Malaysia: Crackdown on Freedom

Published on 14 May 2015 by Al Jazeera.

Meet the Malaysians arrested under a controversial law that critics say is being used to silence government opponents.

Detained in Kamunting for opposing rare earths plant #StopLynas

By Koh Jun Lin. Published by Malaysiakini on 17 April 2012.

Chemical engineering professor Tan Ka Kheng was detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for fighting against the Bukit Merah rare earths plant in 1987, but that did not stop him from being involved in another similar campaign 25 years later.

Now an academician at a local private college as well as a researcher with the Save Malaysia Stop Lynas (SMSL), Tan has been actively speaking out against the Lynas Advanced Materials Plant (Lamp) in Gebeng, Pahang.

He has made frequent appearances at public forums on Lynas and was among the experts who reviewed the Lynas documents - the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Radiological Impact Assessment (RIA) reports - when they were displayed for public viewing.

But more than three decades ago, the same efforts against the Asian Rare Earth (ARE) plant saw him become the first people to be nabbed under Operasi Lalang in 1987. "I asked the Special Branch (SB) during my interrogation, ‘why did you arrest me?'" recounted Tan in an interview with Malaysiakini.

The reply came, "Because you are a mastermind. You are in this Bakun (Dam) committee, PSG (Papan Support Group) chairperson, (founded the theatre group) Pentas... Your hands are everywhere."

Tan was then vice-chairperson of the Environmental Protection Society of Malaysia (EPSM), held a master's degree in environmental engineering from University of California in Berkeley, United States, and was a lecturer at Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (UPM, now known as Universiti Putra Malaysia).

"We came to know about this problem in Papan, Perak - the dumpsite," he explained, referring to the area earmarked for storage of the radioactive waste from the Asian Rare Earth (ARE) factory in Bukit Merah, Perak. "We realised their (villagers') problem... first of all, they were local grassroots people. Only a few of them could speak English; they did not know how to deal with the media.

"Then, of course, the government was very oppressive, it was during the (then prime minister Dr) Mahathir (Mohamad's) ‘white terror' period. "So we sourced materials, such as information about radiation and the plant. It so happened that both of these issues fall under my discipline," Tan said.

An eco-warrior in the making

In May 1984, the Papan Support Group (PSG) was formed to oppose the ARE with Tan as its chief. The PSG was a coalition of some 20 NGOs, among them Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim), Federation of Malaysian Consumers Associations (Fomca) and the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC).

"At the time I was elected chairperson of PSG, I knew that they (the police) would come. I would have to go in (to prison). In our activities, we have no reservations. We fight for justice, we fight for environmental protection," Tan recalled.

The following years saw many protests being held against the Papan dumpsite and the ARE plant, and several of them had thousands of protesters taking part, including one 1,500-strong hunger strike against the dumpsite in December 1984, and a protest of 10,000 people against the ARE in April 1987. Some of these resulted in clashes with the police.

In addition, PSG brought in foreign experts to review the dumpsite, such as American epidemiologist Rosalie Bertell and Japanese geneticist Sadao Ichikawa, both of whom deemed the area hazardous.

"Simultaneously (around 1985), Mahathir was dreaming his grandiose idea of building this dam in Bakun, Sarawak. I also chaired a committee of various NGOs... to support the tribal people of Sarawak in opposing the project," Tan said.

In the months leading up to Operasi Lalang, Tan began to notice that his telephone connection began deteriorating, raising suspicions that his phone was being tapped. "One day, a man with Telekom Malaysia uniform came and said he wanted to repair my phone. I looked at him and said, ‘you don't look like you are a technician'. "He ran away!" Tan laughed. He later recognised the ‘technician' as one of his Special Branch interrogators. "I can't remember how it (the ISA arrests) came about, but generally we can see it coming. So we even held this ‘last supper'. He said during the supper about two months prior to the arrests under Operasi Lalang, those attending - at least 12 of them - made their parting requests, such as asking their friends to bring reading materials to prison. However, Ka Kheng does not remember what he said. "It was too long ago. I only remember this grand last supper. Good wine, good food, a lot of singing...," he said.

First to be arrested during Operasi Lalang

About 1am on Oct 27, 1987, as Tan was sleeping at his house before taking a flight to Singapore to discuss a business plan with his former employer, police came knocking on his door. The next day, newspapers announced his arrest and that of 18 others - it was the beginning of Operasi Lalang.

Tan was first taken the Petaling Jaya district police headquarters for a few hours, then to an unknown detention centre where he was kept in solitary confinement for 60 days. To this day, he can only guess at the location of the detention centre. "They had four-hour shifts for the interrogators. Every four hours they would change interrogators. They're fresh and you're bloody tired. They'd come up with so-called new evidence, new allegations or new questions," Tan said of his interrogation.

It was during his interrogation that he found out that he was the first to be arrested during Operasi Lalang, out of a total of 106 individuals detained. Tan was also accused of being the second-in-command of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), and of attempting to revive its auxiliary wing, the ‘United Front', in an effort to overthrow the government.

"I said, ‘I am not so strong, sorry. I am not that powerful. I am only a weakling, just a scholar. It's just that I am very clear-minded. Right is right; wrong is wrong,'" the environmental activist recalled his response to his interrogators. "They accused me of starting Pentas, like an old-style communist cultural group, which was also not true.

"They said Pentas worked with this Filipino theatre group that was a subversive group, and that Filipino President Corazon Aquino wrote a letter to Mahathir to support my case," Tan explained. He was eventually slapped with a two-year detention order and sent to the infamous Kamunting Detention Camp near Taiping in Perak. During his interrogation, he said, the interrogators sometimes slammed their palms on the table and on one occasion threatened to crush his testicles if he did not cooperate.

'We're just moving the fence'

However, Tan was eventually released on the evening of Aug 25, 1988, serving only eight months of his detention order. "When I left, the Special Branch officer told me, ‘Tan, when you go out, don't think that you are free. We're just moving the fence,'" he said. He said he continued to be followed by people he believes were with the police, but the surveillance stopped after a while.

That is, until Himpunan Hijau 2.0 on Feb 26 this year, when he found a foreign object in his mobile phone's USB port. While his 303 days of incarceration under Operasi Lalang has not dampened his spirit as an eco-warrior, the prospect of history repeating looms over him like a dark cloud.

Tan believes that an Operasi Lalang 2.0 is possible. "Najib (Prime Minister and Umno president Najib Abdul Razak) is not in a commanding position (within Umno). He has to do something drastic. "If he follows the example of Mahathir, that is to go for massive arrests again, it could stop some Umno leaders from opposing him.

"It's not far-fetched. The situation of Umno politics now has gone back to 1987. The only difference now is that we have four states under Pakatan Rakyat." However, Tan is unmoved by the possibility of a second detention.

"If they detain me, other people will continue (the fight). We will win because truth is on our side," he said.

Link: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/195190

Singapore under pressure to abolish security law

By Agence France-Presse, Updated: 9/18/2011

Human rights and opposition groups say Singapore needs to keep up with the times and abolish the Internal Security Act (ISA), which allows for detention without trial and is seen by critics as an instrument to stifle dissent.

In a surprise move, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said last week his government would scrap the ISA and ease other laws perceived as curbs on civil liberties, including protest rules and annual newspaper licensing.

But Singapore insists the ISA, which was used against leftists in the past and suspected Islamic extremists in recent years, remains relevant and maintains that media regulations are needed to preserve social cohesion.

The city-state's longest-held ISA detainee was Chia Thye Poh, a former Socialist Party MP who was held for 23 years from 1966 to 1989, followed by nine more years of effective house arrest.

Even now all protests outside a designated free-speech zone -- where speakers must register with authorities in advance -- still require a police permit in Singapore.

The ISA was originally designed to fight communist insurgents in the 1960s in British-ruled Malaya, which included modern-day Malaysia and Singapore.

Singapore became independent in 1965 after being ejected from the Malaysian federation, but both countries retained the ISA.

Najib said that after repealing the ISA, Malaysia will introduce new legislation retaining some preventive detention powers but for shorter periods and subject to more court oversight.

"In a way Najib is taking the cue from civil society groups in his country," said Sinapan Samydorai, director for Southeast Asian affairs at Think Centre, a Singapore-based political and civil rights campaign group.

"If Malaysia is opening up, then I think they are moving ahead. It's also time for Singapore to move ahead," he told AFP.

Singapore defends the ISA. Last week, authorities disclosed three suspected Islamist militants were being held under it after they were repatriated to the city-state.

Two belonged to the Southeast Asia-based Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terror network and the third is a member of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), an armed group waging an insurgency in the southern Philippines.

In a statement on Friday, Singapore's Ministry of Home Affairs said the ISA had been used "sparingly" and was aimed at fighting "threats of subversion, racial and religious extremism... espionage and terrorism," not political dissent.

"No person has ever been detained only for their political beliefs," the ministry said, referring to criticism that the ISA was used in the past to detain government opponents and intimidate the population.

Samydorai said the results of parliamentary elections in May and the presidential poll in August, when the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) recorded its worst-ever showings, showed that Singaporeans, especially the young, want greater political freedom.

"Governments in Asia are realising that young people cannot tolerate non-democratic practices anymore," he said.

In May, the PAP lost an unprecedented six seats in the 87-member parliament and its share of the popular vote fell to 60 percent, its lowest in 52 years in power.

Three months later, the party's de-facto candidate in the four-man contest for the presidency -- the head of state -- won by a razor-thin margin after garnering just 35.2 percent of votes cast.

Government critics have been emboldened by the poll results and independent political websites are starting to buzz with calls for the ISA's abolition.

"Singapore will be making a quantum leap towards improving its human rights record if (the government) decides to imitate Malaysia in abolishing the ISA," wrote Ann Xavier in The Online Citizen.

"A first world country like Singapore should not be keeping third world laws to repress its political opponents."

According to critics, the ISA is not Singapore's only repressive legislation.

The mainstream media is tightly controlled, and opposition figures have on occasion been bankrupted in libel actions brought by senior government officials -- which bars them from being MPs or parliamentary candidates.

Chee Soon Juan, who is secretary general of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party and has been made insolvent for exactly that reason, said "times demand" that the ISA be abolished.

"Repressive laws that instil fear and stifle independent thinking have no place in the modern world," he told AFP.

Reform Party chief Kenneth Jeyaretnam -- whose father and predecessor J.B. Jeyaretnam was also bankrupted in a defamation suit -- said the ISA should be replaced with laws to fight terrorism while safeguarding basic human rights.

Abolishing the ISA and related legislation was "long overdue", he said, calling for "the restoration of our fundamental constitutional rights to freedom of association and expression".

On The Eve Of Malaysia Day 16 September 2011

Najib disappoints again: Glamour ISA announcements but little real change

Prime Minister Najib Razak's promise to repeal the Internal Security Act 1960 and several other oppressive laws were cautiously greeted by PKR leaders as a victory for the people, including the thousands of activists both local and foreign who fought through the decades for their removal.

However, they slammed Najib for trying to give a false impression to Malaysians that they could look forward to greater democracy, when effectively, there was little real change and a possibility that new laws made to replace the ISA could contain similarly oppressive clauses.

Read more: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=19453:najib-disappoints-again-glamour-announcements-but-little-real-change&Itemid=2

Najib announces repeal of ISA, three emergency declarations

Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced tonight the repeal of the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) and the three Emergency Declarations when both the Dewan Negara and Dewan Rakyat have their next sitting.

The prime minister said that new laws will be enacted to protect the peace, harmony and security of the country.

He also announced that the government will do away with annual printing and publishing permits with permits that can be cancelled if regulations are flouted.

Najib acknowledged in his address to the nation on the eve of Malaysia Day that the move to increase civil liberties was “risky, but we are doing this for our survival.”

“No individual will ever be detained simply due to political ideology,” he said in his speech that was broadcast live on all local television stations.

The move to scrap the law has been hailed by ex-ISA detainee and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng as “an epochal move.”

Read more: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/najib-announces-repeal-of-isa-three-emergency-declarations/

K'jaan mansuhkan ISA dan Akta Buang Negeri

"Sehubungan dengan itu lagi, kita tidak akan teragak-agak untuk meminda atau memansuhkan undang-undang yang tidak lagi relevan," tambahnya.

Kajian semula komprehensif itu akan melibatkan Akta Kediaman Terhad 1933 dan Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan 1984 di mana prinsip pembaharuan tahunan akan dihapuskan dan digantikan dengan pengeluaran lesen sehingga dibatalkan.

Kerajaan juga akan mengkaji semula seksyen 27 Akta Polis 1967 dengan mengambil kira peruntukan Perkara 10 Perlembagaan Persekutuan tentang kebebasan berhimpun dengan prinsip menentang sekeras-kerasnya demonstrasi jalanan.

Baca selanjutnya: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/175950

ISA abolished, host of changes promised

Najib said the parliamentary motion to lift the Emergency proclamations will be made under Clause 3, Article 150 of the Federal Constitution, and was in line with the people’s aspiration for Malaysia to be more open and its democracy, more dynamic.

“As many are aware, only the emergency proclamation made following the confrontation in 1964 had been implicitly revoked, while the other emergency proclamations are regarded to be in force until today,” he said.

He said, realising that Malaysia had changed over the years and in line with the people’s aspirations based on the universal philosophy on democracy, the government would table in the lower and upper houses of parliament for the three emergency proclamations to be revoked.

Clause 3, Article 150 of the Federal Constitution gives the power to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to revoke the emergency proclamations and ordinance, or these to be ineffective if decided by parliament.

Read more: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/09/15/internal-security-act-to-be-abolished/

Najib's Speech Could Open Door to Malaysia Reforms

Still, depending on how far Mr. Najib is prepared to go, Thursday's speech could go some way toward repairing the poisonous atmosphere in the country, and also help Mr. Najib ensure that he can make his own mark on determining the country's future direction.

"This really could be a turning point for Malaysia," Singapore Management University's Ms. Welsh said.

Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903927204576571934144265052.html

Cock-eyed View Of What Constitutes Non-Muslim Rights

Published by The Malaysian Insider.

By Francis Loh.

JUNE 23 — Too bad, Nazri resorted to stereo-typed notions of ‘non-Muslims’ and cock-eyed ideas of what constitutes their rights, observes Francis Loh. No wonder there’s no 1 Malaysia!

“You must remember that the country does not belong to the Muslims. There are things that sometimes non-Muslims do, for example, gambling. It is their culture, their way of life and we have to respect their rights.” Apparently, the minister in the prime minister’s department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, expressed these words which grabbed the headlines on 20 June.

Minister Nazri is absolutely right that the country does not belong to the Muslims.

He is also correct to insist that Muslims have to respect non-Muslim rights, and he should have added ‘and vice versa’.

But he is absolutely wrong to suggest that gambling is a non-Muslim “way of life” that ought to be respected. This is a cock-eyed view of what constitutes non-Muslim culture, even less that it is a non-Muslim right that must be respected.

First, gambling is a world-wide phenomenon and gamblers come from all continents, countries and religions. If one doubts this, recall how there have been some big-time Muslim state-exco and dignitary gamblers who have hit the headlines about their debts ever so often. The point is that gambling has nothing to do with any religion. In the event, all religions discourage their followers from gambling. And only some non-Muslims and Muslims gamble. Most do not.

Second, the BN government has consistently argued that certain civil liberties and rights must be curbed for the greater common good. This is why they argue we have the ISA, the Societies Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, Trade Unions Act, Sedition Act, etc. Time-and-time again, we have argued against these unnecessary curbs imposed upon the rakyat via the introduction of additional acts of parliament. Yet, suddenly, when it comes to gambling, the BN government takes the stand that gambling is an absolute right and we should respect that right. Whatever happened to those other more fundamental liberties to express ourselves, to gather and to associate, among others?

Third, it is most regrettable that the BN government and the minister chose to portray gambling as such an integral part of non-Muslim rights. Where was the minister and what is the stance of the BN government when it comes to having access to land to build a church or temple in general, or in a specific area, say in a part of Shah Alam, where the majority of the population is Muslim? Or to use particular Bahasa Malaysia words in non-Muslim worship and in their religious publications? For that matter, do we have absolute rights when it comes to choosing our religions? And converting from one religion to another? Cakap tak serupa bikin?

Finally, the minister needs reminding that all religions share many values in common. It is not just a common abhorrence towards gambling. All religions also teach their followers to be compassionate to all, indeed regardless of the religion the other professes. All religions also teach us to respect women, to live in harmony with Nature which is part of God’s creation, and to extend a helping hand especially to the needy and the downtrodden.

Too bad, the minister resorted to stereo-typed notions of ‘non-Muslims’ and cock-eyed ideas of what constitutes their rights. No wonder there’s no 1 Malaysia! — Aliran Online

*Dr Francis Loh is secretary of Aliran.

UN Slams Malaysia's Detention-Without-Trial Laws

Published by The Malaysian Insider, 18 June 2010.

KUALA LUMPUR, June 18 — Malaysia needs to repeal or amend draconian laws that allow imprisonment without trial and have been used against opposition politicians, journalists and bloggers, a UN body said today.

The UN working group was invited by the government and has been in Malaysia for two weeks to look into arbitrary detentions. It gave a critical assessment on four preventive laws including the Internal Security Act (ISA).

“These preventive laws are exclusively administrative and do not allow intervention by the judiciary,” the group’s chairman, Malick Sow, told reporters. “It is a classic case of arbitrary detention.”

The ISA, which dates back to British colonial rule, permits detention without trial with detainees usually held incommunicado and rarely charged in court.

Its use has been justified on the grounds of maintaining national security although many of its high-profile victims have been opposition politicians.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who now leads the opposition, was imprisoned under the ISA when he was the leader of a Muslim youth movement.

He is currently on trial on sodomy charges in what he says is a repeat of a politically motivated prosecution that saw him dismissed from office in 1998, put on trial and imprisoned.

The government had pledged to review the ISA before Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak took office in April last year but no changes have taken place yet.

The ISA and other laws are used against people suspected of criminal activity and against terror suspects.

Sow said the group privately interviewed detainees held under preventive laws and found no complaints about treatment by guards in prisons and detention centres.

However, the group found these detainees were likely to be tortured or mistreated in order to obtain confessions or evidence in police detention.

“It is not necessarily physical violence but also the external conditions and the withholding of food. There were few who said any particular tool was used to beat them but it was more to do with punching and kicking,” Sow said.

“They prefer prisons than police stations. They feel safer in prisons.”

The group will present a full report to the United Nations Human Rights Council in March next year and will follow up again two years after the report is presented.

Malaysia was re-elected to the UN Human Rights Council last month. — Reuters

Realised the Importance to Consult the Malaysian Bar or Unable to Get Majority Votes?

ISA Bill delayed as other laws need reforms too

The MalaysianInsider, 20 March 2010 (Updated).

KUALA LUMPUR, March 19 — The Najib Administration will not table proposed amendments to the Internal Security Act (ISA) in the current parliament sitting as it needs to reform other security laws too.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said the Cabinet decided the amendments has to be tabled with reforms in other preventive laws.

“The Cabinet today decided that the ISA amendments must be tabled with other preventive laws based on security and public order issues,” Hishammuddin said in a statement released tonight.

Critics have demanded the abolition of the security law that allows detention without trial, saying it has been used for political purposes.

The government has denied the claims but said it will amend the law.

“In the people’s interests, the Home Ministry and the Attorney-General’s Chambers will review the matter for public interest and the Bar Council has agreed to cooperate in the review,” Hishammuddin said.

He said the weekly Cabinet meeting today agreed several amendments covering detention period, detainee’s rights and treatment, Minister’s power, public perception that the law is used for political purposes and detention without trial.

Among those at the Cabinet meeting were AG Tan Sri Gani Patail and Home Ministry secretary-general Datuk Seri Mahmood Adam

Hishammuddin said the other laws to be reviewed include the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (effectiveness of crime prevention laws), Section 27 of the Police Act 1960 (public assembly without a permit), Banishment Act 1959 (Revised 1972) (relevancy of the law), Restricted Residency Act 1933 (effectiveness of law and directives), Dangerous Drugs Act (Special Preventive Rules) 1985 and the Emergency Ordinance (Public Order and Crime Prevention) 1969.

This is the second Bill withdrawn from the current parliament with the first being the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Bill which has drawn outcry from the opposition.

The government has also ditched a new two-tiered petrol price subsidy scheme that was due to be implemented in May as it was too complex and unpopular.

ISA - To Review Or To Repeal?

25 Feb 2010, By Yang Pei Keng.

In April this year, our new Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak suggested that the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) be subject to review. 13 detainees were released. However, almost at the same time, the ISA was invoked to detain 3 more persons. Little or no publicity was given to such recent detentions.

Proposals to review the ISA had in fact been made by past Prime Ministers, such as Dr Mahathir and Abdullah Badawi, with a view to amending the draconian legislation on detention without trial, but no positive results came about.

Since the ISA came into force in 1960, nearly 50 years have passed. It still exists today. Criticisms have been levelled against the Act from time to time by numerous bodies and organisations like the Bar Council, Civil Rights Committee (CRC), Suaram and even Suhakam. They have all along been advocating for its repeal, but the government has yet to take effective measures in this direction.

True, amendments to the lSA were made from time to time, but they merely served to make it more stringent and detrimental to the interests of the citizenry. For instance, S.73 [relating to the maximum period of detention and investigations by the Police] of the Act was amended to extend the period of detention from 28 days to 60 days, empowering the Police to detain a person for a period more than necessary for investigations. In fact, the necessary investigations ought to have been done before detention, and not after detention.

Similarly, the relevant provision of the Federal Constitution [concerning detention without trial] was also amended to legitimise the undue delay on the part of the Advisory Board in submitting its report after a period of more than 30 days as originally stipulated.

ISA is against the rule of law

Under an ordinary Act of Parliament, if someone is in breach of the law, he has to face criminal charges and will have to stand trial in a court of law. If he is found guilty, he will be sentenced to imprisonment or fined. Such legal process is perfectly in accordance with the spirit of the rule of law.

The ISA, however, is unlike such general laws, and detention under the ISA is subject to an entirely different procedure. Under the Act, the police or the Minister for Internal Security may arrest and detain any person arbitrarily, without any necessity of producing him for trial in any court of law.

In other words, under the ISA, without any proper criminal charge preferred against the person, and without any court trial, judgment and sentence he will be detained by the police for up to a maximum period of 60 days. In most of such cases, a person will be detained for a full period of 60 days (Note: It was only 28 days previously before the relevant amendment).

According to those who have undergone the 60-day police detention, they have been subject to inhuman physical or mental torture, resulting sometimes in mental derangement, and even suicide. It is always euphemistically said that the person was detained for “investigations”.

According to democratic process, all investigations ought to have been done before making any arrest or detention.

After the 60-day detention, a person may be detained for a further period of 2 years pursuant to an order issued by the Minister of Home Affairs. Such 2-year detention period is renewable indefinitely. In theory, a person may be detained for a much longer period. He may be left to rot in the detention camp, so to speak. At least, in law, the Minister of Home Affairs has such arbitrary power to extend the period of detention indefinitely.

In South Africa, Nelson Mandela was detained for 27 years, whereas in Malaysia, Loh Ming Liang of Johor experienced detention without trial for 16 years.

It is widely recognised that the longest-serving detainee under detention without trial was Chia Thye Poh of Singapore. He had been deprived of his personal liberty by the Singapore government for a total period of 32 years. He was detained in the detention camp in Singapore for 23 years, and he was subsequently restricted in his personal liberty for a further period of 9 years on Sentosa Island, making a total of 32 years.

Chia Thye Poh, after his release from detention, immediately issued a statement condemning the draconian ISA, and advocated the repeal of the ISA. As a victim of such inhumane legislation, Chia was fully aware that such unjust law had been invoked to trample underfoot human dignity, and to instil fear in the minds of the people.

He opined that the ISA was the product of former western colonialism. It was resorted to by the powers-that-be to dampen the spirit of the people in the colonies fighting for independence. (See Ang Siok Ngai 2001: Chia Thye Poh – the Longest Serving Political Detainee in Asia)

In criminal law, if any person is found guilty of a serious crime, such as manslaughter, he may be committed to life imprisonment. “Life imprisonment” means a jail term of 20 years, but with all deductions, such as Sundays and public holidays, in actual fact, a person sentenced to life imprisonment needs to stay behind bars for approximately 13 years only.

It is to be noted that detainees under the so-called preventive detention laws have never been charged in court, tried and convicted of any crime. None of the political detainees mentioned above inflicted any bodily harm on any person, let alone committed any serious crime. That notwithstanding, they were arbitrarily arrested and detained in the detention camp without trial for a period much much longer than “life imprisonment”. How ruthless and brutal the ruling elite can be in exercising the power bestowed upon them by the ISA! The essence of ISA - detention without trial

Under the ISA, any person may be subject to arbitrary detention without trial. Without any doubt, detention without trial runs counter to the spirit of the rule of law. No democratic government committed to the rule of law will tolerate detention without trial.

The essence of the ISA is arbitrary detention without trial. Those in power may arbitrarily retain any person under the ISA. In recent years, particularly before the March 8 general election in 2008, abuse of powers under the ISA was rampant in this country.

The crux of the issue is: the primary objective of the ISA is to allow detention without trial. It is not justifiable today to have such law. In the circumstances, should the ISA be reviewed or repealed?

Any country subscribing to the rule of law, democracy and human rights, will never allow abuse of power under the law of detention without trial. If those in power have the genuine intention to do away with arbitrary detention without trial under the ISA, it is incumbent upon them to repeal the ISA once and for all.

Obviously, the ISA must be repealed. Apart from repeal, there is no other alternative. Merely reviewing the provisions of the ISA will lead us nowhere. It may prove to be a futile exercise.

Any attempt at merely reviewing the ISA can only effect a cosmetic change in the legislation itself. It may even enhance the law on detention without trial. In fact, the ISA is seen to have been used to silence opposition and dissenting views.

Perhaps some may ask, what about fighting terrorist activities which have been taking place frequently? Suffice it to say that there is a host of existing criminal laws dealing with terrorist activities. A series of current anti-terrorist legislation are more than sufficient to deal with such situation. An all-encompassing ISA is not required for that purpose.

Simply put, in order to do away with the draconian law of detention without trial under the ISA, the only solution is to repeal the ISA. Merely to review it will not serve the purpose; it may even have the undesirable opposite effect.


This article has appeared in Praxis November 2009. Click here to download the full issue.

Human Rights Award for Malaysian Group Against Security Law

By James Chow, Epoch Times, 8 Dec 2009

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia—Fifty years after British colonial authorities passed a “temporary” law in Malaysia that allows police to detain suspects in security threats, human rights groups are fighting back, and winning awards for doing so.

The Internal Security Act (ISA) was passed in 1960 to strengthen the British colonials in suppressing the communist rebellion. Today, the law is still on the books and according to Human Rights Watch, is a recipe for abuse.

Under the preventative detention law, police can detain suspects without trial or criminal charges by the order of the home minister. Any person who is suspected of posing a threat to the security of the country can be detained for a period of 60 days to two years and is extendable thereafter for further periods not exceeding two years at a time.

“Those held under the ISA are defined as a group that has virtually no rights, so it is hardly surprising that prison guards treat them as less than human,” said Brad Adams, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia Division.

The group leading the fight, the Abolish ISA Movement, known as GMI in Malay, won the SUARAM Human Rights Award 2009 at the 20th SUARAM Fundraising Dinner on Sunday.

Representing GMI to accept the award was Norlaila Othman. Her husband Mat Sah Mohd Satray was one of the ISA detainees who was released on Sept. 15 this year—however, his movement is still restricted by authorities, preventing him from attending the award ceremony.

GMI was awarded the human rights awards because of their fearlessness when facing the authorities and their persistent struggle on their cause, according to the event organizer.

Comprised of 83 organizations, GMI was formed in 2001, and has held various public awareness activities including protests, candle vigils, and public forums. The group is coordinated by human rights activists, lawyers, former detainees, and family members of current and former detainees.

In August this year, GMI held a rally to urge the government to abolish the ISA. The rally attracted 30,000 people, and many ISA detainees were released not long afterward.

SUARAM (Malaysian’s Voice), considered one of the leading human rights organization in the country, was established in 1989 upon the release of the last detainees of “Operation Lalang” (Weeding Operation), where 107 opposition leaders and social activist were detained by the government under the ISA in 1987.

“SUARAM has a mission to build a human rights movement in Malaysia using empowerment, advocacy, and solidarity, and our vision is to build a society based on peace, justice, democracy, and human rights,” said SUARAM’s founder, Dr. Kua Kia Soon, during his awards speech.

More than 500 human rights activist and supporters attended the fundraising and awards dinner to pay tribute to human rights defenders who have fought and sacrificed for the improvement of human rights in Malaysia, as well as to raise funds for SUARAM to continue in its work.

Hakim Bebaskan RPK Naik Pangkat

14 October 2009

(Harakah Daily) - Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam yang membebaskan Raja Petra Kamarudin dari tahanan ISA, Yang Arif Datuk Syed Ahmad Helmy, dinaikkan pangkat ke Mahkamah Rayuan.

Beliau menerima watikah perlantikan dari Yang Dipertuan Agung, Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin hari ini.

Syed Helmi dianggap sebagai hakim yang berani menukar undang-undang ketika beliau mengadili kes harbeus corpus Raja Petra yang ditahan di bawah ISA itu

Ini kerana, sebelum kes ini semua tahu Menteri Dalam Negeri boleh berbuat apa sahaja untuk menahan mana-mana pihak di bawah ISA dan tidak boleh dipersoalkan oleh mahkamah.

Namun, Yang Arif Syed Helmi telah menukar 'undang-undang' ini dengan berkata mahkamah berhak untuk menyemak adakah menteri melakukan sebarang kesalahan dalam melaksanakan kuasa yang diberikan kepadanya.

Penghakiman beliau ini telah disifatkan sebagai 'mengubah undang-undang' oleh seorang blogger dan penulis terkenal Art Harun dalam blognya.

Raja Petra dibebaskan kerana beliau didapati tidak menjejaskan keselamatan dalam negara dengan hanya menulis di dalam laman web.

Selamat Hari Raya!

Ex-ISA Detainee Looking Forward To Aidilfitri With Family

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 16 — After seven years of welcoming Syawal without his family, Mat Sah Mohamad Satray is grateful to be able to celebrate the coming Hari Raya with his loved ones.

“I can’t wait to see my only son, who is now 16 years old. When I left him, he was only nine years old,” he told reporters when met at his father’s house in Ampang.

His wife and son are in Sabah.

Mat Sah was among five members of the Jemaah Islamiah Malaysia who were released from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) today.

Mat Sah said he was informed that he would be released four days ago. — Bernama

Five JI Men Released From ISA Detention

ISA: Semakin Kuat Semakin Yakin

Klik sini untuk menonton video. Memang betul kata Puan Norlaila: tidak perlu mengucapkan terima kasih kepada kerajaan. Sepatutnya kerajaan yang meminta maaf dan membayar pampasan kepada keluarga Encik Mat Sah untuk penderitaan yang telah dialami selama 7 tahun.