LLG: Menolak ekstremis perkauman, Mempertahan hak kebudayaan semua kaum

Menolak ekstremis perkauman, Mempertahan hak kebudayaan semua kaum

Aug 25, 2010 02:04:48 pm

 

Pusat Pembangunan Kebudayaan LLG berasa khuatir terhadap kenyataan dan tindakan perkauman secara berleluasa baru-baru ini, lebih memeranjatkan ialah sehingga kini Perdana Menteri dan Timbalan Perdana Menteri berdiam diri dalam isu-isu tersebut, ini mengakibatkan rakyat hilang keyakinan terhadap slogan inklusif umpamanya "Satu Malaysia" dan "Rakyat Didahulukan" yang diketengahkan Perdana Menteri selepas mengambil alih pemerintahan kerajaan.

Dua orang guru besar sekolah kebangsaan memaki murid-murid "balik China" dan mengejek gelang keagamaan Hindu yang dipakai oleh pelajar India seperti rantai anjing. Pada awalnya, alasan yang diberikan oleh pejabat pendidikan ialah "salah faham", tetapi selepas dikecam oleh parti-parti politik dan pertubuhan-pertubuhan, Timbalan Perdana Menteri baru berkata isu ini akan disiasat.

Di samping itu, Majlis Perundingan NGO Melayu (MPP) dan PERKASA mahu kerajaan menahan Presiden MCA Chua Soi Lek (gambar kiri atas) di bawah ISA kerana menyokong cadangan kuota 30% bumiputera dimansuhkan; MPP menyaran kerajaan memansuhkan sekolah ibunda; Utusan Malaysia cuba mengapi-apikan isu pemansuhan kuota bumiputera dan perlembagaan baru, sebuah surau Seremban disimbah cat merah; amat kesalnya pimpinan tertinggi kerajaan tidak mengkritik perkembangan kurang sihat ini.

Kami berharap Perdana Menteri dan Timbalan Perdana Menteri "cakap serupa bikin", menjaga konsep inklusif dan kepelbagaian yang diketengahkan, mempertahan hak-hak kebudayaan semua kaum dan sekolah ibunda, jangan biar kenyataan dan tindakan ekstremis perkauman merosakkan hubungan kaum.

Satu lagi kekhuatiran ialah, sejarah telah menunjuk-ajar kita, bahawa dalam satu negara berbilang kaum yang politiknya belum berlandaskan demokrasi, spekulator politik sering menggunakan alasan "hubungan kaum tegang" untuk menindas musuh politik dan pihak berlainan pendapat, ia menghalang perkembangan sihat demokrasi.

Pihak tertentu telah memberi amaran bahawa fenomena-fenomena ini telah timbul di Malaysia. Kami ingin memperingatkan Perdana Menteri dan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, jika kerajaan berhasrat menjadikan Malaysia sebuah Negara maju, tidak wajarnya patah balik dalam arah perkembangan politik sekarang, mereka harus mencegah perlakuan tersebut.

Pusat Pembangunan Kebudayaan LLG berpendapat, bagi fenomena perkauman berleluasa ketika ini, puncanya ialah ideologi perkauman yang telah diinstitusikan selama ini. Politik perkauman yang melaksanakan pecah dan perintah, Pemuda UMNO menjulang keris dan mengugut akan membakar Dewan Perhimpunan Cina KL-Selangor, kenyataan diskriminasi perkauman terang-terang Ahmad Ismail dan Nasir Safar, unsur-unsur perkauman yang diindoktrinasikan oleh Biro Tata Negara - tanpa "teladan negatif" semua ini, sekolah dan media tidak akan dijangkit virus perkauman.

Perdana Menteri Najib Razak mesti berani menghapuskan ideologi perkauman yang diinstitusikan, memimpin Barisan Nasional keluar daripada kongkongan politik perkauman, jika tidak "Satu Malaysia" akan menjadi satu kenyataan hampa.

*Kenyataan media oleh Toh Kin Woon selaku Presiden Pusat Pembangunan Kebudayaan LLG.

SUARAM: Changes to Immigration Detention Centres Must Respect Human Rights

Press Statement: 26 August 2010

Changes to Immigration Detention Centres Must Respect Human Rights

SUARAM welcomes the Malaysian Government’s move to review the management and upgrade the facilities of Immigration Detention Centres. National and international human rights organisations have long raised concerns regarding the deplorable conditions and poor management of detention centres but up until now, the Government has repeatedly denied such claims. By acknowledging the dire conditions at the detention centres, it stands to reason that the Government can no longer ignore this issue.

It was announced that the Government intends to revamp the detention centres within the next 3 months. However, SUARAM is concerned about some aspects of the announced plans which are as follows:

*1.      **Reinstating RELA to manage security*

In November 2007, when the management of immigration detention centres were transferred from the Prisons Department to the Immigration Department, RELA personnel were deployed as the Immigration Department lacked personnel. Mid-2009 onwards, RELA personnel were withdrawn from the detention centres.

During the period that RELA assisted in managing the detention centres, there were many allegations of poor treatment of detainees by RELA personnel, including verbal, psychological and physical abuse.

SUARAM is disappointed that the Government has made a u-turn on this decision by now including RELA in the management of the detention centres again. We have repeatedly argued that RELA personnel should not be given powers to act as law enforcement agencies as they do not have adequate training.

*2.      **Explore alternatives to detention*

As most migrants detained in immigration detention centres are detained for flouting immigration laws and are not criminals, detention should be used as a last resort. If there is a need for them to be held for processing
purposes, alternatives to detention must be explored such as those currently practiced in Australia, including community detention or case management[1]

Detention should not be the first option particularly when it comes to refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons, children and trafficked victims. Refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons and trafficked victims
cannot be deported, and as such should be released.

*3.      **Security should not be the main concern*

Based on news reports, it seems like the Government is more concerned about the security aspect of immigration detention centres rather than the welfare of the detainees. SUARAM is of the view that adequate attention must be given to fulfilling the basic rights of the detainees. These include providing clothing, bedding, adequate clean water, sufficient diet, on-site access to health care, personal sanitary supplies, and daily activities.

In line with these serious concerns, SUARAM calls on the Government to:

·         Stop the use of RELA in the management of immigration detention centres.

·         Stop the detention of refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons, trafficked victims and children.

·         Explore alternatives to detention as a method to minimise the use of detention as first resort for those who have violated immigration laws.

·         Ensure that the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the management of immigration detention centres complies with international human rights standards such as the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment.

·         Hold regular consultations with civil society and stakeholders to openly discuss and receive recommendations on how to improve the management of immigration detention centres.


Released by,

Temme Lee
Coordinator

[1] International Detention Coalition (2009) “Case management as an alternative to immigration detention: The Australian Experience”, at  http://idcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/casemanagementinaustralia.pdf, accessed 25 April 2010.

AWAM Urge for More Research on Dumping Babies’ Issue

24 August 2010

Letter to Editor, 

All Women’s Action Society (AWAM) Urge for More Research on Dumping Babies’ Issue

Baby dumping is not something new and the recent spate of incidents finally attracted the attention of the authorities. This provoked the usual knee-jerk reactions.  PAS blaming Valentine’s & New Year’s day celebrations and authorities condemning motor bikes ride with the opposite sex as pillion rider, are just some of the ridiculous reactions, which reflect the serious lack of analysis and understanding of the issue.

It is important to conduct proper studies and delve deeper into the issue before meting out unqualified, harsh and judgmental ‘punishments’ which will not only destroy any persons but also not offer any solutions. It is often through fear of being subjected to harsh reprimands, rehabilitation and stigmatisation that forces people to dump babies. Hence, the first step would be to create a safe environment where these people know that they can go to – to be helped, to be listened to, to be understood and to be cared for. 

AWAM would like to stress that baby dumping is not about a sexual relationship, but about the need for solid sex education which includes the respect of the body and responsible relationships. AWAM therefore, strongly advocates sound sex education, beginning from the home and in both primary and secondary schools. This is in the hope that with knowledge and reliable information, people would be able to make responsible and informed choices in their lives. This will ultimately save lives!

Haslina Yacoob

President of AWAM

ALIRAN: Abandon inquest: Set up Royal Commission of Inquiry

Abandon inquest: Set up Royal Commission of Inquiry

Friday, 13 August 2010 19:50

The inquest into the death of Teoh Beng Hock has been totally discredited. Nobody is going to believe the coroner’s verdict. The latest sham that has emerged - claiming the discovery of a mysterious note - only seems to suggest what that verdict is likely to be. We were told that the findings of the Teoh Beng Hock’s death would be made known within two months. Now after more than one year, we are nowhere nearer the truth; no one is any wiser when the findings would be concluded. All that we have witnessed are delays and denials adding to the agony and anguish to the Teoh family. It is unfair to them that they should suffer this dereliction without any sign of closure to this tragedy. When one is seeking the truth, no stone should be left unturned; no scrap of evidence should be overlooked. But – unfortunately – this wasn’t the case in this inquiry. According to the investigating officer, he found a note in Beng Hock’s sling bag but put it aside because he “did not realise the significance of it”. What gave him that right to come to this conclusion? His duty and business should have been to sieve through every item that was in that sling bag for possible clues. But he behaved like a clueless amateur displaying a total lack of discernment. The Attorney-General’s clarification - that when this note was finally brought to his attention on 7 October 2009, he wanted further investigations to be carried out - is indeed baffling. He should have tendered this to the coroner for the court to determine its authenticity and relevance to the case. To submit this so-called “new evidence” some 10 months later is totally unacceptable. It only raises questions of ethics and propriety. From whatever angle one may look at this situation, there is only one inevitable conclusion and that is evidence has been clearly and surreptitiously suppressed. Instead of assisting by all means to arrive at the truth, the AG’s Chambers have not acted in a transparent and honest manner by hanging on to this so-called “new evidence” that suddenly seem to have assumed “significance” now. This so-called “new evidence” has unfairly disrupted the entire process/proceedings so far and made the inquiry untenable. If it had been tendered from the very beginning, the trend of questioning would have taken a different form and direction. There seems to be a contradiction in the statement issued by the AG’s Chambers as to when the note was discovered. In Paragraph 4, it is stated, “According to the investigation officer, it was not found when he first searched the deceased's sling bag after the incident.” But in Paragraph 10, we are told: “However, recently the investigation officer owned up by admitting that he did in fact find the note when he searched the sling bag on July 17...” What then is the truth? In Aliran’s view, the inquest has been totally discredited and therefore should be disbanded/discontinued; it should make way for the setting up of a Royal Commission of Inquiry. Anything short of this would be a travesty of justice. P Ramakrishnan President 13 August 2010

Malaysian Bar calls for Royal Commission of Enquiry

Press Release: Malaysian Bar calls for Royal Commission of Enquiry 

The Malaysian Bar is disappointed that the Attorney-General’s Chambers has withheld a crucial document from the Coroner’s Court in the Teoh Beng Hock inquest.  The suppression of evidence, particularly in such a high profile matter, is disturbing, regardless of the reason.  This action is indicative of a serious lapse of judgment and undermines the proceedings of the inquest.

It is a fundamental tenet of the criminal justice system that all evidence must be disclosed, and made accessible to all parties, including evidence that is detrimental to the prosecution’s case.  Prior to the commencement of the inquest, the prosecution ought to have furnished to the defence and the Court all documents that are relevant and necessary for the Coroner to determine the cause of death based on all facts and evidence before the Court.  The principle of disclosure is aimed at ensuring that justice is served in all cases.

It is the duty of the court, and not of the prosecution, to determine the authenticity or relevance of any piece of evidence.  The prosecution is duty bound to uphold fairness and justice, which without doubt includes the full disclosure of all evidence uncovered during the investigation.  The failure to produce the document as soon as it was discovered raises misgivings about the credibility and fairness of the prosecution, and its poor judgment points to the lack of transparency.

Over one year after Teoh Beng Hock’s untimely demise, public confidence in the investigation and prosecution of the case remains low, and the credibility of the Malaysian criminal justice system is still very much in doubt.  The Malaysian Bar calls on all parties in the case, particularly the prosecution, to do their utmost to ensure that not only justice is done, but it is seen to be done.

We reiterate our longstanding call for the establishment of a Royal Commission of Enquiry (RCE) to investigate Teoh Beng Hock’s death.  The RCE should also examine the shortcomings within the criminal justice system, and ensure that protocols are introduced to guarantee full compliance with accepted norms of the criminal justice system.   

 
Ragunath Kesavan
President
Malaysian Bar

10 August 2010

SUARAM: Federal Court Decision on Former ISA Detainee Abdul Malek Husin: A Negative Development on Human Rights Development in Malaysia

Press Statement: 12 August 2010

Federal Court Decision on Former ISA Detainee Abdul Malek Husin: A Negative Development on Human Rights Development in Malaysia

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) expresses its grave disappointment and expresses serious concern over the Federal Court judgment today which overturned a RM2.5 million award to former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee Abdul Malek Husin following an appeal by the Malaysian government.

The Federal court reversed the High Court decision and the Federal Court has upheld the Court of Appeal ruling to overturn a High Court decision his suit against the government. The Federal Court thus ruled that Malek Husin will not receive the damages awarded to him by the High Court and ordered Malek Husin
instead to pay RM20, 000 in costs. It’s a total setback to the former detainee and also for the rest of the Malaysians. He was detained without trial for 57days under the ISA; he was tortured, beaten up & now to pay costs RM 20k. 

Something is really wrong with our judges and judiciary system in Malaysia!

Suaram is of the view that the judgement sets a negative bench mark on human rights development in Malaysia as the court refuse to even hear a fundamental question pertaining Article 5 of the Federal Constitution as it went on to reject the leave application citing Court of Judicature Act. Suaram feels that courts failed to exercise its jurisdiction to address fundamental constitutional rights and civil liberties by choosing to adopt technical grounds per se.

The judgement reaffirms the current worsening culture of impunity and torture by further granting a 20,000 RM cost over a public interest litigation seeking justice over his rights and fundamental liberties that was purportedly violated by the most notorious undemocratic law of the nation. The message sent by the
courts is that the only mechanism available to make police actions accountable is laden with risk of reverse punishment in form of a cost. Suaram views that all public interest litigations should not burden litigants with cost or fear of cost in addressing the legal remedy over one’s Constitutional rights and freedom.

The Federal not only refused to hear a question of fundamental rights enshrined in the Federal Constitution but it also went on to punish the person for raising it. The judgement is the biggest blow to our judicial integrity since the controversial Lingam Tape and the controversial appointment of UMNO linked lawyer Tan Sri Zaki Azmi as the Chief Justice of Malaya.

Court Rules In Favour of Human Rights Violators!

SUARAM also views this as another dire attempt by the government to defend the indefensible ISA which allows detention without trial. It is a known fact that all ISA detainees are subjected to severe psychological torture and put in solitary confinement in their 60 days detention. Detention without trial for such a long period without any access to lawyers, family and the outside world is itself a cruel maltreatment to the detainees. Many amongst them, like Malek Husin, have been subjected to physical torture while in detention.

Malaysia Accepts Torture?

The Federal Court judgement today, rejecting the findings of the High Court that Abdul Malek was indeed tortured while in detention, did nothing more than to reaffirm the acceptance of torture in the country not only by the Malaysian government – which has still to date refused to ratify the UN’s Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) – but also by the Malaysian judiciary!

SUARAM strongly urges the Malaysian government to immediately ratify the CAT. SUARAM finds no reason for the refusal of the government to do so but for its acceptance of torture as a punishment in the country!

Abolish the ISA!

The absence of judicial checks and balances in ISA detentions has also exacerbated the abuses of power by the police who can get away with impunity. Malaysia cannot call itself a democratic country when there is such a law that permits detention without trial and gross violation of human rights.

SUARAM reiterates its demand that the government abolishes the ISA frees all detainees or accords them a fair trial. SUARAM stands strongly against any law that provides for detention without trial.

Last but not least, SUARAM reaffirms that it will build on the struggles, sacrifices and perseverance of the numerous courageous ex-ISA detainees and their families who have stood up against the draconian law. With the support of  the people, SUARAM will continue the struggle until the ISA is finally abolished.

Released by,



Nalini, E.
SUARAM Coordinator


Background

Abdul Malek Husin was arrested on the night of September 25, 1998 after addressing a demonstration earlier that afternoon in Masjid Negara. He accused the police of severely assaulting him, physically and mentally.

In the past trial, Malek Husin told the court that he was slapped by the respondent, Borhan bin Haji Daud when he was arrested. Then he was stripped naked and blindfolded during the interrogation period. He was physically assaulted for about 60 times, beaten-up and hit hard on the head until he passed out. He was also forced to swallow liquid with terrible stench, which deemed to be urine. His interrogators also threatened to inject him with the HIV/AIDs virus.

Malek Husin filed his suit civil suit in March 1999, naming special branch officer Borhan Daud, the then police chief Abdul Rahim Noor and the government as respondents. On 18 October 2007, then Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus, ruled that Malek Husin’s detention during the Reformasi
demonstrations in 1998, were made in bad faith under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution. He was rewarded RM 2.5 Million for the damages.

On the 25th March, The Court of Appeal’s convened by a panel of three judges, reversed the High Court decision and ruled that Malek Husin detention was lawful and rejected his allegations of torture while in custody. The Court of Appeal thus ruled that Malek Husin will not receive the damages awarded to him by the High Court and ordered Malek Husin instead to pay RM50, 000 in costs.

SUARAM : SUHAKAM’s Positive Efforts Must Continue

Press Statement: 5 August 2010

SUHAKAM’s Positive Efforts Must Continue

SUARAM commends the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) for sending an official monitoring team to the Anti ISA candlelight vigil on 1 August 2010 at Padang Timur Dataran MBPJ, Petaling Jaya. This was in response to an earlier request by SUARAM and Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) to send a monitoring team for the vigil. The vigil was held to commemorate the passing of the Internal Security Act (ISA) 50 years ago and to call for the abolition of the ISA.

SUARAM notes that SUHAKAM Commissioners James Nayagam and Muhammad Sha'ani, accompanied by their five officers, were present before the vigil began and also at the Petaling Jaya police headquarters where those arrested were brought. They continued monitoring at the police station until the last person was released at approximately 4.50am.

This is indeed a positive step forward following SUHAKAM’s refusal to do the same exactly one year ago, in the massive anti-ISA rally in August 2009, which subsequently saw 589 individuals being arrested.

Such renewed efforts in SUHAKAM’s work is indeed welcomed and is especially timely in view of the continued occurrence of grave violations of human rights in the country. SUHAKAM’s latest effort is a glimpse of what the Human Rights Commission that Malaysia could and ought to do to fulfil its mandate as a credible national human rights institution and expected role as a public defender of human rights.

Notwithstanding this, SUARAM expresses concern over the government’s disregard of SUHAKAM’s previous recommendations. The arrests made during the anti-ISA candlelight vigil on 1 August 2010 were the latest of the many instances of the government’s refusal to comply with SUHAKAM’s numerous recommendations on peaceful assembly, including those contained in the Commission’s reports of its public inquiries on the cases of the Kesas Highway incident (2001), the “Bloody Sunday” incident in KLCC (2006), and the Bandar Mahkota Cheras incident (2008). In the report of the public inquiry into the “Bloody Sunday” incident, for example, SUHAKAM recommended that “peaceful assemblies should be allowed to proceed without a license”. However, through the excessive use of force by the police and FRU personnel in dispersing participants of the candlelight vigil and previous peaceful assemblies, it is evident that SUHAKAM’s repeated recommendations to the Government have fallen on deaf ears.

SUARAM thus strongly calls upon the police and the Malaysian Government to respect SUHAKAM’s decisions and actions following the Anti ISA vigil and to implement all recommendations made by SUHAKAM.

Encouraged by the positive efforts by SUHAKAM, SUARAM lastly urges the Commission to revisit all recommendations made to the government with increased vigour. SUHAKAM must ensure that its improved efforts in the protection and promotion of human rights do not end with this instance.

--
Best regards,

郑文辉
MoonHui
Coordinator
Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
012-7209981 / 03-77843525

Malaysian Bar: Abolish the death penalty

Press Release

Abolish the death penalty

 

The Malaysian Bar calls for the abolition of the death penalty, as every individual has an inherent right to life.  This right is absolute, universal and inalienable, irrespective of any crimes that may have been committed.

 

Although crimes such as rape of children are very serious offences, and heavy sentences, commensurate with the gravity of the offences committed, must be meted out, the Malaysian Bar is categorically opposed to the imposition of either capital or corporal punishment as the penalty for crimes.  This position was clearly articulated in resolutions adopted at the Malaysian Bar’s Annual General Meetings in March 2006 and March 2007, respectively.

 

The Malaysian Bar has consistently argued that there is no empirical evidence that the death penalty serves as an effective deterrent to the commission of crimes.  Arguably, there has been no significant reduction of crimes for which the death penalty is mandatory.  Furthermore, it is not possible in any system of human justice to prevent the horrifying possibility of the execution of innocent persons.

 

The trend worldwide has been to abolish the death penalty, as the execution of human beings by the State serves as an “example of barbarity” to society and legitimises the taking of human life.  In 2005, the UN Commission on Human Rights passed Resolution 2005/59 calling upon all states to abolish the death penalty, and stated that the abolition of the death penalty is essential for the protection of the right to life of every human being.

 

While the call for the imposition of the death penalty may be a reflection of society’s abhorrence towards rapes of children, the penalty would have serious repercussions on efforts to prosecute and prevent the incidence of such crimes, protect rape survivors, and reduce further victimisation of the survivors under the legal process.  As the prosecution of rapists depends on the existence of a complaint by a rape survivor, the death penalty may discourage rape survivors from reporting the matter, especially if the perpetrator is a family member.

 

We also appeal to the President of the Republic of Singapore to act in accordance with international human rights norms and to show compassion by exercising clemency in the case of Malaysian Yong Vui Kong, who is in imminent danger of being hanged in Singapore for a drugs-related offence.  We encourage our colleagues at the Law Society of Singapore to continue to speak out against the use of the death penalty in Singapore.

  

The death penalty has no place in any society that values human rights, justice and mercy.  The Malaysian Bar calls on the Malaysian Government to immediately abolish the death penalty.

 

Ragunath Kesavan
President
Malaysian Bar

 

6 August 2010

EMPOWER: - Knee Jerk Responses do not solve sexual crimes

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

2 August 2010

Dear Editor,

Knee Jerk Responses do not solve sexual crimes

EMPOWER is disturbed by Karpal Singh's suggestion to have death penalty for child rapists. Ending death penalty has always been a call by the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and it is worrying to know that one of its top leaders is backtracking on such a basic human rights principle. Karpal Singh has to retract his statement and call for an end to death penalty.

The reaction by Karpal Singh also raise a grave concern on how “policy makers” view solutions to sexual crimes and other serious crimes. Empower believes that Karpal’s call to end sexual crimes against children by passing death penalty on the offender is a narrow knee jerk reaction to a crime that demands for more long term solutions. Time and again when serious sexual crimes are reported, there is a tendency to suggest "a tooth for a tooth" solution. But will this really solve crimes? If it does, then how do we explain Malaysia's drug problems - death by hanging - but the numbers have not decreased or disappeared. Heavier punishment has really not proved to end crime and violence.

 So please - let us have a more committed, comprehensive and sustainable approach towards ending sexual crimes.

 Between 2005-2007, a three-year research on sexual crime was conducted by the Women's Centre for Change Penang. The findings of this study showed that "45% of court cases in a sample of 439 cases did not go to full triall and of the contested cases that were heard in full, only 4% resulted in a conviction". So even if we do use death penalty as a punishment, the hard reality is that very few rapists will be sent to the gallows, unless they are caught red handed as is the case of the bus driver raping the school girl in front of her friends.

Most cases which appear in the media are reported cases. Research has shown that the vast majority of sex offences are never reported, let alone the offender tried and convicted. We also forget that sexual crimes are not always committed by strangers but by persons whom the victims know and/or love - their fathers, uncles, persons in authority (e.g. teachers, religious instructors, police). If there is a heavy penalty, such as death, the victims will not want to report. Who would want to send their own fathers, uncles, brothers to the electric chair or hanged?

 Putting an end to sexual crime, therefore, goes beyond just reforming the criminal justice system.

Empower believes that the continued existence of sexual crimes is really due to a flawed and unsupportive judiciary and executive system where it has failed to bring about justice to victims of violence. The WCC's research also showed that 48% of the cases took over a year to complete their trial, and with 18% of the cases taking more than 2 years. There has been little actions taken to improve the poor collection of forensic evidences, lack of witnesses, "cold" cases" due to late reporting and/or lack of evidences, and the long waiting trial period – these have dampened reporting and hence victims’ access to justice.

The prevailing negative attitudes held by society, family and friends against the victims leave very little legal and psychological support for them. Rape victims being branded as "spoilt", her fault as she enticed the rapist with her dressing, have gravely added to unsupportive responses by family, friends and enforcement agencies. Such attitudes are grounded in the manner in which women and children are treated - weak, subordinate and therefore they are meant to satisfy sexual urges of the males (in most sexual crimes, women and children formed the majority of the abused). Such attitudes must be transformed.

Empower feels that it is about time that the authorities take the necessary steps to develop a long term and sustained effort to combat sexual crimes. Some of them include:

 Reforming the judiciary and the executive system

1. Ensure effective collection of forensic evidences.

2. Develop gender sensitive support services for victims of sexual crimes. Having shelters, half-way houses, drop-in centres, may not be sufficient if the social workers or counsellors do not understand why sexual crimes happen

2.  Implement offenders' programmes aim to prevent violence by changing the attitudes and behaviour through individual counselling, case management, and group programmes. Programs may be court-mandated or voluntary. This means providing training to social welfare counsellors and/or police officers who will be able to conduct the offenders' programmes.

3.  Monitoring and intensive supervision of those offenders who are at highest risk of re-offense. While this is limited to reported cases and is still a controversial issue but nevertheless it has to be discussed where a mechanism can be developed to track repeat offenders.

4.  Government needs to mandate for professional development for judicial and law enforcement personnel, and other professionals within the legal sector. Gender sensitising programmes need to be conducted on a yearly basis to include changes in personnel. This will help change mindset towards a more positive and supportive attitude for victims of violence.

5.  Changing attitudes

If the long term goal is to eradicate violence, then the government agencies and implementators need to fully understand why violence occurs in the first place. In Australia, under the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigeneous Affairs, they have emphasised on changing the attitudes and behaviours of individuals, emphasising the way people operate in relationships and families, the way they engage as communities, and how social structures and institutions are regulated and these were viewed as the most effective ways to combat violence.

Last of all and a need to underscore this recommendation is to bring about a longer term action by teaching respectful relationship and sex education at schools, beginning from kindergartens with teaching children about good and bad touch. Such insterventions will not only save lives but reduce, if not eliminate, sexual violence. Presently, the piecemeal introduction of sex education at schools is not sufficient and will not end sexual violence. The policy has failed to understand that sexual violence is due to a deep and engrained perception and values about unequal power relationships, where women and children are treated as chattels, inferior and dependants. .It is not just about physical violence and sex.

 At the end of the day, any attempts to transform and end sexual violence must ask the question: will the action bring about prevention of future sexual crimes? 

Maria Chin Abdullah

Executive Director

EMPOWER

CIJ : Police arrest, dispersal of ISA protesters unwarranted, disproportionate

Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) Malaysia
27C Jalan Sarikei, off Jalan Pahang
53000 Kuala Lumpur
Website: cijmalaysia.org
Email: cijmalaysiaATgmail.

com
Tel: 03 4023 0772
Fax: 03 4023 0769

Media Statement: Police arrest, dispersal of ISA protesters unwarranted, disproportionate
2 August 2010

The Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) condemns the police arrest of 38 people in Selangor, Penang and Kelantan, who were participating in nationwide candlelight vigils held to denounce the 50th year of the Internal Security Act (ISA) on 1 August 2010.

Although all were released in less than 12 hours, they have to report to the police stations of their localities within two weeks.

The police arrest and dispersal of the protesters were unwarranted and disproportionate. In the first place, organisers Abolish ISA Movement (known by the Malay acronym GMI) and SUARAM took steps to minimise the impact of the vigils on traffic and public safety, including that of the protesters, by announcing in advance the places – all of which were public – and securing permission for their use from the relevant municipal authorities. In Penang, it was to have been held at the very spot dedicated for the exercise of freedom of expression – the Speakers’ Square.

Secondly, by no stretch of the imagination can a candlelight vigil be seen as a threat to public order. Yet, in Selangor and Penang, riot police disrupted the vigils before they could even start. In the former, the scene was chaotic when riot police chased participants off the designated field into a nearby shopping mall, beating some participants in the process, according to eyewitnesses. This needless response could have seriously injured not just the protesters but also bystanders.

The arrest of citizens who had wanted to gather to peacefully protest a law that violates the fundamental right against arbitrary arrest and detention, and to a fair and public hearing in court, makes a mockery of Malaysia’s membership in the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Such disproportionate response also reflects badly on Prime Minister Najib Razak, whose much-touted 1Malaysia concept exhorted, among others, a respect for the diversity of opinion.

CIJ reiterates that the freedom to assemble peacefully is a fundamental right accorded by the Federal Constitution to all citizens. It is the Police Act, which requires a permit for an ‘assembly’ of three and more persons, that is illegitimate and, like all unjust laws throughout history, should be defied.

-Ends-

Issued by:
Chuah Siew Eng
Publicity Officer

SUARAM: Tindakan Polis Menangkap Tiga aktivis Melampau! SUARAM Menggesa Polis Melepaskan Segera Aktivis yang Ditahan!

    Kenyataan Akbar: 2 Ogos 2010
 

                                            Tindakan Polis Menangkap Tiga aktivis Melampau!

                                  SUARAM Menggesa Polis Melepaskan Segera Aktivis yang Ditahan!

SUARAM mengutuk dan mengkritik terhadap tindakan kekerasan Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) yang dikenakan terhadap 3 orang aktivis yang telah ditangkap kerana menghadiri upacara pelancaran kempen PROTES DI Kampung Kerinchi pada 530 petang hari ini.

Antara aktivis yang ditangkap adalah Tah Moon Hui, penyelaras dari badan Hak Asasi Manusia iaitu SUARAM dan pembantu kepada YB Tian Chua,Rozam Azen bersama kawannya yang bernama Fareez Kamal .Mereka ditahan oleh polis akibat dikatakan  tidak memberi kerjasama dengan polis padahal mereka hanya menolak permintaan polis untuk membuka sebuah kereta yang bukan dimiliki oleh mereka.  

Tindakan polis adalah tidak munasabah dan pihak polis telah menyalahgunakan kuasa untuk menangkap sesiapa sahaja walaupun mereka tidak melakukan pekara yang melanggari undang-undang. Upacara pelancaran kempen PROTES adalah dijalankan secara aman dan ia merupakan hak dan kebebasan rakyat untuk menyuarakan ketidakpuasan terhadap polisi kerajaan melalui cara keamanan.

Tujuan Kempen PROTES adalah untuk membantah kenaikan harga barangan keperluan awam yang dikatakan akan mempengaruhi kehidupan golongan miskin .Tindakan polis sedemikian jelas menunjukkan polis telah dipergunakan oleh kerajaan pemerintahan iaitu Barisan Nasional untuk menindas terhadap rakyat yang ingin mengkritik atau membantahkan polisinya yang kurang memanfaatkan rakyat. 

SUARAM berpendirian bahawa isu penyalahgunaan kuasa polis amat ketara sekian hari dan hal ini jelas menunjukkan keperluan untuk mewujudkan mekanisme yang bersifat telus dan adil untuk memantau polis. Hal ini penting untuk melindungi dan menjamin hak rakyat seperti yang termaktub dalam perlembagaan persekutuan.

Akhir kata,  keengganan kerajaan untuk menubuhkan  Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan dan Salah Laku Polis (IPCMC) dengan segera akan meningkatkan kes-kes  penyalahgunaan  kuasa polis yang secara langsung menambahkan kemarahan dan kekecewaan rakyat jelata terhadap Polis Diraja Malaysia dan Kerajaan Barisan Nasional.

SUARAM menggesa kerajaan untuk segera melepaskan aktivis yang ditahan dan henti menggunakan kuasa Polis untuk agenda politik sendiri dengan mencabuli hak rakyat .

Yap Heng Lung

Penyelaras SUARAM

MADPET: N0 TO THE EXTENSION OF DEATH PENALTY TO CHILD RAPIST CIVILISED MALAYSIA MUST ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY

MEDIA STATEMENT – 1/8/2010

N0 TO THE EXTENSION OF DEATH PENALTY TO CHILD RAPIST

CIVILISED MALAYSIA MUST ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY

MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is appalled by the proposal by Karpal Singh, the chairperson of the Democratic Action Party(DAP) calling for the amendment of the Penal Code to provide for death penalty for child rapists (Malaysiakini, 31/7/2010, Karpal proposes death penalty for child rapists).

Human rights activist the world over and all justice loving people have called for the abolition of the death penalty.

The Malaysian Bar, a body of more than 12,000 Malaysian lawyers, since March 2006, has adopted the position for the abolition of the death Penalty. They have been specifically calling for (1) Abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia; (2) An immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition; (3) Commutation of the sentences of all persons currently on death row; and (4) Ratification by Malaysia of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

It must also be pointed out that a television poll done by RTM 2 during the Hello on Two programme on 7/5/2006 showed that 64% of Malaysians are for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia. This program has an estimated audience of 80,000. It is thus important that members of Parliament, the representatives of the people respond to the aspirations of Malaysians and remove the death penalty from the laws of Malaysia.

Further, let us also note that the global trend is for the abolition of the death penalty and more than two-thirds of the countries of the world have already abolished the death penalty in law or in practice.

Resolution 2005/59 of the United Nations Human Rights Commission calls specifically for the total abolition of the death penalty, and in the mean time for an immediate moratorium on all executions. This Resolution received explicit support by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 62/149 passed on 18/12/2007, where 104 countries voted in favour, 54 against and 29 abstained. On 18/12/2008, the United Nations General Assembly passed another Resolution 63/168 which reaffirmed Resolution 62/149 and specifically welcomed ‘the decisions taken by a growing number of States to apply a moratorium on executions and the global trend towards the abolition of the death penalty…’. Resolution 62/149 received even more support with 106 voting in favour, 46 against and 34 abstained.

Even in the United States in America, there is a trend towards abolition of the death penalty where more and more States have moved towards abolition. US also now have the Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2009 which puts an immediate halt to federal executions and forbid the use of the death penalty as a sentence for violations of federal law.

One of the main arguments by death penalty that is used by governments, including the Malaysian government, to justify the death penalty is that it deters serious crimes. This was what Datuk M. Kayveas, a Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department told Parliament.(Bernama, 28/6/2006) This is baseless and cannot be justified by any facts or statistical proof. 

On the other hand, there are studies conducted throughout the world over the past seventy years using various different methodological approaches that have failed to find convincing evidence that capital punishment is a more effective deterrent of crime than long-term imprisonment. 

Studies conducted in Australia show that abolition of the death penalty had no effect on the homicide rate and in Canada there in fact was a sharp decline in the homicide rate after abolition;

In the United States over the past twenty years, states with the death penalty in general have had a higher homicide rate than states without the death penalty;

The United Nations itself noted in 1988, 1996, and 2002, "research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis."

Further, there is always the risk that perpetrators of crimes that carry the death penalty would be more inclined to kill victims and even witnesses to avoid death.

Given the state of the Malaysian criminal justice system, including the judiciary, and the possibility of miscarriages of justice, we should abolish the death penalty to prevent even slightest possibility that an innocent person may be killed by the State.

DAP, together with the Parti Keadilan Rakyat(PKR) and Parti Islam SeMalaysia(PAS) form the Opposition Coalition known as Pakatan Rakyat. In the light of Karpal’s statement, it becomes important now, for these political parties to re-state their position on the death penalty.

As a civilized nation, Malaysia must abolish the death penalty, and as such it is hoped that Karpal Singh immediately withdraws his proposal to amend the Penal Code to impose the sentence of death on convicted child rapist.

Noting that Article 43 of the Federal Constitution, states that “…Ruler or Yang di- Pertua Negeri of a State has power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of all other offences committed in his State…”, maybe the Pakatan Rakyat state governments should take the first step by immediately commuting all death sentences to prison terms, and in the interim a moratorium on all executions in their States.

MADPET reiterates its call for:-

(1)    An abolition of the death penalty;

(2)    A moratorium on all executions pending abolition; and

(3)    That all death sentences be commuted to prison terms.

Charles Hector

for  Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

1 August 2010

(For further information, contact Charles Hector (019-2371 100, chef@tm.net.my )