

By failing to consider this crucial point the majority members misdirected themselves in coming to the conclusion that the conduct of Datuk George Seah amounted to 'misbehaviour'.

Datuk George Seah acted correctly 'in flying in the face of the Acting Lord President's directive (given through Datuk Harun Hashim)'. He responded to the directive of Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman to prevent an injustice.

In my opinion the conduct of Datuk George Seah did not amount to 'misbehaviour'. His dismissal was not justified.

 

Chooi Mun Sou is an Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya. He has also served as Treasurer of the Aliran Trust Board. This article is based on the second half of a paper that Chooi presented on 4 November 1988, soon after the judicial crisis had rocked the nation. The first part of his article had discussed the dismissal of the Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas.

Source: Aliran

Anwar's victory draws himself closer to become the next PM

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim won by an astounding majority in the last by-election in Permatang Pauh constituency held on August 26, 2008.

 

Malaysia's Election Commission officials announced Anwar won by a majority of 15,671 votes against Arif Shah Omar Shah of United Malays National Organisation and over Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, Head of Barisan National (BN) government.

Election Commission reveals Anwar Ibrahim won 31,195 of the estimated 47,000 votes cast in Permatang Pauh, the district in the northern state of Penang, while rival Arif Shah Omar Shah got only 15,524 votes and a third candidate had 92 votes.

It reflects that the BN government has lost the popularity support of the people in Permatang Pauh which is the stronghold of Datuk Seri Anwar. This trend may be followed by other constituencies in the future elections as it shows that the manifesto of Pakatan Rakyat is favoured by the People. If the manifesto works to win the Penang State by Pakatan Rakyat, there is no reason it cannot work in other States with some fine tuning. The whole election machinery of the BN government gathered and focused all their efforts in Permatang Pauh, yet BN lost it badly, not by a slim majority but by 15,671 votes. Why? With the sodomy charges and all kinds of personal attack hurdled against Anwar, he still won the hearts and minds of the voters.

The People really want the change in the government and look forward to a new government. By God's will, a new government can be formed by the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) by September 16, 2008. It seems impossible now that PR can have the number of 30 MPs to hop party to form the new government. But nothing is impossible for PR Advisor Anwar whom Dr. Mahathir commented, could "convince even the devil to follow him"

However, Tun Dr Mahathir, contradicts with his earlier comment that Datuk Seri Anwar who can convince even the devil to him but would not get 30 MPs to switch sides to form the government. Dr. Mathathir said the PKR adviser might think he could "buy" the MPs but it would be impossible for him to "outbid the other bidders who have more money. He was right to say the other bidders have more money. Anwar has no money for buying over 30 MPs but can use his charisma and leadership skills for uniting the main 3 ethnic groups in the country and form the new government. He who can convince the devil to follow him, will have no sweat to convince merely 30 MPs from BN to follow him to form the new government!

Tun Dr. Mahathir is afraid of Datuk Seri Anwar who can even convince the devil to follow him, to take revenge on him for his role to oust him as Deputy Prime Minister in 1998, 10 years after 1988 judiciary Mayday in the country.  Saying he did not want anyone like Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim "who stabbed him in the back" as Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad said he would rather migrate if the former deputy prime minister succeeds in toppling the Barisan Nasional government. Let's wait and see whether Dr. M will migrate if Anwar becomes the next PM of Malaysia.