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.

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.