Wednesday, June 25, 2025

World Drug Day(26th June) - Abolish Life Imprisonment and Death Penalty for DRUG offences

 

Media Statement (World Drug Day) – 26/6/2025

Abolish Life Imprisonment and Death Penalty for DRUG offences

On the occasion of the World Drug Day (26th June), MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) applauds Malaysia for the elimination of the mandatory death penalty for the offence of drug trafficking, which now finally allows judges, after convicting a person of the offence of drug trafficking, do have the option to sentence persons convicted of drug trafficking offence to life imprisonment and whipping, other than death. This was made possible after the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023.

An Oversight Which Still Provides for Life Imprisonment for Drug Trafficking Should Be Speedily Dealt With

However, there was an oversight, when the alternative imprisonment sentence for drug trafficking remains the life imprisonment, when MADPET believed that ‘life imprisonment’ should have been amended to 30 to 40 years imprisonment, which MADPET hope Malaysia should speedily do the needed amendment. This is inconsistent, as all other previously mandatory capital offence, now carry an alternative sentence of imprisonment – not the life imprisonment, which was also abolished with the mandatory death penalty.

Section 39B(2) still today reads ‘(2) Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and shall be punished on conviction with death or imprisonment for life and shall, if he is not sentenced to death, be punished with whipping of not less than twelve strokes.’

Until that ‘imprisonment for life’ for drug trafficking is speedily amended to a range like 30 to 40 years imprisonment, Courts will have a problem when they chose the alternative to death sentence, they still have to sentence convicted drug traffickers to ‘imprisonment for life’.

Now, some courts have been since sentencing drug traffickers to 30 to 40 years imprisonment, and not imprisonment for life, which is JUST but still could be seen as illegal when this Drug law specifically provides the alternative punishment of ‘imprisonment for life’ for the crime of drug trafficking.

MADPET believes that the offence of drug trafficking ought to broken up to provide for different types of drug trafficking offences with different sentences. ‘Mules’ arrested with drugs in their possession should be subjected to much lesser sentences, compared to kingpins or bosses, that manufacture, sell, or arrange distribution networks. Rather that fixing the minimum imprisonment term at 30 years, it may be just to set it at no more than 5 years, or simply not fixing any minimum term of imprisonment, and leaving it to judges to determine the appropriate just sentence for each particular case.

DRUG OFFENCES and Death Row

In November 2023 in Malaysia, on death row, there were 840 for drug offences, and 435 for other offences – about 65% because of drug offence – drug trafficking.  Now, in January 2025, only 40 are on death row for drug offences, and another 100 for other offences – about 28% on death row for drug offences (Malay Mail, 5/4/2025)

This happened not only because of the Abolition Of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, but more importantly the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction Of The Federal Court) Act 2023 that allowed the Federal Court temporary special jurisdiction to consider the application of death row inmates, who had already exhausted all appeals, to review their death sentence.

“… 814 individuals were granted a reduction of their death sentences to imprisonment through hearings under the Death Penalty and Life Imprisonment Review (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 [Act 847], which came into effect on September 12, 2023,” she[Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said] said in a parliamentary written reply to Bukit Gelugor MP Ramkarpal Singh Deo.[Malay Mail, 6/11/2024]

After the Abolition Of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, courts hearing appeals could also change death sentences in appropriate cases to the imprisonment sentence. The Minister also said “Of that number, 52 were prisoners at the appeal stage who were granted a reduction of their death sentences to imprisonment….’ .[Malay Mail, 6/11/2024]

Likewise, now courts hearing drug trafficking case could now avail themselves to the alternative to death sentences if the accused had been found guilty.

Despite The Abolition Of Mandatory Death Penalty, Persons Still Being Sentenced To Death..

Although Malaysia abolished the MANDATORY death penalty, the death penalty still exists in all these offences. The only difference, is that now, upon conviction, judges have the option of sentencing to death, OR imposing the alternative imprisonment plus whipping sentence.

The problem is that some Judges/Courts, despite the abolition of mandatory death penalty, still continues to impose the death penalty, both after trial at the court of first instance, or the appeals following.

In November 2024, the Minister acknowledged this. ‘Azalina noted that 18 individuals received new death sentences — 12 from the High Court and six from the Court of Appeal.’ [Malay Mail, 6/11/2024]

This means that there will still be death row prisoners, and the numbers will rise in time – and there is NO possible way on how to deal with this existing and new death row prisoners.

Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction Of The Federal Court) Act 2023 only gave TEMPORARY powers to the Federal Court, and effectively now is a ‘DEAD Act’ – as persons in death row cannot anymore apply for a revision of their death penalty.

In Indonesia, at the end of 2022, their revised Criminal Code introduced an automatic 10-year probation for convicts on death row to demonstrate good behavior for the possibility of having their sentences commuted. This law will take effect on January 2, 2026.

MADPET urges Malaysia to revive the Federal Court’s jurisdiction to be able to revise death penalty of those on death row, who have already exhausted their appeals. Those on death row ought to be allowed to make applications, maybe once every 2 years or when circumstances warrant such an application.

MADPET also reiterates for the abolition of the death penalty, noting Malaysia’s commitment to the world at large to have a moratorium on execution pending abolition of the death penalty. Malaysia voted in favor of the UN General Assembly Resolution in 2018, 2020, 2022 and 2024 which is also Malaysia’s commitment to abolish the death penalty.

No Public Outcry Indicates Malaysia’s Readiness For Total Abolition Of Death Penalty

There was no public outcry when the mandatory death penalty was abolished. Likewise, there was no outcry when dead sentence was commuted to imprisonment plus whipping, and as such it is a positive indicator that Malaysia and Malaysians are ready for the abolition of the death penalty.

A possible next step is the abolition of death penalty for offences that does not directly result in death or grievous bodily harm to any victim/s.

Drug offences are one such category of offences, where death penalty ought to be abolished.

Statutory Denial of Bail Must be Abolished – Let Courts decide on Bail

Section 41B(1) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952[DDA] now states that ‘Bail shall not be granted to an accused person charged with an offence under this Act – (a) where the offence is punishable with death; or….’. The 39B Drug Trafficking offence carries the sentence of death OR life imprisonment, and as such BAIL, by law, cannot be granted.

Yusoff Rawther, and 7 others in 3 different cases, from February this year, who had languish in detention for months, and the worst for more than 5 years because of this denial of bail, ended up being found not guilty and acquitted (NST, 6/3/2025) (The Star, 14/3/2025) (NST, 12/2/2025). This were only the media reported cases, and so there can be more.

It is a gross miscarriage of justice for these innocent persons to have suffered prolonged pre-conviction detention because the Statute, not judges, denied them bail. MADPET reiterates the call for the repeal of statutory provisions that deny bail, and ask that judges be restored that Judges be restored the jurisdiction to hear and decide on all bail applications.

DNAA If Trial Cannot Speedily Begin and End

What is of great concern is the delay of commencement and ending of criminal trials, more so for those who have to suffer pre-conviction detention in Malaysia’s already overcrowded prisons. Recently, in former Prime Minister Najib’s trial, where there was delay in starting and ending trial, the courts DISCHARGED Najib – a Discharge Not Amounting To Acquittal (DNAA).

MADPET asks for similar DNAA for all pre-conviction or remand prisoners, be it for drug offences of other offences, to ensure Malaysia’s Constitutional guarantee under Article 8(1) ‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.’

If trial cannot start within 3 months, they should all be DISCHARGED, and this will not be prejudicial to State who can at anytime re-charge them when prosecution is ready to start and end trial speedily. Justice Delayed is Justice Denied also applies to the presumed innocent accused persons, especially those subjected to pre-conviction or remand detention.

MADPET also reiterates for the abolition of whipping, more so since the recent case where a person died after being whipped.

In dealing with the DRUG problem, it seems obvious that death penalty or heavy penalties have not solved the problem of drug use and abuse. Thus, States should look at real causes of addiction, mostly done voluntarily, and deal with it in more effective ways like education.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

Two years after abolishing the mandatory death penalty, data shows Malaysia may be moving on for good

Data presented in Parliament during the February-March sitting showed a sharp increase in commutations of existing death sentences in the six months after Putrajaya repealed the mandatory death penalty, as death row inmates filed appeals for resentencing and judges granted them. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa
Data presented in Parliament during the February-March sitting showed a sharp increase in commutations of existing death sentences in the six months after Putrajaya repealed the mandatory death penalty, as death row inmates filed appeals for resentencing and judges granted them. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa

KUALA LUMPUR, April 5 — Within two years year of the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim administration abolishing the mandatory death penalty, the number of death row inmates has plunged by nearly 90 per cent, the clearest sign yet that Malaysia is moving away from capital punishment — even as it remains legal.

Data presented in Parliament during the February-March sitting this year showed a sharp increase in commutations of existing death sentences in the six months after Putrajaya repealed the mandatory death penalty.

This comes as death row inmates filed appeals for resentencing and judges granted them.

Most sentences were commuted to prison terms of between 20 and 40 years, with the latter often reserved for serious crimes such as murder.
Flourish logoA Flourish chart

Rapid speed in resentencing

In January 2024, there were 1,275 death row inmates, with 936 awaiting their resentencing applications. By January 1 this year, the total number of death row inmates had dropped to just 140 — a staggering 87 per cent decline.

The data reflects the speed at which judges commuted these sentences, slashing resentencing cases by over half by July 2024 before clearing most of them as the year progressed.

Just 50 death sentences were retained

A total of 860 death sentences were commuted within 12 months, with just 50 retained. Meanwhile, courts struck out 22 applications on administrative grounds, barring them from reapplying.

Four inmates, however, died in prison before their resentencing applications could be approved.

Some drug offenders remained on death row

While the data shows judges largely retained death sentences for murder cases, dozens of drug offenders were not spared.

Still, the number of death row inmates convicted for drug trafficking dropped significantly by January 1 this year, from 840 a year earlier to just 40 — the highest rate of commutations among all offences.

In contrast, death sentences for homicide had the highest rate of retention. On January 1, 2024, there were 435 death row inmates convicted of murder, with 335 of them having their sentences commuted 12 months later.

A total of 100 death sentences were retained.

By gender, male death row inmates had the highest rate of sentence retention, at 137. Only three of the remaining death row inmates are women.

Progress made, but gaps remain

Anti-capital punishment groups such as Hayat, which works with families of death row inmates, said the data signals progress but also highlights gaps.

For instance, the absence of written judgments for resentencing cases was a missed opportunity to provide guidance for fair and just sentencing discretion, the group said.

There is also ambiguity around resentencing for juvenile offenders and those with mental health conditions. Laws governing sentencing for these groups still allow for indefinite imprisonment and the death penalty.

Another issue is whipping, which was not repealed despite the move to abolish the mandatory death penalty. Human rights groups have described whipping as inhumane. - Malay Mail, 5/4/2025

Over 800 death row sentences commuted to imprisonment under new Act, says Azalina

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said 866 individuals received reduced sentences from the Federal Court between Jan 1 and Oct 14, 2024. — Bernama pic
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said 866 individuals received reduced sentences from the Federal Court between Jan 1 and Oct 14, 2024. — Bernama pic

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 6 — More than 800 death row inmates in Malaysia have had their sentences commuted to imprisonment under the new Death Penalty and Life Imprisonment Review Act 2023.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said 866 individuals received reduced sentences from the Federal Court between Jan 1 and Oct 14, 2024.

“Of that number, 52 were prisoners at the appeal stage who were granted a reduction of their death sentences to imprisonment.

“Additionally, another 814 individuals were granted a reduction of their death sentences to imprisonment through hearings under the Death Penalty and Life Imprisonment Review (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 [Act 847], which came into effect on September 12, 2023,” she said in a parliamentary written reply to Bukit Gelugor MP Ramkarpal Singh Deo.

Ramkarpal had asked the Prime Minister’s Department for the number of individuals newly sentenced to death from January 1 to October 14 this year, and the number of death penalty commutations during the same period.

Azalina noted that 18 individuals received new death sentences — 12 from the High Court and six from the Court of Appeal. - Malay Mail, 6/11/2024

 

World Drug Day [26 June] 70 Groups say UNODC and CND should take urgent action against death penalty for drugs

 

25 June 2025

UNODC and CND should take urgent action against death penalty for drugs 

On the occasion of the 2025 International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, also known as World Drug Day, on 26 June – which also marks the Support Don’t Punish Global Day of Action – we, the undersigned 70 organisations call on the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) to unequivocally condemn the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences and take concrete steps to ensure that international human rights safeguards restricting the imposition of this cruel punishment are fully implemented, with a view to its full abolition. The continued failure to take a stand against the death penalty by these UN bodies mandated to oversee the development and implementation of international drug policies contributes to a lack of transparency and accountability for these human rights violations, and risks being interpreted as tolerance or even complicity at a critical moment when drug-related executions are in an unprecedented rise.

The death penalty for drug-related offences: executions on the rise in a handful of countries

The death penalty is retained for drug-related offences in at least 34 countries. Although official information on the use of the death penalty is not publicly available for many countries, research carried out independently and separately by our organisations indicates that this punishment is mostly imposed for offences related to the cultivation, manufacturing, trafficking or importing/exporting of controlled substances.

Drug-related executions have been increasing in recent years. In 2024, Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International recorded over 600 drug-related executions, which constituted around 40% of total executions globally (1,518) and a 25% increase on the known total executions for these offences in 2023 (508 out of 1,153), making 2024 the deadliest year on record since 2015. These figures show that punitive drug policies have become a significant driver of the use of capital punishment both globally and in many countries individually.

Drug-related executions were known to have been carried out in four countries in 2024: Iran, Singapore, Saudi Arabia and China. In China, official sources confirmed drug-related executions, but state censorship and lack of transparency did not make it possible to establish a credible figure. The authorities of Iran carried out approximately 500 executions for drug-related offences in 2024, the majority of executions confirmed nationally, according to figures by the Abdorrahman Boroumand Centre, Iran Human Rights and others. These constituted 79% of the known global totals for drug-related executions. In Saudi Arabia, the number of drug-related executions (122) constituted 35% of the national total and an alarming rise from the only two recorded in 2023. In Singapore, eight out of 9 executions carried out over the year were drug-related. Civil society monitoring also suggests that drug-related executions were carried out in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Viet Nam, but could not confirm it due to restrictive state practices.

Amnesty International and Harm Reduction International recorded at least 337 new death sentences known to have been imposed for drug-related offences in at least 13 countries in 2024: Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Laos, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Viet Nam, and Yemen. In addition to these, Harm Reduction International recorded death sentences for drug-related offences in Egypt, North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Thailand. It is estimated that at least 2,300 people were on death row for drug offences in 19 countries at the end of 2024; though actual figures are likely to be significantly higher.

Attempts to discuss or introduce the death penalty as punishment for drug-related offences were also recorded in some countries in 2024, including Fiji, the Maldives, Nigeria and Tonga.

However, recent developments in several Asian countries suggest that, in the long term and with sufficient political will, a significant decrease in the global resort to the death penalty for drug-related offences is possible. Among other examples, in July 2023, Pakistan repealed the death penalty for drug-related offences; the first country to do so in over a decade; and in April 2025, the Ministry of Public Security of Viet Nam proposed repealing the death penalty in the Penal Code for eight crimes, including drug trafficking. The 2023 repeal of the mandatory death penalty Malaysia resulted in the commutation of more than 1,000 death sentences, with none of the more than 40 sentences confirmed by the Federal Court relating to drug trafficking.

A clear violation of international human rights law and standards

International human rights law and standards restrict the use of the death penalty to the “most serious crimes”, which do not include drug-related offences. Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Safeguard No.1 of the UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, adopted through UN Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50, provide that the imposition of the death penalty must be restricted to the “most serious crimes”. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that “The term ‘the most serious crimes’ must be read restrictively and appertain only to crimes of extreme gravity, involving intentional killing. Crimes not resulting directly and intentionally in death, such as […] drug and sexual offences, although serious in nature, can never serve as the basis, within the framework of article 6, for the imposition of the death penalty. […].” In a 2023 report to the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights highlighted that “[d]rug-related offences can never serve as the basis for the imposition of the death penalty”.

The three UN Drug Conventions do not make any reference to the death penalty, while several UN human rights and drug control bodies have reiterated the total opposition to the death penalty, including for drug-related offences. The UN Common Position on Drugs has reiterated in unequivocal terms that the application of the death penalty for drug-related offences does not respect the spirit of the UN Drug Conventions and has the potential to become an obstacle to effective cross-border and international cooperation against drug trafficking. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) has also noted that the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences is in breach of the UN Drug Conventions and a violation of international human rights law, and has called on States that still retain this punishment for drug-related offences to consider abolishing it for such offences and commuting death sentences that have already been imposed.11 More broadly, the INCB has stressed that respect for human rights is a prerequisite for the implementation of the UN Drug Conventions, and that measures adopted with the purported aim of furthering drug policy that are inconsistent with universally recognised human rights norms are a violation of the Conventions.

WORLD DRUG DAY AND THE DEATH PENALTY

World Drug Day is an initiative designed to encourage international cooperation to address the risks and harms of drugs. However, this day has unfortunately been used by various governments to promote highly punitive approaches as the authorities display “zero tolerance” and “iron-fist on drug crime” stances. In some retentionist countries, World Drug Day has been used to support an increased resort to the death penalty or even to ramp up drugrelated executions. For example, World Drug Day has been a regular hook for Chinese courts, including the Supreme People’s Court, to issue judicial guidelines on how to apply the death penalty for drugrelated offences. The authorities of Iran have also reaffirmed on World Drug Day their strong resolve to act as “the flag bearer of the global fight against narco-traffickers and death dealers”.

Meanwhile, the publication of the World Drug Report, launched by UNODC every year on 26 June, presents a unique opportunity for UNODC to publicly condemn the application of the death penalty for drug-related offences and recommend concrete measures that states that still retain this cruel punishment can implement to align their domestic policies with international human rights law and standards.

Our organizations reiterate our call on all international drug control mechanisms, including the CND and UNODC, to consistently incorporate death penalty abolition (and human rights more generally) into their work, including in connection with the World Drug Day. In particular, we urge the CND to establish a standing item in its agenda to address the human rights impacts of drug policies; and for UNODC to ensure that human rights are part of its constant monitoring work, including through the inclusion of a specific chapter on human rights in its yearly World Drug Report.

The continued and unequivocal public condemnation by UNODC and the CND of the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences would be critical, in the long term, to change the perception of this issue and foster a context for discussions that puts the protection of human rights at the core of international and national drug control policies.

co-signed by:

  • ACAT Germany (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)
  • ACEID (Costa Rica)
  • Africa Network of People Who Use Drugs [AfricaNPUD]
  • AIVL-Australian Injecting & Illicit Drug Users League
  • ALQST for Human Rights
  • Amnesty International
  • Añadir REPECAP – Academicsforabolition. Spain
  • Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network
  • Association for Humane Drug Policy, Norway
  • Capital Punishment Justice Project
  • Center of Legal and Social Studies (CELS)
  • Colegio de Abogados y Abogadas de Puerto Rico
  • Corporación Acción Técnica Social – Colombia
  • Corporación Viso Mutop- Colombia
  • Corporacion Viviendo
  • DITSHWANELO – The Botswana Centre for Human Rights
  • Drug Policy Alliance
  • DRUGZ (https://drugz.fr/ ; France)
  • drustvo AREAL (Slovenia)
  • ECPM (Together against the death penalty)
  • Elementa – Colombia and Mexico
  • European Network of People who Use Drugs (EuroNPUD)
  • European Saudi Organization for Human Rights
  • Groupement Romand d’Études des Addictions (GREA), Switzerland
  • German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)
  • HUMANITY DIASPO
  • Human Rights Dallas
  • Hands off Cain
  • Harm Reduction International
  • Harm Reduction Malta
  • Harm Reduction Nurses Association (HRNA)
  • HAYAT
  • Health and Opportunity Network (HON)
  • HIV Legal Network, Canada
  • IDUCARE, Philippines
  • Indonesian Drug Policy Reform Network (Jaringan Reformasi Kebijakan Narkotika)
  • Institute for the Rule of Law of the International Association of Lawyers (UIA-IROL)
  • Instituto RIA, AC (México)
  • Intercambios Puerto Rico
  • International Center for Ethnobotanical Education, Research and Service (ICEERS), Spain
  • International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
  • International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC)
  • International Network of People who Use Drugs (INPUD)
  • International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
  • Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO)
  • Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC)
  • The Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ Kenya)
  • Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat
  • Lifepark (Switzerland) – movement against the death penalty
  • MADPET (Malaysian Against Death Penalty and Torture)
  • Mainline (Netherlands)
  • Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN)
  • Menahra
  • MANAS (Portugal)
  • Mantes la Galette (France)
  • My Brain My Choice Initiative (Germany)
  • Organisation for the Prevention of Intense Suffering (OPIS)
  • Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA)
  • Release (UK)
  • Reprieve
  • Responsible Business Initiative for Justice
  • Skoun, Lebanese Addictions Center
  • Southern Methodist University Human Rights Program
  • StoptheDrugWar.org (US)
  • Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty
  • Transnational Institute (TNI)
  • WHRIN
  • Witness to Innocence
  • Women Beyond Walls
  • World Coalition Against the Death Penalty 

Tuesday, June 17, 2025

Extend term of Suhakam official probing prison abuse, govt told(FMT)

 


Extend term of Suhakam official probing prison abuse, govt told

NGO also urges Putrajaya against extending the tenure of two Suhakam commissioners who are also active Umno leaders.

Suhakam commissioner Mariati Robert is on a three-member panel holding a public inquiry into alleged human rights violations at Taiping prison. (Suhakam pic)
PETALING JAYA:
An NGO has urged the government to extend the tenure of Suhakam commissioner Mariati Robert, who is on a panel investigating alleged human rights violations at Taiping prison.

Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) pointed out that the first phase of Suhakam’s inquiry had just ended on June 12, and the second phase will be held from June 23 to 26.

However, it said Mariati’s term as Suhakam commissioner expires on June 22, alongside those of fellow office-holders Noor Aziah Awal, Nordin Ibrahim, K Ragunath, Chew Chee Ming, Hasnal Rezua Merican Habib Merican and Nazira Abdul Rahim.

Noor Aziah is serving her second and final term as a Suhakam commissioner while the rest, including Mariati, are eligible to be appointed for a second term.

“Given that Mariati’s term ends soon, the public inquiry is at risk if she is not reappointed for another three-year term.

“If not, the public inquiry may have to start again, as all three commissioners on the panel need to hear and consider all evidence and make a decision independently,” Madpet said in a statement.

The other two on the panel investigating the incident at Taiping prison, which is said to have led to the death of one inmate and injury to several others, are Suhakam chairman Hishamudin Yunus and commissioner Farah Nini Dusuki.

Madpet urged Putrajaya not to extend the tenures of Hasnal and Nazira, citing their roles as active members and leaders in Umno. Hasnal is the Selayang Umno chief while Nazira heads the women’s wing of the Kulim Umno division.

The NGO also suggested that the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act be amended so that a Suhakam commissioner’s term of office is raised from three years to six, with no provision for reappointment or term extension.

“This will strengthen the independence of Suhakam commissioners, who are expected to act without fear or favour for human rights. They should not be afraid of angering the prime minister or the government of the day,” it said.

It also said the role of the prime minister and government in the appointment of Suhakam commissioners should be removed and allocated instead to Parliament or another independent body. FMT, 16/6/2025

See Full Statement:-  

No new SUHAKAM Commissioners as 2022-2025 Batch’s term ends on 22nd June – RISK to ongoing SUHAKAM Public Inquiry on Rights Violation by Prison Officers that resulted in 1 death

Monday, June 16, 2025

No new SUHAKAM Commissioners as 2022-2025 Batch’s term ends on 22nd June – RISK to ongoing SUHAKAM Public Inquiry on Rights Violation by Prison Officers that resulted in 1 death(MADPET)

 

Media Statement – 16/6/2025

No new SUHAKAM Commissioners as 2022-2025 Batch’s term ends on 22nd June – RISK to ongoing SUHAKAM Public Inquiry on Rights Violation by Prison Officers that resulted in 1 death

PM and government’s role in appointment, reappointment and removal of HR Commissioners need to be removed

The 3-year term of most SUHAKAM Commissioners of the 2022-2025 batch, that began on 22/6/2022, will end on or about 21/6/25, and this would include HR Commissioners Dato' Noor Aziah Binti Mohd Awal, Datuk Mariati Robert, Datuk Mohamad Nordin Bin Ibrahim, Ragunath Kesavan, Dr. Chew Chee Ming, Madam Nazira Binti Abdul Rahim and Dato' Hasnal Rezua Merican Bin Habib Merican.

Only the Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Yunus (the Chairman who was appointed on 3/7/2024), YM Tengku Mohamed Fauzi Bin Tengku Abdul Hamid (the Vice Chairman) and Dr. Farah Nini Binti Dusuki (the Children’s Commissioner appointed on 8/3/2023) will remain HR Commissioners after the said date.

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is concerned that the names of HR Commissioners for the term 2025-2028 is not yet announced, and hopes that suitable persons committed to Human Rights will be announced forthwith to prevent a SUHAKAM with insufficient HR Commissioners. We do not want a recurrence of 2022, where SUHAKAM had no Chairman and Commissioners after  the term of the Chairman and Commissioners ended on April 27 – the new Commissioners were appointed more than 2 months later on 22/6/2025. (Vibes 27/5/2022)

We note that former SUHAKAM Chair Tan Sri Razali Ismail has resigned as Human Rights Commission of Malaysia chairman two weeks before his tenure was supposed to end so that ‘his early resignation was to give more time for SUHAKAM to receive a new chairman.’(NST, 16/4/2019). The action was to raise the point to ensure that at no time SUHAKAM should National Human Rights Institution end up with no HR Commissioners, and possibly the need of overlaps to ensure more efficient transfer of obligations amongst Commissioners. 

MADPET believes that since the Human Rights Commission Of Malaysia Act 1999 in Section 5(1) states that, ‘The Commission shall consist of not less than seven and not more than twenty members.’ It may be best the Commissioners are appointed in batches, so that there will no time where SUHAKAM does not have Commissioners, and it also allows for effective hand-over of jobs and experience.

This time, we are fortunate that 3 SUHAKAM Commissioners remain when 7 Commissioners end their term in a few days, as 3 were appointed later.

No more active politicians as SUHAKAM Commissioners

It is good that by way of amendment that came into force on 10/7/2024, we now have new Section 5(3B) which states, ‘Any person who is actively involved in politics and registered with any political party shall not be appointed as a member of the Commission.".

This was a problem when active politicians, Dato’ Hasnal Rezua Merican and Puan Nazira binti Abdul Rahim as SUHAKAM Commissioners (2022-2025). Whilst remaining Commissioner, Hasnal Rezua Merican, also contested in a by-election as a party candidate, lost the elections and all the while continued functioning as a SUHAKAM Commissioner. Calls for the 2 to resign or be removed as Commissioners began since their appointment. MADPET sadly notes, that even after the amendment to the SUHAKAM Act, the 2 failed to honorably tender their resignation.

MADPET calls for Hasnal Rezua Merican and Puan Nazira binti Abdul Rahim to definitely NOT be reappointed as SUHAKAM Commissioners,

SUHAKAM – Independent of Government, Removal of PM’s power in appointment, reappointment, and removal of Commissioners

Noting the government is often the alleged perpetrator of human rights violations, MADPET verily believes that the government, especially the Prime Minister and the Executive arm of government  best not be involved in the selecting and appointment, reappointment and/or removal of HR Commissioners, and also the members of Section 11A Committee that makes recommendations on appointments.

Section 5 (2) The members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the recommendation of the Prime Minister who shall, before tendering his advice, consult the committee referred to in section 11A.

This 5 person 11A committee now comprise of ‘(c) three other members of civil society who have knowledge of or practical experience in human rights matters, to be appointed by the Prime Minister.’

Section 5(6) also states ‘…(a) by the Prime Minister before tendering his advice to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for the reappointment of any member of the Commission…’

A SUHAKAM Commissioner’s term is for 3 years, but they are ‘…eligible for reappointment once for another period of three years…’. MADPET believes that this is an unhealthy provision, as it may cause some SUHAKAM Commissioners to compromise their roles as HR Commissioners, simply not to ‘anger’ the Prime Minister so as not to jeopardize their re-appointments as SUHAKAM Commissioners for another 3 years.

Will the HR Commissioners Dato' Noor Aziah Binti Mohd Awal, Datuk Mariati Robert, Datuk Mohamad Nordin Bin Ibrahim, Ragunath Kesavan and Dr. Chew Chee Ming be reappointed for another 3-year term? Will some which Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is happy with be re-appointed, and others not?

MADPET is of the opinion that the ACT be amended, and the  terms of office of SUHAKAM Commissioners be increased from 3 years to 6 years, and there should be no possibility for any re-appointment or extension of term, for this will strengthen the Independence of HR Commissioners, who is expected to act without fear or favour for human rights. They should not be afraid of angering the Prime Minister or the government of the day.

MADPET also calls for the role of the Prime Minister and/or the government must be removed, and possibly be placed under Parliament, or some other independent body. A National Human Rights Institution like SUHAKAM is not a government department or agency, and should never be placed under any Minister or Prime Minister – it must be independent of the Government, as one of the reasons is that at most times, the alleged perpetrators are public officers, under the different Ministers of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet. The current Public Inquiry being conducted by SUHAKAM is also about possible violations of human rights by public officers, this time prison officers who are under the Home Minister.

PUBLIC INQUIRY at risk if Commissioner Mariati Robert not reappointed  

SUHAKAM just started a Public Inquiry into alleged human rights violations in connection with an incident that took place on Jan 17 at Taiping Prison, Perak, which led to the death of an inmate. The first phase of the inquiry which ran for 4 days ended on June 12. The second phase of the inquiry will be held from June 23 to 26. The inquiry panel comprises SUHAKAM chairman Datuk Seri Hishamudin Yunus and two commissioners, Datuk Mariati Robert and Dr Farah Nini Dusuki.

Given that Mariati Robert term ends on 22/6/2025, the Public Inquiry is at risk if Mariati Robert is not reappointed for another 3-year term. If not, the Public Inquiry may have to start again, as all 3 Commissioners need to hear and consider all evidence and make a decision independently.

MADPET prays for the correct HR Commissioners to be appointed, ones that are truly committed to upholding human rights – not fearful of antagonizing Prime Minister or Ministers when they, from a human rights perspective, cannot but speak out saying that the Government is wrong, or what it did was a violation of human rights of the people.

It may also be better if the public, even Parliament, are involved in the process of choosing SUHAKAM Commissioners. Now, suddenly we see a notification by the Prime Minister that these are the new SUHAKAM Commissioners and when their term begins. Greater public participation should be considered.

 

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

See some relevant/earlier posts and LINKS 

Need for those who do not fear government to be SUHAKAM Commissioners. Law passed active politicians no can be HR Commissioners

 

Has Suhakam ceased to function, with no new chair, commissioners?

NGOs alarmed by ‘comatose’ state of national human rights body

 Published on 27 May 2022 8:37AM


facebook sharing button
twitter sharing button
email sharing button
whatsapp sharing button
wechat sharing button
print sharing button
Has Suhakam ceased to function, with no new chair, commissioners?
Suhakam was established by Parliament under the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999, which was gazetted on September 9, 1999. – The Vibes file pic, May 27, 2022

KUALA LUMPUR – Eight non-governmental organisations have raised extreme concern that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) has “ceased to function”, with the term of office of the previous chairman and commissioners ending April 27 and no replacements being made to date.

Stressing that they are perturbed over the matter, they said that without any human rights commissioners, Suhakam cannot play the vital role it has been playing in Malaysia. 

“They can make no Suhakam statements, recommendations to the government or even hold public inquiries. Human rights suffer,” they said. 

“Noting the important role that Suhakam has been playing in Malaysia in terms of the promotion and defence of human rights, it is an embarrassment for Suhakam to find itself in a comatose stage by reason of a failure of the government to ensure that Suhakam always have commissioners.”

The statement today was undersigned by Aliran, Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture, Greenpeace Malaysia, International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific, Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia, Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia, Teoh Beng Hock Trust for Democracy, and Workers Hub For Change.

The NGOs noted a report earlier this month that Suhakam is conducting an investigation into alleged human rights violations against junior doctors at public hospitals in Malaysia.

They said this raises a fundamental question as to how Suhakam, with no commissioners at present, can even make such a statement. 

They stressed that Suhakam employees reasonably cannot act on their own if and when there are no commissioners.

“Suhakam is a statutory body created by reason of the Human Rights Commission Of Malaysia Act 1999, and the commission is made up of the appointed HR commissioners, appointed for a three-year term,” they said in the statement. 

“When there are no Commissioners, as had been the case for the past month, Suhakam ceases to function, and will not be able to do anything including issuing statements, appointing and also providing directions to Suhakam’s staff/employees.”

The NGOs pointed out that the process of identifying and selecting new Suhakam commissioners began in October 2021.

They noted the failure to appoint a new chairman and commissioners on or before the end of the term of previous commissioners on April 27 this year.

“We hope that the members of the commission appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the recommendation of the prime minister are done without any more delay.”

“The choice of the future chairperson and Suhakam commissioners is crucial, for that determines the future functioning and effectiveness of the national human rights institution,” they said.

A check on Suhakam’s website early this morning showed that the names of Tan Sri Othman Hashim whose term as chairperson lapsed last month, as well as the names of all the immediate former commssioners, are still on the portal.

Former commissioner Mah Weng Kwai was reported by Free Malaysia Today last month as saying that a selection committee had met on April 25, and the process of choosing and appointing the new commssioners would take some time.

Caution against ‘pro-government’ commissioners

Suhakam was established by Parliament under the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999, which was gazetted on September 9, 1999. Its inaugural meeting was held on April 24, 2000.

The NGOs said that Suhakam’s effectiveness was not so evident since its inception, but this changed after Tan Sri Hasmy Agam (2010-2016) was appointed chairman, followed by Tan Sri Razali Ismail (2016-2019).

“The number of commissioners who will act without fear or favour for human rights in Suhakam is crucial, for all decisions of Suhakam require consensus, failing which the decision by a two-thirds majority of the members present at meetings shall be required,” they said. 

“If the wrong kinds of commissioners are appointed, we may end up with a less vocal, possibly ‘pro-government’ Suhakam who may be disinclined to speak up when required or even hold public inquiries, more so when the alleged perpetrators may be (the) state or state officers.”

“The days when Suhakam was effectively an independent organisation which investigates complaints for the violation of human rights may come to an end,” they warned.

With wrong appointments, there may be no more public inquiries on matters of human rights, like that on disappearances of Joshua Hilmy, Ruth Sitepu, pastor Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat, they added.

They also cited the public inquiries into the incidents during and after the public assembly of April 28, 2012; into the infringement of human rights, including the use of excessive force prior to and during the assembly on July 9, 2011; into the arrest and detention of five lawyers of the Kuala Lumpur Legal Aid Centre on May 7, 2009; into the allegation of excessive use of force by law enforcement personnel during the incident of May 27, 2008 at Persiaran Bandar Mahkota in Cheras; and inquiries into deaths in custody.  – The Vibes, May 27, 2022

Razali quits as Suhakam chairman

KUALA LUMPUR: TAN Sri Razali Ismail has resigned as Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) chairman.

His resignation comes two weeks before his tenure was supposed to end.

Razali, who had helmed the position since 2016, was supposed to have completed his term on April 27.

He said he had informed the commission of his decision, and had submitted his resignation letter to Yang di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri’ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah as well as Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Speaking to Malaysiakini, he said his early resignation was to give more time for Suhakam to receive a new chairman.

“I have done three years (at Suhakam). I think I did a pretty credible job and I (now) want to do more than advocacy.

“Doing things like human rights, it’s an advocacy job and it is enough after a while. It continues to be what it is, advocacy. It doesn’t make a big difference on the ground,” he was quoted as saying.

Razali began his career with the Foreign Ministry in 1962, and served in the diplomatic corps in Malaysian missions in India, Vientiane (Laos), Poland, the United Kingdom and France.

In 1989 and 1990, he headed the Malaysian delegation to the United Nations, and at the same time, served as the chairman of the United Nations Security Council.

From 1996 to 1997, he served as president of the United Nations General Assembly. NST, 16/4/2019