CIPFG Asia Urges Open Investigation on the persecution of Falun Gong in China

Vice Team Leader of CIPFG Asia Urges Open Investigation
Epoch Times Malaysia Staff Dec 21, 2006

KUALA LUMPUR–In a press conference held in Kuala Lumpur on December 19, Edmund Bon, vice team leader of Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (CIPFG) Asia (Malaysia), requested the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to allow CIPFG Asia to have investigation without restriction on the persecution of Falun Gong in China.

The Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong Asia Delegation was officially formed on December 10, 2006, the International Human Rights Day. According to CIPFG Asia, there are over 116 members to date in the coalition, including local council leaders, administrative leaders, non-governmental leaders, figures from human rights circles, law, medicine, professionals, and media from six countries/regions in Asia.

CIPFG Asia is headed by Dr. Lai Ching-te, who is a member of the Taiwan Legislative Council and a doctor. Individuals in law and political circles in Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Macau and Malaysia were appointed as vice team leaders in each country/region. All the six countries/regions held a press conference in their respective regions simultaneously on December 19 to inform the public on the formation of CIPFG Asia.

Malaysia is so far the first South East Asia country to have members joining the coalition. According to lawyer Mr. Edmund Bon, CIPFG Asia in Malaysia consists of several lawyers and an NGO, Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET). The team will invite other regions in Asia to join and expand the coalition.

Lawyer Edmund Bon (The Epoch Times)"This Coalition was setup as part of the international effort to continue the pressure on the Chinese government, because it is quite clear from the evidence and documents, including the United Nation reports, which we have come to know that thousands of Falun Gong practitioner in China are being persecuted for their freedom of belief, expression, and conscious," said Edmund Bon in the press conference.

"The Chinese government should respect the basic rights of the Chinese people declared under the Universal of Declaration of Human Right and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and also to really open up all the detention centers, prisons and rehabilitation camps to allow UN staffs, members within and outside China to be able to access to prisoners of conscience who have made the allegations about inhuman torture and illegal treatments," Edmund said.

Edmund Bon also urged the CCP to answer the Canadian independent investigation report which was released on July 6 this year. The investigation report was authored by Mr. Kilgour, a former MP and cabinet member of Canada, and Mr. Matas, a renowned international human rights lawyer. The investigation report concluded the allegations of living organ harvesting of the Falun Gong practitioners by the CCP are true, with the support of 18 proof and disproof.

"Up to this point in time, we have not seen any reply from the CCP to the investigation report. What I think the allegations on the report are serious and we want further investigation," said Edmun Bon.


After the press conference, Edmund Bon together with another CIPFG Asia team member and lawyer Miss Chen Mei Shang went to the Chinese embassy to submit a letter requesting for open investigation into China. The Chinese embassy accepted the letter. About 15 Falun Gong practitioners also showed up to voice their support to the CIPFG Asia by displaying slogans and banners outside the embassy.

The letter to the embassy and the CCP consists of 2 requests:

Falun Gong practitioners support the formation of CIPFG Asia outside the Chinese embassy. (The Epoch Times)1) Follow the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to protect the human rights and enforce the recommendations stated in the Kilgour-Matas Report, i.e. to stop all mistreatments and repression on Falun Gong practitioners; to stop organ harvesting from executed prisoners, and to stop commercialization of organ transplants.

2) Allow CIPFG Asia to have investigation without restriction into all the prisons, forced labor camps, detention centers, mental hospitals, organ transplant hospitals (including organ transplant centres and military hospitals) in Liaoning, Shandong, Henan provinces and Tianjin City which detain Falun Gong practitioners. CIPFG Asia requests to the Chinese government to announce the records of the source of organs and the agreements of the donors to CIPFG Asia and the public.

4 from Saudi, Africa caught in Malaysia drugs haul(AFP)

4 from Saudi, Africa caught in Malaysia drugs haul
(AFP)

22 November 2006


KUALA LUMPUR - Four students from Africa and Saudi Arabia, including two women, could face the death penalty after being nabbed by Malaysian police with marijuana, officials said Wednesday.

“They were arrested in a special operation last weekend by our district police narcotics officers,” said Zahedi Ayob, district police chief of Sepang, south of the capital, Kuala Lumpur.

“We have evidence to charge them with drug trafficking, as they had a huge amount of drugs in their possession,” he told AFP.

The four students — two Kenyan women, one man from Eritrea and another man from Saudi Arabia — were arrested at their apartment in the town of Cyberjaya at the weekend.

Zahedi said the four, aged between 18 and 22, were students from a nearby higher learning institution, adding they were arrested after a tip-off.

They were being detained until Friday, when an investigation into their case would be concluded, and were then expected to be formally charged, he said.

Zahedi said narcotics officers found four slabs of marijuana and various small plastic packets of the drug during the arrests, adding the total weight of the drugs seized was about four kilograms (nine pounds) with an estimated street value of about 7,200 ringgit (1,982 dollars).

“We are investigating where they got their supply from, how they came into possession of such a large amount of drugs, and what it was intended for,” Zahedi said.

Malaysian laws set a mandatory death sentence for anyone caught with 200 grams or more of marijuana.

More than 100 people, a third of them foreigners, have been hanged for drug offences in Malaysia since the law was introduced in 1981, but the lucrative drug trade continues to lure traffickers.

WORLD DAY FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY

WORLD DAY FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY
LAUNCH OF ADPAN
SEOUL, 10 OCTOBER 2006
Statement by Purna Sen,
Director, Asia-Pacific Programme, Amnesty International


The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. It violates the right to life. It is irrevocable. It can be and has been inflicted on the innocent. To move towards a world where human rights are protected and respected those counties that still execute must abolish this penalty. A world where human rights are real is a world without executions. What will be Asia’s part in this journey? What will be said of South Korea?

We meet today on the occasion of the World Day Against the Death Penalty, the fourth of its kind, called by the World Coalition against the Death Penalty. This grouping of lawyers, NGOs including Amnesty International, trade unions, local governments from across the world, is an important umbrella for work to abolish the death penalty. Last year saw 263 actions all over the world on 10 October. This year we bring an added dimension to the power of this global call with a focus on Asia and the Pacific, through the launch of the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN). This network brings together voices of those fighting for human rights and against the death penalty across various countries in this region.

Trend towards abolition
In April 2006 Amnesty International estimated that 20000 people were on death row throughout the world. They wait to be killed by their own governments. Despite the shocking figures, the trend towards abolition is clear: the number of countries carrying out executions halved in the last 20 years and has dropped for the fourth consecutive year.

Progress towards global abolition has been dramatic. In 1977, just 16 countries had abolished capital punishment for all crimes. Today the figure stands at 88:
• 88 countries and territories have abolished the death penalty for all crimes;
• 11 countries have abolished the death penalty for all but exceptional crimes such as wartime crimes;
• 30 countries can be considered abolitionist in practice: they retain the death penalty in law but have not carried out any executions for at least the previous 10 years and are believed to have a policy or established practice of not carrying out executions,
This is a total of 129 countries which have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.

Asia
In Asia this trend towards abolition has not been as strong or clear as in the rest of the world. In fact, it could be said that Asia has bucked this trend

The region contains countries with high rates of executions and rare prospects of abolition. Several Asian countries, including Japan, China, Singapore and Indonesia, appear to be staunch supporters of capital punishment. In 2005, China was one of four countries in which 94 per cent of all known executions took place (the others were Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USA) and has the dubious ‘honour’ of being the country with the highest number of executions in the world. In China a person can be sentenced and executed for as many as 68 crimes, including non-violent crimes such as tax fraud, embezzlement and drug offences.

After fifteen months with no executions, Indonesia reaffirmed its preference for executions, with the killing of three men in September 2006. India has announced an October execution date after two years of no state killings (the date has since been postponed). Singapore continues to execute, despite high levels of concern and appeals for clemency from across the world; the state has killed 420 people since 1991. Hanging, shooting, lethal injection and stoning are methods used in Asia to carry out the death penalty.

It is in this context that today we are launching ADPAN – a network of local, Asian voices against the death penalty working together towards a region without state executions. The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) brings together 21 members from twelve countries and will campaign against the injustice inherent in the administration of the death penalty in Asia and the Pacific. Today’s launch is marked by a range of activities across the region. These include
 A public outreach action to raise awareness of the death penalty in various countries
 The launch of a national coalition against the death penalty in Indonesia, that will be marked by a candlelight vigil
 A pubic education activity day in Hong Kong
 A demonstration outside Bankwang prison in Thailand, at which messages from prisoners on death row will be shared
 Website blogs against the death penalty in Malaysia and Australia
 As part of ADPAN, Amnesty International will launch a website today where ADPAN members talk about the death penalty in their countries and where other regional information is available
 In the light of the President’s stated goal of ‘zero executions’ Amnesty International has also written to the Taiwanese government, on the occasion of their national day and the world day against the death penalty, to urge abolition.

Asia is indeed a diverse region but moves against the death penalty are increasingly united, as ADPAN demonstrates. We also note, with great pleasure, the recent abolition of the death penalty in the Philippines and congratulate the government for taking this step. Such leadership in the region is very welcome and increases the number of abolitionist countries, to include Nepal, Bhutan, Samoa, Australia and New Zealand, Cambodia, Micronesia, Solomon Islands, Timor-L’este. The work to win abolition in more Asian and Pacific countries will continue and will learn from the examples set by those countries that have lead the way.

Secrecy and doubt surround the death penalty in Asia. Many governments, like China, refuse to publish full official statistics on executions while Viet Nam has even classified statistics and reporting on the death penalty as a 'state secret'. Statistics on executions and prisoners on death row are very hard to elicit from the Indian government. If the claim that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime surely governments would be making them public: how often they execute and for what crimes. The absence of transparency, however, suggests shame; secrecy indicates that the state has something to hide and robs the people of the chance to see what their governments are doing and to hold them to account.

Crime and the death penalty
The death penalty is not the unique or powerful deterrent against crime it is often claimed to be. Instead of relying on the illusion of control given by the death penalty, governments must focus on developing effective measures against crime.

Studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments. Reviewing the evidence on the relation between changes in the use of the death penalty and homicide rates, a study conducted for the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 2002 concluded that fears of sudden increases in crime rates as a consequence of abolition are not supported by statistics.

Crime figures from abolitionist countries fail to show that abolition has harmful effects. In Canada, for example, the homicide rate per 100,000 population fell from a peak of 3.09 in 1975, the year before the abolition of the death penalty for murder, to 2.41 in 1980, and since then it has declined further. In 2003, 27 years after abolition, the homicide rate was 1.73 per 100,000 population, 44 per cent lower than in 1975 and the lowest rate in three decades.

It is not the death penalty that inhibits crime but the knowledge that an effective and prompt criminal justice system will investigate and prosecute crime. This is what states must deliver as an effective element of crime reduction strategies; a reliance on the death penalty is not a substitute.

Use of the death penalty today is a failure of justice and a dangerous conclusion to trial processes that are deeply flawed. The death penalty is an irreversible act – a cruel and inhuman punishment indeed. But where the criminal justice process that preceeds state execution is itself flawed the penalty becomes even more indefensible. Allegations of torture and reliance on confessions make convictions questionable and have featured in death penalty cases in Asian countries. The alleged murder victims in cases where the accused have been executed have even re-emerged, sometimes after the execution of the so-called murderer.

South Korea
ADPAN held its inaugural meeting July 2006 and decided that an appropriate launch would be in South Korea, where the potential for an impressive step lies in the hands of the present government. By launching in Seoul, ADPAN draws attention today to the Special Bill to abolish the death penalty, introduced in 2004 and still awaiting its review by the Legal and Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly. South Korea has strengthened its human rights work in the Ministry of Justice, has introduced the language of human rights into public discussion and most likely will provide the next Secretary-General of the United Nations. The eyes of the world are upon this country: will South Korea now deliver on the promises it has made to human rights by showing leadership on that most basic right – the right to life – by abolition of the death penalty? Or will it remain among those countries whose names are shamefully associated with the unjust and outdated practice of the death penalty?

Since the mass state execution of 23 people in December 1997, South Korea has not carried out further executions; 64 people remain on death row. The 15th and 16th National Assemblies considered Special Bills to abolish the death penalty but parliamentary time for debate lapsed before discussion had progressed. The National Assembly again showed in 2005 the strength in this country of the pro-abolition voice. ADPAN calls upon the government, upon the National Assembly, to demonstrate a leadership role in Asia by ending the death penalty not only in practice but in law. Courageous steps have been already been taken; this opportunity cannot be wasted. South Korea must show itself to be a nation progressing towards the full protection of human rights by legal abolition of the death penalty.



Relevant websites:
www.amnesty.org
http://asiapacific.amnesty.org
http://asiadeathpenalty.blogspot.com/2006/07/malaysias-inexcusable-position-on.html
http://www.amnesty.org.au/Act_now/campaigns/adp

Malaysia would not abolish the death penalty as it served as a ‘good deterrent’?

Dr M attacked in death penalty debate
Beh Lih Yi
Sep 11, 06 4:10pm

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz appears to be using every opportunity that arises to criticise former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

This was apparent during the question and answer session in the Dewan Rakyat today, where Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) became collateral damage in the attack.

The minister used the death penalty issue to draw a comparison between Mahathir and his successor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

It started when Karpal asked if the government would review using the death penalty since Nazri had supported calls for its abolishment recently.

Explaining that it was his personal stand, the minister said: “Regarding my statement, I am free to give my views in this more open administration but I will have to adhere to the government’s final decision, this is democracy.

“Maybe (Karpal) is still trapped in the time when his ‘mentor’ was the prime minister,” he added in an obvious reference to Mahathir.

Nazri once again attacked Mahathir when Karpal, in a supplementary question, asked why the minister breached the cabinet’s spirit of collective responsibility by supporting calls to abolish the death penalty.

“You (Karpal) are not a minister. I comply to whatever final decision which is made by the government, not like your mentor (Mahathir), after the cabinet makes a decision (he) still makes noise,” he said.

Nazri has been Mahathir’s strongest critic since the 81-year-old former premier launched an offensive against the current administration.

On one occasion, the minister even challenged Mahathir to “be a man and resign from Umno”.

Good deterrent

Earlier, Nazri said Malaysia would not abolish the death penalty as it served as a ‘good deterrent’ to hardcore crimes..

“It (the death penalty) has to be maintained to show the government’s determination and seriousness in fighting heavy crimes,” he added.

Citing an example, the minister said the police’s surprise announcement last week to slash traffic fines led to the perception that the police was not serious in combating such offences. The cabinet later reversed the decision.

Nazri, who is also the defacto law minister, said there were enough ‘safeguards’ in the legal system to ensure a death penalty would not be simply handed down.

In his supplementary question, Karpal said there was no proof that the death penalty served as a good deterrent but the minister disagreed.

“Murders still happen even though we have the death penalty in place at the moment, try to imagine when there is no death penalty?” he argued.

The Malaysian Bar, which represents some 12,000 lawyers, had passed a resolution during its annual general meeting in March calling for the death penalty to be abolished and for a moratorium on all executions.

Malaysia remains one of the 74 countries yet to abolish capital punishment while 123 other countries have done so.

Al-Ma’unah leader Mohd Amin hanged

Saturday August 5, 2006


Al-Ma’unah leader Mohd Amin hanged

KUALA KANGSAR: Mohd Amin Mohd Razali, the Al-Ma’unah movement leader who was sentenced to death for treason, had a last meal with his wife and four children on Thursday night before he was hanged yesterday morning.

Mohd Amin: His last words to his children were to study hard and become religious teachers
The death penalty was carried out at the Sungai Buloh Prison in Selangor. His body was returned to his hometown of Kampung Ngor near here and buried after asar prayers at about 5.30pm.

Mohd Amin’s wife Salamiah Sallehuddin, 35, said the prison authorities allowed her and the children to see him.

“We met as a family last night (Thursday) and even managed to eat together,” she said.

Mohd Amin’s last words to his children were to study hard and become religious teachers, she said.

Mohd Amin was supposed to be hanged last week together with three others – Zahid Muslim, Jemari Jusoh and Jamaludin Darus – but the prison authorities deferred his execution, pending the return of his mother Aminah Abdullah, 62, who was in Mecca to perform the umrah (pilgrimage).

LAST RITES: Salamiah pouring scented water over the grave of her husband in his hometown of Kampung Ngor near Kuala Kangsar yesterday. Beside her are their daughter Nor Fatihah, 11, son Muhamad Azhan, nine, and relatives.

According to Mohd Amin’s brother Abdul Rahim, his mother managed to see Mohd Amin before the execution yesterday morning.

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/8/5/nation/15061095&sec=nation

4 Hanged in Malaysia in July & August 2006

August 04, 2006, Western Resistance

Malaysia: Islamist Cult Leader Is Hanged

The man pictured left is 35-year old Mohammed Amin Mohammed Razali, the leader of a jihadist cult which kidnapped and killed. Razali was hanged early this morning in west Selangor state, Malaysia, for treason, states Radio Australia and the Malaysia Star.

Razali had tried to overthrow the government of Mahathir Mohammad in July 2000, and had planned to dethrone Malaysia's king. His group was called Al-Ma'unah, or The Brotherhood of Inner Life. Last week, Razali was due to be hanged, but a dispensation had been made to give his 62-year old mother, who was in Mecca on umrah, time to return to see her son before the execution.

Last week, Zahid Muslim, Jemari Jusoh and Jamaludin Darus were hanged at Sungai Buloh Prison, Selangor.

On Thursday night, Razali was allowed to have a meal with his 35-year old wife, and their four children. He told the children to study hard and become religious teachers.

This morning, his mother was allowed to see him, and then he was hanged. His body was later given to the family, who took it back to his hometown of Kampung Ngor, near Kuala Kangsar, in northwestern Perak state, where he was buried at 5.30 pm local time.

The attempted coup in July 2, 2000 included a surprise attack upon two armouries in Perak, where, disguised as soldiers, the group stole 100 rifles. A day later, a villager discovered their jungle camp, and police gathered. Two policemen, an army ranger and an orchard owner were kidnapped, and one member of Al Ma'unah was shot dead. Wives and children of the group had been ferried in to try to negotiate a surrender, and on July 6, two members had surrendered. At the end of the day, the remaining 25 had turned themselves in.

The bodies of two of the hostages were discovered, tortured to death long before the surrender. The dead men were an undercover police officer and the army ranger.

On its website, the group had claimed that it had been founded in 1998, and that it had 1,000 members in various countries, including Brunei, Singapore, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

They claimed that they could make enemies be hurled back without touching them, and also claimed they were invulnerable to weapons, fire or sharp objects. They also asserted that they could tie up enemies without rope. They said they could cause their enemies to "drop to their knees or fall down with the blink of an eye."

The website had images of group members being burned, scalded with boiling oil, and logs rolled over their chests. Razali, the site claimed, had received enlightenment after spending five years studying the paranormal in a hut in Indonesia.

The group asserted that it was "involved in the teaching of martial arts, particularly the development of one's inner power and the practice of Islamic traditional medicine."

Their slogan on the site had been: "Jihad is our way! Islam will be victorious!"

After the surrenders and arrests, Malaysia's chief of police, Norian Mai, had described Razali as mentally "unstable".

SUN: Govt's faith in death penalty defies facts

Govt's faith in death penalty defies facts
By: (Fri, 14 Jul 2006)

Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) is disappointed by the statement made by Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas who told Parliament last month that the death penalty deters serious crimes. This statement, reported by Bernama on June 28, cannot be justified by any facts or statistical proof.

On the other hand, studies conducted throughout the world over the past 70 years using various different methodological approaches 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 20 years, states with the death penalty in general have had a higher homicide rate than states without the death penalty.

The deputy minister also went on to say that there will be no abolition of the death penalty as it "safeguards public interest". Surely sending someone to death,

especially when there is the real possibility that an innocent man can be killed is against the public interest.

He is further reported to have said that, "There are enough safeguards in the country's judicial system to ensure that death sentences are not meted out easily."

What safeguards are the honourable deputy minister speaking of? In Malaysia there is no immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, immediate right to a phone call and no

right to full pre-trial disclosure.

Evidence, reports, statements and witnesses obtained during police investigations that may support the accused's story or bring to light possible defences to the accused could be suppressed if prosecution officers are overly interested in prosecuting. Mostjurisdictions in the Commonwealth and elsewhere have made it mandatory for

immediate full disclosure to the accused person.

It must be reiterated that even in jurisdictions where all these safeguards exist, the number of persons wrongfully

condemned to death have been frighteningly high. Human justice is dangerously fallible, and the only acceptable choice for any civilised nation is to abolish the death penalty.

The fact that a person has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Federal Court, and thereafter to the Pardons Board for clemency is grossly insufficient to justify the keeping of the death penalty in our law books. It is laughable that the deputy minister even suggested, at this day and time in Malaysia, that thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force is yet another safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice.

Last month, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a law abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. The number of countries that have done away with the death penalty now stands at 123. The worldwide trend has been towards abolition of the death penalty.

A recent television poll done by RTM2 during the Hello on Two programme on May 7 showed that 64% of Malaysians are for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia. Ê

Further, the Malaysian Bar, which comprises about 12,000 lawyers, is also calling for the abolition of the death penalty.

Madpet calls for an immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition, and the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.

N. Surendran
and Charles Hector
for Malaysians Against Death
Penalty and Torture

Seremban dog-shooting incident: Reports lodged against council

Seremban dog-shooting incident: Reports lodged against council
19 Jul 2006
By Devinder Singh


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KUALA LUMPUR: Three police reports were lodged against the Seremban Municipal Council yesterday over the shooting of 13 dogs on June 29.

The reports — from the owner, his sister and animal lovers — urged police to investigate the council’s enforcement officers for their alleged cruelty to the animals.

The owner of the dogs, Ng Her Sun, said the barbaric way in which his dogs were killed had no place in a civilised country like Malaysia.

"We are civilised people and we should act civilised," he said outside the Brickfields police station where the reports were lodged.

"My dogs hid under the bed, they were frightened. The officers were cruel."

Ng, 57, and his sister, Choon Mong, 56, lodged separate reports.

Lawyer N. Surendran also lodged a report on behalf of the Coalition Against Dog Shooting and Other Inhumane Methods (CASIM), urging police to investigate all cases of cruelty to animals by enforcement authorities.

Surendran said shooting of dogs was illegal and the proper way to put the animals down was by injection.

"Not only did they shoot the dogs, they also trespassed on private property and discharged firearms in a residential area," he said.

"To shoot the animals in that manner amounts to cruelty."

Surendran said action could be taken against the enforcement officers and the director of enforcement under Section 44 of the Animals Act 1953 and Section 428 of the Penal Code.

"We expect the enforcement officers to prevent cruelty to animals but here the opposite happened," he said.

CASIM is a coalition made up of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership, Bivai Special Dogs Selangor, Malaysian Animal-Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association, Malaysia Against Death Penalty and Torture, and Paws.

On June 29, a team of MPS enforcement officers entered Ng’s house and shot 13 of his dogs.

Ng, an odd-job worker, lived with his sister and 26 dogs in the house.

The council had said that they had issued Ng numerous warnings to remove the dogs but they were ignored.

The council had also claimed that the dogs attacked several enforcement officers who went to the house to have them removed.

Shooting of 13 dogs: Reports lodged against council

Thursday, July 20 2006

Shooting of 13 dogs: Reports lodged against council
-by NUR AZWA IBRAHIM -
THREE police reports were lodged against the Seremban Municipal Council (MPS) yesterday, for shooting 13 dogs in Taman Desa Rasah, Seremban, on June 29.

The reports were lodged at Brickfields police station, led by the dog owner, Ng Her Sun, and his sister, Ng Choon Mong.

The other report was lodged by the Coalition Against Shooting and other Inhumane Methods (Casim).

Casim, made up of of six non-governmental organisations, was led by lawyer N. Surendran, 39.

They claimed the council had committed unlawful acts by breaking into Ng’s house and shooting the dogs inside the compound.

Her Sun, 57, said: “I wanted to give shelter and food to the dogs. What the officers did was cruel. I had to leave with some of the dogs because I feared the officers would kill them all.”

Her sister, Choon Mong, 56, claimed she was dragged out by female enforcement officers against her will.

“I begged them not to shoot my dogs but they ignored me. I heard the dogs howling and they looked frightened. They were not aggressive and were hiding under the beds when the officers shot them,” she said.

Surendran called for reforms to regulations on stray animals and asked for a more humane approach to combat the problem of animal over-population.

“There are other methods, including shooting and using wire loops to catch dogs, which are cruel, inhumane and cause a lot of pain and distress to the animals.

“We want police to investigate and act against the offenders,” he said.

Negri Sembilan PAS commissioner, Dr Rosli Yaakop, who was outside the station, said he supported the decision to lodge reports against the council.

MM says: All dogs go to heaven

SUN: TO KILL OR NOT TO KILL

To kill or not to kill?
Umran Kadir

It came as quite a surprise to me that jury trials in Malaysia were abandoned in 1995 due to cost and difficulties in finding qualified jurors.

It was thus a pleasant turn of events to read about the Attorney-General's recent suggestion of reintroducing juries. As we all know, the Attorney-General's bright idea was promptly extinguished by Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz. In his justification Nazri bluntly accused Malaysians of being racist and amenable to bribery.

Given the furore raised when Reader's Digest recently labelled KL the third rudest city in the world, I immediately wondered what studies or data Nazri had in his possession to back an even more slanderous allegation. And how could the government place a price tag on democracy? Would the powers-that-be next claim that elections are costly and unnecessary as the outcome is already certain?

Arising from the above events I intended to write today about why jury trials are in many ways the epitome of the democratic process. Having a jury as opposed to a single judge decide on the facts of a case also provides more surety, as with a jury of seven a minimum five-two majority is required for a firm verdict. The accusation that Malaysian jurors are not legally trained is irrelevant as judges normally guide juries on points of law.

In researching the history of jury trials in Malaysia I came across a point which forced me to step back and examine the larger picture. Jury trials were introduced to Malaysia subsequent to independence and they have only ever been an option for capital cases - cases in which the accused face the death penalty.

In my view, the argument over whether we reintroduce jury trials for capital offences misses the point. Whether it is a judge or jury which sentences a person to death, blood remains on the collective hands of our society. Hence the title of this piece: "To kill or not to kill?", for that is the real question we should be asking ourselves.

On June 28, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas clarified that the government stance that the death penalty is here to stay as it reflected the government's seriousness in dealing with crime. This is an inexcusable position to take when international studies overwhelmingly support the notion that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent to crime. Shortly after Kavyeas made his statement, reports surfaced of death row inmates who have been languishing in Malaysian jails for more than 20 years; apparently some of the Pardons Boards meet very infrequently.

Is this the sign of a criminal justice system which is fair, just and humane?

Moreover, the ugly truth is that in dispensing justice mistakes can and do happen. Between 1976 and 2003, 112 death row inmates in the United States were released after the unearthing of new evidence led to the overturning of their convictions.

Civilisation has moved far beyond the time of Hammurabi when "an eye for an eye" was the basis of all laws. The death penalty creates a senseless and vicious cycle of violence. I firmly believe that we are in no position to take away that which God has bequeathed upon each of us.

Fortunately, Malaysians can rely on several voices of sanity in this debate. Organisations such as the Bar Council and Madpet (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) have consistently called for an end to capital punishment.

Indeed, the global trend is for countries to drop the death penalty from the repertoire of punishments. The latest country to do so was the Philippines which repealed capital punishment last month. To date 125 countries have so far abolished the death penalty. Malaysia is among a shrinking group of 71 countries that continue to cling on to an unmerciful and irreversible punishment.

It is high time we let compassion guide us on this issue.



The writer notes with sadness that from 1970 to the present, 359 people have been condemned to death by Malaysian courts while 159 are still on death row. Send comments to feedback@ thesundaily.com


Updated: 10:33AM Fri, 14 Jul 2006

DAILY EXPRESS : Jail term upped for rape; down for incest

DAILY EXPRESS NEWS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jail term upped for rape; down for incest

Kuala Lumpur: Rape will be punishable by up to 30 years jail and whipping compared to the present maximum 20 years plus whipping under an amendment to the Penal Code tabled in the Dewan Rakyat Wednesday.

Home Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad, who moved the amendment Bill, said the most severe penalty would be applied in cases of a man committing gang rape or rape in the presence of others, rape resulting in injury to the victim or others and rape of a pregnant woman.

He said the maximum penalty would also be applied in the case of man who raped a woman below 16 years without her consent, raped a girl below 12 years with or without her consent or raped a woman by using his position of authority even with her consent.

"The penalty for all these categories of rape is a minimum jail term of five years to a maximum of 30 years and could include whipping," he said.

In other categories of rape, there is no minimum jail term and the maximum remains at 20 years plus whipping, he added.

The proposed changes to the Penal Code were recommended by a parliamentary select committee which conducted public hearings.

In the case of incest, Radzi said the present minimum 15 years jail would be reduced to eight years because it was felt the longer imprisonment discouraged the victim from reporting the crime.

He said the committee recommended that the death sentence for rape that caused the death of the victim be replaced with either the death sentence or a minimum 15 years jail to a maximum 30 years plus not less than 10 strokes of the cane.

"The change in the punishment is based on the consideration that the accused in some rape cases did not have the intention to cause the death of his victim," he said.

He said the Bill introduced a new section that provides for a maximum sentence of 20 years jail and whipping for a person having sex with another by inserting an object in the vagina or anus without the other person's consent.

On the issue of marital rape, Radzi said the committee did not agree that it be made an offence in Malaysia on the ground that it would be inconsistent with the syariah and the practices of other religions.

However, he said, the committee recommended the inclusion of a provision to punish a husband who injured his wife or placed her or others in fear of death or injury with the intention of having sex with her.

"The offence is punishable by a jail term not exceeding five years. This punishment does not conflict with the principles of any religion. In this context, the stress is on injury caused by a husband against his wife," he said.

Radzi said the Bill also proposed to reclassfify snatch theft as robbery that would be punishable by the higher imprisonment of up to 14 years plus whipping instead of seven years for theft.

Another change to the Penal Code is abolishing the distinction between an offence of criminal intrusion committed in daytime or night.

Radzi said the distinction was no longer practical and effective.

Mkini: 'Doggycide': Bar Council's bureau ready to bite

'Doggycide': Bar Council's bureau ready to bite


Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
Jul 7, 06 2:03pm

The Bar Council's legal aid bureau is prepared to take on the Seremban municipal council (MPS) for the killing of 13 dogs in a house recently.

Lawyer N Surendran said the violence with which MPS officers carried out their tasks - including having allegedly broken into Eng Her Sun’s house to shoot the terrified canines - was ‘totally illegal’.

This contravened provisions of the Animal Ordinance Act 1953 against prohibiting unnecessary pain or suffering to animals, he added.

"All the individuals (who committed or abetted in the incident) should be charged for the offence," he told a press conference held in Kuala Lumpur yesterday with the six-member Coalition Against Dog Shooting and Other Inhumane Methods (Casim).

Casim and other animal welfare groups have been up in arms over the incident last Friday in which MPS enforcement officers had allegedly sawed their way into Eng's house in Taman Desa Rasah before shooting 13 of the 26 stray dogs that he had adopted and given shelter.

Court order

MPS president Abdul Halim Abdul Latif was reported to have said his officers were acting on a court order following complaints from neighbors of the foul stench and disturbance caused by the dogs.

Abdul Halim also claimed Eng, 57 and his dogs had turned aggressive, an allegation that Surendran dismissed.

"That is a total lie.. Some of the dogs were found having squeezed between two cupboards, others were shot while hiding under a mattress," he said.

"The only ones acting aggressive that day were the council officers," he added.

Surendren also said he could only assume that they had gone into Eng’s house on the pretext of a local government by-law pertaining to the control of dogs.

“They said they were acting on a court order following a notice issued six months earlier, but they never showed Eng that court order,” he said.

Surendran's statements were met by murmurs of agreement from the crowd of animal lovers and animal welfare groups that had gathered in the compound of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), a member of Casim.

'Animal terrorism'

"I have only one word to describe MPS' actions that day: Terrorism! It was an act of pure animal terrorism!" cried one dog-owner to a resounding applause.

Eng, who was also present at the press conference, accused MPS of high-handedness and excessive violence.

"I'm not the one who is mental. MPS officers are the mental ones!" he said

A veterinarian from Seremban was also present to confirm that Eng (right) had properly cared for his dogs by ensuring their cleanliness, vaccination, spaying, and sterilisation.

Surendran also questioned the legality of MPS officers, who were accompanied by four Veterinary Services Department officials and two police officers, having discharged their firearms in a house within a residential area.

On this point, Casim member Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership's (Marpo) pro-tem president Dr Jon S Satyamoorthy said the Animal Ordinance Act providing for local officials to ‘put down’ on sight dogs was in the context of a by-gone problem.

The law pertains to the problem many decades ago of rabid dogs which had to be shot immediately when identified because of the dangers that they posed to the public, he noted.

"But this problem is no more relevant in 2006 as rabies has since been wiped out," he said.

Humane methods

Casim, meanwhile, called for an immediate ban to shooting and other inhumane methods used in dog-catching, including the use of wires and nylon ropes whereby dogs are almost strangled to death while suffering from the deep cuts inflicted on their necks and bodies.

"The whole shooting massacre, which looked like a bloody crime scene, was a horrendous, cruel and violent act and the Seremban municipal council should have never taken this merciless route," said SPCA chairperson Christine Chin.

Dog catchers should be trained to use humane methods, like nets and tranquillisers while the only acceptable and humane method of putting dogs to sleep is the administration of lethal injection by a veterinarian or other qualified person authorised by the former, she added.

"In times of resistance, a mediator should be sought to diffuse the situation in a humane, effective and considerate manner. SPCA and the other participants of this coalition can assist in this area," she pointed out.

For the long-term, Chin said local municipalities should adopt more a effective and humane mindset and attitude to solve the problem of dog and cat over-population.

Among the concrete steps that can be taken is the establishment of 'humane shelters and pounds' where animals can be kept and re-homed, she suggested.

"This gives the residents a chance to bring in strays and abandoned animals instead of taking them into their own homes and thus creating neighborhood problems," she said.

Chin also urged the establishment of high volume, low-cost neutering clinics where dogs and cats are spayed at reduced rates.

She also called for local governments to emulate the pro-active measures taken by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL)in cooperating with the SPCA to establish the Kembiri Clinic, which has over the past three years successfully prevented 2.7 million dog and cat births in the city.

"The coalition is willing to embark on a working committee together with a number of municipalities to provide a wealth of knowledge, experience and expertise in solving this man-made problem," she said.

Star- Humane way to catch strays sought

Humane way to catch strays sought

KUALA LUMPUR: A new coalition vowing to fight for a humane way to catch dogs and cats has been formed following the recent shooting of 13 dogs by the Seremban Municipal Council.

The Coalition Against Dog Shooting and Other Inhumane Methods (Casim) is endorsed by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership (Marpo) and Bivai Special Dogs Selangor.

Other organisations include Malaysian Animal-Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association, Malaysian Interfaith Network, Pure Life Society, Malaysia Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpat) and PAWS.

Marpo pro tem president Dr Jon Satyamoorthy told a press conference that the coalition wanted all municipalities to adopt a more effective and humane mindset to solve the overpopulation of dogs and cats.

Mkini: Death penalty debate needs to go beyond emotions

Death penalty debate needs to go beyond emotions
Sad Malaysian
Jul 6, 06 4:21pm

I refer to your report It’s the gallows for abolish death penalty call.

The death penalty has always been a controversial subject. There are many arguments used by both the proponents and opponents of the death penalty. The usual arguments that you would receive from the proponents would be is one, the death penalty is a preventive measure and two, our judicial system is well equipped to deal with this issue.

In Malaysia, the death penalty is reserved for what is deemed ‘the most heinous of crimes’ which include murder, treason, trafficking of drugs and being in possession of firearms. And the most famous of all arguments, ‘If someone you loved was brutally raped and murdered, wouldn’t you want the murderer to die?’ Make the victim a child, and you have a winning argument to sway almost anyone into in saying we need the death penalty.

So then, why are there people who keep saying the death penalty is a form of cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment? That the death penalty goes against one of the holiest tenets of all religions, which is the sanctity of life? Why do these people persist in saying that there is no concrete evidence to say that the death penalty works as a preventive measure?

Let us take a look at the Malaysian scenario and all the necessary actors in the death penalty drama.

We will start with the police. How many of us are of the firm belief that the Royal Malaysian Police Force is one of the best in the world? Are corruption and abuse of power not rampant within the police force? No, you say, our police are decent and incorruptible. How about the cases where people died in police custody and the reports made about police abuse by countless Malaysians? Hearsay, hearsay!

Now let us look at our judiciary. Have there been any allegations of corruption and judicial misconduct? No, never. Our ‘house of Denmark’ smells of roses! Our judges have always exemplified the highest standards of professionalism, even when they go on holidays with lawyers that they have cases with. All right then, so we have the best judiciary in the world. All appeal cases are heard in record time since there is no backlog in our courts.

Let us not forget, that the poor and marginalised (who seem to constitute a large number of those on death row) always get the best defence lawyers pro-bono. We have a state-run institution that provides for the best lawyers to defend someone’s life right? I am sure we do. Just check with the Legal Aid Centres on the numbers of lawyers lining up to do their part in ensuring everyone gets the best defence possible even if they cannot afford it.

And we have an excellent track record of the Pardons Board, who meets up on a frequent basis to discuss any clemency appeals by those who have exhausted all avenues with the courts. I mean the reports in the papers about them meeting up only in 10-15 years was just a lie, wasn’t it?

Well, since everything is in place that guarantees that only those who are guilty beyond a doubt get the death penalty, I guess the death penalty serves its purpose in getting rid of the scum of society. Therefore, Malaysians have nothing to fear. We live in a perfect society. Only the bad get punished.

But wait a minute... if the death penalty works and we have punished all those people who have committed heinous crimes by taking their lives, why is there an increase in the crime rate? Why are the crimes becoming more heinous by the day? Why isn’t the death penalty preventing all those who continue to commit heinous crimes? Why do people who have been on death row for decades still maintain their innocence, when we know for a fact that our perfect system of justice found them guilty?

In conclusion, the death penalty will always be a contentious issue simply because people delude themselves in thinking that the ‘eye for an eye’ argument make sense and it will provide them with security from the barbarians out there. No amount of data and facts will make them think otherwise.

It is my sincere hope that people educate themselves about the death penalty and evaluate the circumstances in which a person is killed, even if it is state-sanctioned. The death penalty deserves more than just an emotional response to the heinousness of a crime. It needs to go beyond emotions to justify going against the fundamental right of all people – the right to life.

COALITION AGAINST DOG SHOOTING AND OTHER INHUMANE METHODS (CASIM)

MEDIA STATEMENT

COALITION AGAINST DOG SHOOTING AND OTHER INHUMANE METHODS (CASIM)

Endorsed by
SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS (SPCA)
MALAYSIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP (MARPO)
BIVAI SPECIAL DOGS
MALAYSIAN ANIMAL-ASSISTED THERAPHY FOR THE DISABLED & ELDERLY ASSOCIATION (PETSPOSITIVE)
MALAYSIANS AGAINST DEATH PENALTY & TORTURE (MADPET)
PAWS

The Coalition believes that compliance with the city council’s by laws is paramount and that neighbours complaints should be taken into consideration. However we deplore the manner in which the operation was conducted . The tragic end to the 13 dogs lives, that were BRUTALLY shot in their homes, have angered many Malaysians and animal carers all over the world.

The whole shooting massacre, which looks like a bloody crime scene, is a HORRENDOUS, CRUEL and VIOLENT act and the Seremban Municipal should have never taken this merciless route. What if children, the disabled or the elderly were shot as they stepped in to protect the dogs and their property? Is this the way Malaysia wants to be portrayed? Are there no other more humane and non-violent solutions that the Seremban Municipal could have resorted to?

Kind and caring Malaysians have stepped forward to feed and give temporary shelter to many abandoned/stray dogs and cats in the hope of rehoming them. Cases like Mr Eng’s show that sometimes love can be misplaced and misguided.Most municipals lack the infrastructure and capacity to assist these animal carers and the problem is compounded. Municipalities should engage and assist the animal carers who regularly take these animals off their streets.

It is indeed an irony that this tragedy occurred in the Year of the Dog. We hope they did not die in vain as this sad and unfortunate incident has propelled the plight of the SILENT CRIES THAT GO LITTLE HEARD by the majority of Malaysians. Excess dogs are considered garbage and any way to clear them off the streets by any contractor that vouches to do that is employed usually with a price tag of RM 35-50 per dog head.

This coalition demands an END to this indifference and discrimination against dogs and the suffering the dogs endure and vigorously proposes the following reforms and humane options:-


A) AN IMMEDIATE BAN TO SHOOTING AND OTHER INHUMANE METHODS USED IN DOG-CATCHING

1. Other inhumane methods used are wires - where animals have been severely cut in their necks and bodies, ropes- where the dogs are almost strangled to death.

2. Dog Catchers be trained to use humane methods like nets and tranquilizers.

3. The only acceptable and humane method is lethal injection administered by a veterinarian or an authorized person supervised by him.

4. In times of resistance, a mediator be sought to diffuse the situation in a humane, effective and considerate manner. SPCA can assist in this area.


B) THE MUNICIPALITIES ADOPT A MORE EFFECTIVE AND HUMANE ORIENTED MINDSET AND ATTITUDE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF DOG AND CAT OVERPOPULATION

1. Establish a Humane Shelter and Pound where animals can be kept and rehomed. This gives the residents a chance to bring in strays and abandoned animals instead of taking them into their own homes and thus creating neighbourhood problems. SPCA is able to assist in developing humane procedures and guidelines.

2. Establish a high-volume, low-cost spay neuter clinic like DBKL-SPCA Klinik Kembiri (KK) where dogs and cats are spayed at largely reduced rates of RM90 and RM50 respectively. This has been a huge success as the number of prevented dog and cat births in KL reached an unbelievable 2.7m in the 3 years since KK was established!!! (attached is the statistical evidence).This is the cheapest, smartest and most effective pro-active way to prevent over population of unwanted dogs and cats.

The Coalition is willing to embark on a working committee together with a sizable number of Municipalities to provide a wealth of knowledge, experience and expertise in solving this MAN MADE problem.

The Coalition urges all animal carers to be Responsible Pet Owners and spay and neuter their pets to prevent pet overpopulation and to be considerate neighbours as well.

6 July 2006

MADPET(4/7/2006): MALAYSIA BLINDLY ACCEPTS MYTHS PROPAGATED BY DEATH PENALTY RETENTIONISTS

MEDIA STATEMENT – 4/7/2006

MALAYSIA BLINDLY ACCEPTS MYTHS PROPAGATED BY DEATH PENALTY RETENTIONISTS

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is disappointed by the unsubstantiated and false statement made by Datuk M. Kayveas, a Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department when he told Parliament that the death penalty deters serious crimes. This statement, as was reported by Bernama on 28/6/2006, 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 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 Minister also went on to say that there will be no abolition of the death penalty as it “safeguards public interest”. Surely sending someone to death, especially when there is the real possibility that an innocent man can be killed is against the public interest.

He is further reported to have said that "There are enough safeguards in the country's judicial system to ensure that death sentences are not meted out easily,"

What safeguards is the Honourable Deputy Minister speaking of? In Malaysia there is no immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, immediate right to a phone call and no right to full pre-trial disclosure.

Evidence, reports, statements and witnesses obtained during police investigations that may support the accused story or bring to light possible defences to the accused will most likely be suppressed as prosecution officers are only interested in prosecuting. Most jurisdictions in the Commonwealth and elsewhere have made it mandatory for immediate full disclosure to the accused person.

It must be reiterated that even in jurisdictions where all these safeguards exist, the number of persons wrongfully condemned to death have been frighteningly high. Human justice is dangerously fallible, and the only acceptable choice for any civilized nation is to abolish the death penalty.

The fact that a person has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Federal Court, and thereafter to the Pardons Board for clemency is grossly insufficient to justify the keeping of the Death Penalty in our law books. It is laughable that the Deputy Minister even suggested, at this day and time in Malaysia, that thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force is yet another safeguard to prevent miscarriage of justice.

In June 2006 President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a law abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. The number of countries that have done away with the Death Penalty now stands at 123. The worldwide trend has been towards abolition of the death penalty.

The Malaysian government ought to have conducted a thorough study on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the death penalty as a deterent to serious crime before having a Deputy Minister, who is a lawyer, stand up in Paliament and attempt to turn a myth into an empirical truth.

A recent 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.

Further, the Malaysian Bar, which comprises about 12,000 lawyers, is also calling for the abolition of the death penalty.

MADPET calls for an immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition, and the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia.

N. Surendran
Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

4th July 2006

KL Bar: Police mock court order

Ng Eng Kiat
Jun 30, 06 6:38pm (Malaysiakini)


The Kuala Lumpur Bar Committee yesterday slammed the police for re-arresting detainees, who were being held without trial, after they were ordered to be released by the court.

The 13 detainees were detained under the Emergency Ordinance and were freed on a writ of habeas corpus by Kuala Lumpur High Court on Wednesday.

In the drama that unfolded at 6pm two days ago at Simpang Renggam, the 13 detainees - who were being transported on a bus from inside the detention centre to be set freed at the main gate - attempted to run away upon noticing that they would be re-arrested.

Five of the 13 got away after a fracas between the police who were waiting outside the centre and family members who tried to aid the detainees to escape.

The plain-cloth police officers, in the course of apprehending the freed detainees, allegedly injured elderly female family members who were there to welcome back their loved ones.
.
The KL Bar Committee, which represents lawyers in the Federal Territory, also ticked off the police for using excessive force against the family members of the detainees.

Malaysiakini has obtained a five-minute video footage of the incident depicting the unfolding drama, taken with a mobile phone.

No real basis for re-arrest

The New Straits Times today reported that Johor police chief Hussin Ismail claimed the police only intended to re-arrest eight of those being released, and that the five who “got away” were not on their list.

Criminal Practice Committee chairperson N Sivananthan, counsel for the detainees, claimed the police’s explanation only served to show there was no real basis for the re-arrest.

“What is really weird here is the police are now taking the stand that they never wanted to arrest the five in the first place. If this is the reason, why were the eight arrested then? What is so special about the (other) five?” he said during a press conference yesterday.

Baljit Singh Sidhu, a lawyer for the detainees, added that one of those who escaped has identical offences with another who was re-arrested.

“They cannot say they intended to release the five and detain the other eight. First of all, there is no reason to detain anyone because there is a valid court order (for their release),” he said.

According to Baljit, all 13 who are held under the Emergency Ordinance (EO) - a law similar to the Internal Security Act - were suspected of committing petty crimes like theft and extortion.

“There is ordinary court process for these crimes, but they are held under the EO because the police lack of evidence to charge them,” he lamented.

Under the EO, detainees can be held without trial for two years and this can be extended indefinitely.

KL Bar Committee chairperson Lim Chee Wee expressed indignation with the incident and questioned the motive of the police in totally disregarding a release order granted by a court of law.

“There was no disclosure of the grounds of re-arrest. The only recourse for these detainees is a writ of habeas corpus, which is a constitutional right, and to repeat arrest renders such relief ineffective,” Lim said.

A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial mandate to the authorities ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether the person is imprisoned lawfully and whether he should be released from custody.

Re-arrests increasingly a trend

Sivananthan expressed fear that if this practice of re-arresting ‘habeas corpus’ detainees becomes a trend, it would allow the police to abuse their powers.

“It is an easy way out - if I am a police officer, why bother? Put them under the EO, write down the charges and put them there as long as I like. When a lawyer comes along and the court grants a release order, I will re-arrest them,” he said.
Baljit was furious with the police of not informing the detainees’ families about the reasons of the re-arrest, and said the police had obviously taken the law into their own hands.

“The police were there (Simpang Renggam) since 3pm, and they waited for three hours before the detainees came out. Why didn’t they tell the family members ... about the need for re-arrest?” he said.

Baljit also claimed that the police have treated the court with contempt.

Lim concluded that this incident bolsters the Bar Council’s support for the setting up of the controversial Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission.

“We are asking from the authorities details of all the detainees, the reasons why they are there (under EO), and historical records of how many of these detainees are on a second or third re-arrest,” he said.

“The police must be transparent about it and come out with proper guidelines as to the use of such draconian powers that bypass the ordinary court process.”

BERNAMA: No plan to abolish death penalty

Wednesday, 28 June 2006, 20:50

KUALA LUMPUR, June 28 (Bernama) -- The government will not abolish the death penalty for it deters serious crimes and safeguards public interest, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk M. Kayveas said Wednesday.

He said the penalty also reflected the government's seriousness in dealing with heinous crimes.

"There are enough safeguards in the country's judicial system to ensure that death sentences are not meted out easily," he said in a written reply in the Dewan Rakyat.

Kayveas was replying to a question from Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) who had wanted to know whether the government planned to abolish the death sentence.

The death penalty is provided for serious crimes such as murder and drug trafficking.

Kayveas cited thorough investigations carried out by an experienced and effective police force on crimes that carry the death penalty as a safeguard against wrongful detention and trial.

He said the criminal justice system in the country was also matured, independent and fair in its proceedings.

"Criminal cases which carry the death sentence are tried in the higher courts by learned judges.

"A convicted person can file two appeals, that is to the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court," he said.

Failing that, he said, the convicted person can apply to the Pardons Board for clemency.

The Dewan Rakyat sits again Thursday.

Bar Council Press Release: Inmates on death row

Friday, 30 June 2006, 04:16
Reference is made to the report in the New Straits Times today (28/6/06) that several persons on death row have been awaiting execution for many years, in some cases for more than a decade, or even two.

The Bar Council’s position is that capital punishment should be abolished.

No legal system in the world is foolproof or error-free. No matter how procedurally fair the system is, how stringent the rules of evidence may be, how much reliance is placed on advanced and scientific investigation methods, or how many opportunities of appeal are afforded; one cannot rule out the possibility of error. Experience all over the world shows that this possibility is a real and not a theoretical one. Perfection and absolute correctness are neither expected of, nor attainable by, any legal system.

Experience further shows that from time to time the errors made, when subsequently discovered, are promptly remedied. For example, it is reported that in the last 33 years, 125 prisoners who were convicted and sentenced to death in the USA have been subsequently released after evidence had emerged (thankfully before their executions) that they did not commit the crimes. This opportunity to right a wrong will, however, not be available if the death sentence on the person has been carried out; in which event we as a society are collectively responsible for having sent an innocent man or woman to the gallows.

This is one of the reasons why capital punishment is unacceptable, especially in our justice system that has as one of its pillars the belief that it is better for 9 guilty men to walk free than for 1 innocent man to be wrongly convicted; what more if that innocent man is to be put to death.

It is also a myth, unsupported by empirical evidence, that capital punishment operates as a more effective deterrent on crime than, say, life imprisonment.

Death penalty is a cruel and extreme form of punishment. Keeping a person on death row waiting indefinitely or for a long period of time adds to its cruelty. The uncertain and indefinite waiting and fearing for the final moment constitutes inhumane psychological torture, the nature of which those who have not suffered the experience will not even begin to comprehend. It is made worse by the fact that they are kept in solitary confinement most of the time; which means that they have to face the suffering all alone.

We are given to understand that one reason why inmates are kept in limbo for long periods of time is that the clemency process must be exhausted before a death sentence can be carried out. There is long delay in this process, because the Pardons Board convenes infrequently. This issue needs urgent attention, as long as capital punishment remains in our statute books.

The Bar Council renews its call for the abolition of capital punishment, and for a moratorium pending its abolition.

We are aware that a considerable portion of Malaysian society feels that the death penalty should remain, arguing that many (and some will say most) of these inmates have indeed committed heinous crimes, have gone through the legal process, and have been found guilty. In short, the impulsive reaction is that “they deserve it” and “they have to pay for the crimes they committed”.

There is no argument that guilty persons ought to receive punishment. But that is not the same as saying that they therefore ought to die. Even in the case of a convicted murderer, the death penalty is a reflection of the notion that “an eye for an eye” provides the best form of justice, a concept that we no longer embrace nor practise today.

This is not forgetting that from time to time there will be those who are in fact wrongly convicted, no matter how carefully the system operates. Is putting innocent men and women (or even if just one of them) to death, an acceptable feature in our system of justice, because society wishes to punish the guilty ones by employing this most extreme and irredeemable process?

We are glad that Suhakam is looking into the issues concerning capital punishment, and we hope that change will soon come. The Bar Council will be most happy to work with Suhakam on the same.

Dated 28 June 2006

Yeo Yang Poh
Chairman
Bar Council

Mkini: It's the gallows for abolish death penalty call

It's the gallows for abolish death penalty call

Ng Eng Kiat
Jun 28, 06 7:20pm

The government will maintain capital punishment for serious and heavy crimes as it is preventive in nature and protects public interest.

In a parliamentary written reply today, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department M Kayveas said that as such, the death penalty would not be abolished .

Replying to Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) at the Dewan Rakyat, he said the government was strict in dealing with serious crimes, hence the death penalty would remain.

It is also the government’s view that there are enough safeguards to ensure that the death penalty is not simply dished out, he added.

Kayveas said among the existing safeguards was an ‘experienced police force that was efficient in completing thorough investigations’ before someone is accused in court for an offence that carries the death penalty.

Apart from this was a ‘wise and knowledgeable Malaysian judiciary’ which tries cases fairly coupled with fact that those accused of offences that carry the death penalty are only tried in the higher courts, he added.

Review possible

With the existing court hierarchy in Malaysia, those convicted have two chances to appeal their capital punishment sentences, this being at the Appeals Court and the country’s highest court, the Federal Court, said the deputy minister.

Kayveas said those on death row could also bring their cases to the Pardons Board for a review if they have exhausted all avenues of judicial appeal.

The Malaysian Bar Council had, in March this year, passed a resolution calling for the death penalty to be abolished and for a moratorium on all executions.

Malaysia remains one of the 74 countries yet to abolish capital punishment while 123 other countries have.

NST: LONG WAIT TO DIE

Wednesday, 28 June 2006, 08:11
©New Straits Times
By Tony Emmanuel

KUALA LUMPUR: They are Malaysia's forgotten convicts - prisoners who have spent more than two decades on Death Row awaiting their tryst with death.

Among this group is a man who has been awaiting execution for 22 years, since the age of 26.

The authorities are tight-lipped on why these men have yet to be executed, but the New Straits Times understands that a combination of administrative hitches and delays in handing down written court judgements have kept these criminals in solitary confinement for years.

Usually, those sentenced to death spend up to 10 years exhausting the appeals and clemency process. But when a team from the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) visited Death Row in Kajang Prison to investigate the death of Alex Wong, there were several prisoners who had been awaiting execution for nearly two decades.

Suhakam is concerned whether these death row prisoners — convicted of murder, drug trafficking and firearm possession offences — are receiving two distinct punishments: the death sentence and years of living in solitary confinement.

It also wants to know whether executing someone after prolonged periods on death row violates the Constitution and the principles of justice.

There has been a debate in the United States and England on the length of time convicts spend on Death Row. In 1993, a British court found that it was inhuman and degrading to hang anyone who has spent more than five years on death row. It argued that such prisoners should have their sentences commuted to life in prison.

In the US, some death row inmates have spent more than 20 years awaiting execution and several prisoners were executed when they were in their 80s.

The Suhakam study also covers those being held in remand for long periods and those held at the pleasure of the Rulers.

Suhakam Commissioners are expected to seek the help of the Bar Council in compiling their report.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Waiting for date with the hangman

In 1993, a British court found that it was inhuman and degrading to hang anyone who had spent more than five years on Death Row. In Malaysia, one man has been on Death Row for 22 long years...

KUALA LUMPUR: One was sent to the gallows for firearms possession, another for multiple murders and the remaining three for drug trafficking.

In all, the five have spent a combined 70 years in jail. They are among those on death row who have been waiting a long time for their date with the hangman.

One of the drug traffickers was arrested in 1978. He was convicted and sentenced to death 14 years later. He remains in Kajang Prison.

The last time he was out of jail Tun Hussein Onn was Malaysia’s third prime minister and Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman was still known as Batu Road.

Another long time resident on Death Row is an individual convicted for firearms possession. He has spent the past 16 years behind bars.

The prisoner convicted of multiple murders has spent almost 10 years on death row. He is now seeking legal advice on options available to him.

MADPET(29/5/06) POLICE ATTACKS ON PEACEFUL PROTESTERS MUST END

MEDIA STATEMENT – 29/5/2006

POLICE ATTACKS ON PEACEFUL PROTESTERS MUST END
-Take action against policeman who used tear-gas gun butt on protester’s head-

MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty & Torture) is shocked by the conduct of the Malaysian police who forcibly dispersed a peaceful assembly of about 500 persons on Sunday(28/5/2006) at Kuala Lumpur City Centre(KLCC) using brutal and excessive force. These persons were there at about 10.30am in front of the Kuala Lumpur Twin Towers exercising their constitutionally guaranteed right of peaceful protest and legitimate dissent. This group included women and children. They were there expressing their opposition to the recent fuel hikes and the increase in electric tariffs, which were adversely affecting the majority of Malaysians.

In total disregard of their fundamental rights, these brave Malaysians were fired upon by an FRU(Federal Reserve Unit) water cannon and subjected to unreasonable force by FRU and plainclothes police personnel under the direction of the OCPD of Dang Wangi police district ACP Kamal Pasha.

The manner in which the police used violence on the crowd which resulted in about 3 persons suffering head injuries is deplorable and completely unacceptable. One victim was kicked and beaten by police in front of his two young daughters.

Possibly the most shocking image to emerge from the violent action of the police on Sunday 28th May 2006 is that of an FRU officer apparently using the using the butt end of his tear-gas canister launcher on the naked head of a protester. This is reminiscent of South Africa during the days of the Apartheid regime. This horrifying image, which will long endure in the minds of all peace-loving Malaysians, is itself an eloquent argument for the immediate formation of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission(IPCMC).

We demand that immediate action be taken against the policeman who used the butt end of the tear gas launcher to assault a protester , ACP Kamal Pasha and all other policemen responsible for the 28th May attack on peaceful protesters. We also demand that the IPCMC be immediately set up in order to protect citizens of Malaysia from the unlawful acts of the police.

Charles Hector
N. Surendran

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)
29th May 2006

MADPET(10/5/06):-OPPOSE DEATH PENALTY FOR WATER OFFENCES

OPPOSE DEATH PENALTY FOR WATER OFFENCES

MADPET (MALAYSIANS AGAINST DEATH PENALTY AND TORTURE) calls for the immediate removal of the clauses imposing the death penalty in the Water Services Industry Bill 2006, which came up for second reading in Parliament today(10/5/2006).

Section 121, under Part X : General Offences and Penalties of this Bill, which deals with the offence of water contamination provides that “…a person who contaminates or causes to be contaminated any watercourse or the water supply system or any part of the watercourse or water supply system with any substance (a) with the intention to cause death; (b) with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death; or (c) which would likely endanger the life of any person ….[and]… where death results shall be punished with death or imprisonment…”

The Malaysian Bar, a body representing over 12,000 Malaysian lawyers, at its 60th Annual General Meeting held on 18/3/2006 passed a Resolution calling for the abolition of the death penalty in Malaysia, an immediate moratorium on all executions pending abolition and the commutation of the sentences of all persons currently on death row.

It must be pointed out that a recent 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 Water Bill and all other laws of Malaysia.

It is ironic that at a time when the nations of the world are rapidly moving towards abolition of the death penalty, Malaysia is once again unnecessarily and imprudently extending the range of capital offences. An average of three countries have abolished the death penalty each year over the last decade 122 countries have abolished capital punishment in law or practice as opposed to 74 countries which retain the death penalty;

We therefore call on all Parliamentarians, from both the Barisan National ruling coalition and the Opposition, who value human rights, justice and mercy to immediately cause the removal of the provisions that provide for the sentence of death.

N. Surendran
Salbiah Ahmad
Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

10th May 2006

Death to Malaysian Water Contaminators?

DEATH PENALTY:
Death to Malaysian Water Contaminators?

Anil Netto

PENANG, May 8 (IPS) - While there is a global trend toward abolishing the death penalty, the Malaysian government is set to add more entries to its list of capital offences -- like contamination of water and rape.

A new Water Services Industry Bill is one of two water-related bills due for a second reading in parliament this week. The bill seeks to revamp the way water is managed in the country, transferring control of state water authorities and privatised firms to a single federal regulatory body.

But it also provides for capital punishment for serious cases of water contamination that result in loss of life.

Anyone who contaminates the water supply with the intention of endangering lives or causing death could face the death penalty. The death penalty could also apply to those who contaminate the water supply with any substance that would likely endanger lives.

Opponents of the law believe the proposed rules are draconian and unworkable. Moreover, they do not address the real causes of water pollution.

"Most of the time, the real offenders are likely to be companies and you can't hang the companies," said Charles Hector, a human rights lawyer who was one of the coordinators of the campaign network Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET). "So who would face the death penalty then -- the chairman of the board? All the directors? The general manager? The administrative officer? It's absurd."

Hector told IPS there was no need to add to the death penalty laws as there are already provisions in the penal code that cover the intention to kill someone. "Besides," he added, "we are against the death penalty as it doesn't address the real issues."

More than half the rivers in Malaysia are polluted by raw or partially treated sewage as well as industrial effluents, agricultural run-offs, waste from animal husbandry and land development, and municipal rubbish.

These can pollute sources of drinking water. After a flood in February, residents around Kuala Lumpur complained of smelly water coming from their taps. A common complaint at other times is of murky water in parts of the country.

The soaring costs of maintaining the rivers prompted the government of the developed state of Selangor to announce in February that it would privatise three key rivers to firms, which would be tasked with ensuring their cleanliness. Critics argue that this is not the solution as the sources of river pollution have to be tackled.

The new water bills are being tabled at a time when the private sector has been eyeing a larger stake in water treatment, supply and distribution.

Top officials at the Energy, Water and Telecommunications Ministry could not be reached for comment about the provision for the death penalty despite several attempts. That leaves Malayasians only speculating why that provision was added.

"I think the death penalty was included because they had terrorists in mind" who might deliberately contaminate water sources, opposition Parliamentarian Teresa Kok told IPS, adding, however, that she was opposed to the death penalty.

Others have a different view. "It seems that the intention of the bill is merely to randomly prosecute harshly some nobodies to give an impression something is being done," was one comment in response to a blog entry on the issue at the popular website, Malaysia Today.

By including the death penalty in the bill before parliament, Malaysia is bucking a global trend against capital punishment. It is one of 74 countries where the death penalty is still allowed, while 123 countries have abolished capital punishment.

In contrast, Malaysia's neighbour, the Philippines, commuted the death sentences of all prisoners last month. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has appealed to the Philippine Congress to abolish the death penalty, while Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban has described the country's death penalty laws as unconstitutional.

In Malaysia, however, the death penalty remains mandatory for drug trafficking (including possession), murder, certain firearms offences and offences against the king.

The majority of the death sentences meted out are for drug trafficking. Out of 52 people sentenced to death from 2004 until July 2005, 36 were convicted for drug offences. Last December, Deputy Internal Security Minister Chia Kwang Chye said that from 1960 through last October, 434 convicts were hanged while 172 cases were pending appeal.

But despite the country's tough stance, the drug menace remains serious. For MADPET, that proves that capital punishment is not the solution. It has never been proven that the death penalty effectively deters crime, the group says.

Parliamentarian Kok, however, is under no illusions that it will be easy to abolish capital punishment. She was a member of a Parliamentary select committee, made up predominantly of ruling coalition members, which traveled the country in 2004 seeking public views on proposed amendments to the penal code and criminal procedure code, which will be brought to Parliament on Thursday.

During the hearings, she said she got the impression that public sentiment was in favour of the death penalty. "The problem is that many among the public still want the death penalty in cases where the victim loses his or her life."

Kok told IPS that among proposed amendments to the codes is the provision for the death penalty for any act of terrorism involving the "release of poisonous substances into the environment". The death penalty would also be handed out to those found guilty of rape resulting in the death of the victim.

Kok pointed out that when the cabinet minister responsible for the law, Nazri Aziz, spoke out against the death penalty in March, he did not receive much support from his ruling coalition colleagues. "For me, a life is a life. No one has the right to take someone else's life, even if that person has taken another life," he had said.

Public opinion may be changing though. Nazri's comments were in response to an unprecedented resolution opposing the death penalty by the Malaysian Bar Council, the governing body for the country's 12,000 lawyers, at its annual general meeting on Mar. 18. The resolution, calling for the death penalty to be abolished and for a moratorium on all executions, was passed by a thumping 105-2 majority, with 21 abstentions.

And, during a recent morning talk show programme aired on state-run television station RTM2, a cell phone text message poll showed that just over 60 percent of those who responded supported the abolition of capital punishment. (FIN/2006)

MALAYSIA:Justice Minister backs abolition of death penalty

21 March, 2006

MALAYSIA
Justice Minister backs abolition of death penalty

For Nazri Aziz “a life is a life. No one has the right to take someone else's life, even if that person is a murderer”. From 1970 to the present, 359 people have been condemned to death; 159 are on death row.



Kuala Lumpur (AsiaNews/Agencies) – The Malaysian Justice Minister has said he supports abolishing Malaysia's death penalty. "For me, a life is a life. No one has the right to take someone else's life, even if that person has taken another life," Nazri Aziz, minister in charge of law, was quoted as saying to a local newspaper.

The minister’s statement comes as the Malaysian Bar Council launched a campaign for abolishment of the death penalty: “I welcome this proposal. This is definitely something which should be looked into.”

The Council said the death penalty is “barbaric, inhumane and an insufficient deterrent for crime”, and called for an immediate moratorium on all death sentences.

But the minister said this would not be possible: “The death sentence has been part of our laws for a long time. It goes with the fabric of the whole system. After discussions are held, hopefully the attorney general will advise the government.”

Malaysia is one of 76 countries which still impose the death penalty. It is mandatory for murder, for trafficking in heroin, cocaine, opium and marijuana, and for offences against the king. In the national penal code, possession of drugs is presumed to be trafficking.

At his discretion, a judge can also hand down the death penalty – administered by hanging – for crimes like kidnapping, associating with people carrying arms or explosives and waging war against the ruler.

Since 1970, Malaysia has hanged 359 people, 40 of them in the last 10 years. Most were convicted of drug trafficking. There are 159 prisoners on death row.