Gerakan call for release of HINDRAF 5, now detained under ISA

Perak Gerakan Wanita: Release Hindraf
By CHAN LI LEEN (Star Online, 10/8/2008)

IPOH: Perak Gerakan Wanita has called on the Government to release leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force(Hindraf) from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

The call to release M. Manoharan, P. Uthayakumar, V. Ganabatirau, K. Vasantha Kumar and R. Kenghadaran, detained since last Dec 13, were among the resolutions passed during the state Gerakan Youth and Wanita annual delegates conference on Sunday.

Both Youth and Wanita wings passed their six and 12-point resolutions, mostly concerning education, national issues, corruption and the present economic scenario.

Wanita further drew attention to the problem of lack of Chinese national type schoolteachers and asked the Education Ministry to re-evaluate its hiring process so that qualified ones were not turned away.

The Ministry was also urged to be fair in its distribution of funds to government-aided schools to speed up their construction and development.

The wing also urged the Government to give a free hand to the Judiciary and the Anti-Corruption Agency to investigate government agencies without fear or favour in order to restore the people's trust and faith.

It said the Government should also pay more attention to the rising corruption within its agencies and to take stern action against those involved.

The Youth wing asked that the party's constitution be reviewed to allow for the post of deputy chief to be created at the branch, division and state levels.

Woman sues Government over son's death and wins - Death in Police Custody

Well, there you have it - for at last we have a victory in a case of death in custody. The government really do not want any reasoned judgment of the court - and they would prefer that they lose for some technical/procedural non-compliance -- or that the final decision is some consent judgment (for if it is a consent judgment, the judge will not write his grounds of judgment). This is done, possibly, to ensure that there is no real precedence that other victims could rely on.

In a case against the DG of Immigration(and others), that I was involved in before, at the 11th hour (when they know that the judgment will not be going the government's way), they conceded and pushed for consent judgment to be recorded - and it that particular case, it did happen twice - the 2nd was for a contempt of court proceeding. And yes, in that case also, the Judge awarded cost, but left it to the Registrar to tax/access it .

And, in that case involving 40 Indian workers, the Registrar decided that cost be RM10,000-00 - and this was absurd because it works out to RM250 per worker. On review, that sum was cut down by half ...about RM5,000. Now, there is an application for review before the Judge...

So, I wonder how much would the award of damages be at the end of the day for this death in custody case. What is the value of human life? It would have been best that the Judge himself decided now the quantum of damages and the cost - for that would have put an end to this matter in court. Now, the family of the late M.Ulaganathan, who died in 2003, will still have to be in court for assessment of damages and cost. Speedy resolution of such cases is always best.

Woman sues Government over son's death and wins

BERNAMA (New Straits Times, also Malaysian Insider - 29/7/2008)

KUALA LUMPUR, TUES:

The High Court here today awarded damages to a woman who sued the police and the government for negligence over the death of her 19-year-old son while in police custody in 2003.

Justice Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail ruled that the defendants had failed to comply with the case management direction from the court.

Justice Wahab made the decision after the defendants failed to produce the affidavits and submissions as ordered by the court.

“In the circumstances, the court enters judgment for the plaintiff, general and special damages to be assessed by the Deputy Registrar of the High Court,” he said Justice Abdul Wahab.

With the decision, besides the damages, Tamil Selwee, a housewife, also succeeded in her claim for four declarations, namely that the death of her son, M.Ulaganathan, while in police custody on July 21, 2003, was caused by the Royal Malaysia Police and that Ulaganathan’s death was caused by their breach of statutory duty, recklessness and gross and wanton negligence.

On July 17, 2006, Tamil Selwee, 50, filed a suit seeking the four declarations and damages, claiming that her son’s death while in custody at the Kajang district police headquarters was caused by police negligence.

She named the Inspector-General of Police, Selangor police chief, Kajang OCPD and the Malaysian government as defendants.

She said in her statement of claim that her son was well on May 12, 2003, but when she visited him at the police lockup on May 23 he was sick, could not walk properly, had swollen eyes and bruises and complained of having no appetite, She said she again visited her son a week later and found him still in a bad condition and he died on July 21 the same year.

The defendants, in their statement of defence, admitted that the police had detained Ulaganathan at the Kajang police station but denied that his injuries were caused by their negligence.

They said that throughout the time he was in their custody he was in good health and did not show any signs of sickness which required treatment by a doctor and that he also did not ask to be taken to see a doctor.

2008/07/30 (NST Online)

Mum wins damages for son's death in lock-up

Judge Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail ruled against the defendants after they failed to produce affidavits and submissions

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court yesterday awarded damages to a woman, who sued the police and government for negligence over the death of her 19-year-old son while in police custody in 2003.

Judge Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail ruled that the defendants had failed to comply with the case management direction from the court.

He made the decision after the defendants failed to produce the affidavits and submissions as ordered by the court.

"In the circumstances, the court enters judgment for the plaintiff, with general and special damages to be assessed by the Deputy Registrar of the High Court," he said.

With the decision, Tamil Selwee, a housewife, also succeeded in her claim for four declarations.
The declarations were that the death of her son, M. Ulaganathan, while in police custody on July 21, 2003, was caused by the Royal Malaysia Police.

Ulaganathan's death was also caused by their breach of statutory duty, recklessness, and gross and wanton negligence.

On July 17, 2006, Tamil Selwee, 50, filed a suit seeking the four declarations and damages.

She claimed that her son's death at the Kajang district police headquarters was caused by police negligence.

She named the Inspector-General of Police, Selangor police chief, Kajang OCPD and the government as the defendants.

She said in her statement of claim that her son was well on May 12, 2003.

But when she visited him at the police lock-up on May 23, he was sick, could not walk properly, had swollen eyes, bruises and complained of having no appetite.

She said she visited her son again a week later and found him still in a bad condition and he died on July 21.

The defendants, in their statement of defence, admitted that the police had detained Ulaganathan at the Kajang police station.

But they denied that his injuries were caused by their negligence.

They said that throughout the time in police custody, the deceased was in good health and did not show any signs of sickness which required treatment by a doctor.

The deceased also did not ask to be taken to see a doctor. -- Bernama

Caning doesn’t deter illegals (Star)

The Malaysian Bar has already called for the abolition of whipping and corporal punishment...and it has been pointed yet again in the recent Star report that whipping is not a deterrent...

They come because there is work here -- and the real persons that should be targeted are the employers - not these persons who coming looking for work to support themselves and their families.

The law says that employers will also be whipped --- but are we not surprised that no employer has yet to be whipped. At the same time

Tuesday July 22, 2008 (Star Online)

Caning doesn’t deter illegals

KOTA KINABALU: As many as 4,326 illegal immigrants jailed, caned and deported have been found back in Sabah.

Sabah Immigration Department director Datuk Baharon Talib said some of them had been deported up to seven times but they keep coming back.

He said these immigrants who were rearrested between 2004 and June this year were found working at plantations, mills, workshops and restaurants.

Baharon, who was responding to calls for locals found guilty of employing illegal immigrants to be caned, said that there had been no caning imposed on employers.

However, he said several companies were charged or fined by the courts for not paying the levies.

Calls for more stringent action against those who employ illegal immigrants have been growing in the state.

Anwar's press statement in full (Malaysiakini)

Anwar's press statement in full

Jul 17, 08 3:38pm

MCPX The following is Anwar Ibrahim’s press statement providing his own account of what had transpired in the days leading to his arrest. On Saturday, July 12, 2008, the police came to my house to serve a Section 111 Criminal Procedure Code notice, harassing my family and demanding my presence at the IPK Kuala Lumpur (Federal Territories Police headquarters) at 2pm on Monday, July 14, despite an earlier agreement with my lawyers for me to come to the IPK. On the next day, Sunday, the police also served an ex-parte court order, prohibiting me from physically being within 5km from the Parliament on July 14. As you can see, my house and the IPK KL are within 5km radius from the Parliament building. The court order effectively put me under house arrest on Monday and at the same time prevented me from going to the IPK. On July 14, the presence of police personnel outside the compound of my house strengthened our suspicions that they would be prepared to arrest me as soon as I left the compound of my residence, on the pretext of me violating the court order. The issue here, is which order should I comply with, the ex-parte court order or the Section 111 notice from the police? On the same day, the police through the investigating officer, one DSP Jude Pereira wrote and faxed to my lawyer at about 1.06pm, informing that I was required to be present at the IPK KL on Wednesday, July 16 at 2pm to assist with the investigation. I conveyed my agreement to the appointment and it was communicated to the police through my solicitor, SN Nair and Partners via telephone and letter on the same day. On Wednesday, July 16, I was at the Anti-Corruption Agency (BPR) head office to record my statement pursuant to the police report lodged by me at IPK Shah Alam on July 1, against attorney-general Gani Patail and inspector general of police Musa Hassan for their involvement in the fabrication of evidence way back in 1998. To ensure that we will be able to attend the appointment with the police at 2pm, we cut short our statement at the BPR's office, and this fact was clearly conveyed to the BPR officers present. Ambushed by masked men At about 12.45pm, the investigating officer (IO), DSP Jude Pereira called Mr Nair to confirm about our attendance and Mr Nair confirmed that we would attend that 2pm appointment. We were about to have a quick lunch at my house before proceeding to the IPK. Five minutes later, we were ambushed by a team of masked and heavily-armed police personnel near my house. I was arrested and brought to the IPK. I cooperated fully with the police by giving my cautioned statement from 2.30pm to about 7.30pm. At this particular point, the IO and the other officers handling this case were doing their job professionally. I was then given assurances by assistant commissioner of police Razali and later senior assistant commissioner II Khor (through my lawyer) that I would be released on police bail on the same day. However, later on, upon my return from Kuala Lumpur General Hospital (HKL), the IO, DSP Jude Pereira informed me and my lawyers that I will be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight for the purpose of recording a further statement in the morning. I and my lawyers protested, giving our undertaking that we will be back anytime required by the police to continue with the recording of the statement, and there was no need for me to be detained overnight, and that I should be released on police bail. The police, through the IO were adamant that I should be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight, despite them knowing about my physical condition. I had to spend the night sleeping on a cold cement floor, which aggravated my back injury which was due to the beating I received from the then IGP, Tan Sri Rahim Nor on Sept 20, 1998. This morning, after a short statement that was recorded for about 30 minutes, I was released on police bail. I was in pain and had to immediately receive some medical treatment upon my return home. CID chief tells blatant lie I now wish to deal with the statement of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) director, Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin as appeared in Utusan Malaysia today, inter alia "Pasukan khas bertopeng polis terpaksa memintas kenderaan DSAI di Bukit Segambut di sini dan menahan Anwar ekoran tindakan Penasihat PKR itu mengubah haluan kenderaannya pada saat-saat tempoh yang diberi kepadanya untuk menyerah diri kepada polis pada pukul 2 petang ini hampir berakhir." This is a blatant lie from the CID director to cover up their shameful act of abuse of police powers. I have given the assurances and had just informed the IO five minutes before the disgraceful ambush by the police through my lawyer who was with me in the same car. In addition to the above, Deputy Home Minister Wan Farid said, as reported in Star Online that, I "went voluntarily to the police car without any incident." Again, this is also a blatant lie by the government. I take to task the IGP for this abuse of police power against me through the events I've narrated above. It appears that the events of the last few days, the nature of my unwarranted arrest, my overnight incarceration which was actually absolutely unnecessary, were an act of personal vengeance against me in retaliation to the reports I lodged earlier against him, which are now being investigated by the ACA. Why I refused to give my DNA I have reasonable grounds for having no confidence in the system. In the course of the trial of the false allegations of sodomy in 1998, DNA evidence was fabricated and used against me. The persons responsible for the fabrication then were the IGP, SAC Rodwan and the AG, are new key players in this investigation. Until now, I have been denied access to the police report made by the accuser against me. My accuser is still under police protection and as such, any fabrication is possible if they take my DNA. My decision to refuse a DNA test is taken through advice of my lawyers and DNA experts, both local and overseas. Anwar Ibrahim July 16, 2008

62 under ISA as of 30/6/2008

What a load of crap -- Detention Without Trial is geared towards rehabilitation not punishment...

First, give them an open trial - and find them guilty first, then talk about punishment or rehabilitation...

62 being held under ISA


Friday July 11, 2008

Detainees undergo rehab programme

DETENTION under the Internal Security Act (ISA) is geared more towards rehabilitation rather than criminal punishment.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar told M. Manogaran (DAP – Teluk Intan) that ISA detainees would be rehabilitated in regard to their extremist beliefs and actions, which could threaten national security.

“Those held under the ISA will undergo a rehabilitation programme at their place of detention.

“If a detainee has been considered to be rehabilitated and no longer poses any danger to the country, he or she will be released,” he said in a written reply.

Syed Hamid said that as of June 30, there were 62 detainees held for involvement in various activities.

“Forty-two people were held for militant violence, six for falsifying documents, one for human trafficking, nine for gathering information for foreign intelligence agencies and five for Hindraf activities.

“However, we cannot provide a full list of ISA detainees with their background and offences at present due to security factor,” he said.

Manogaran had asked for a full list of ISA detainees and whether the Government provided their family members with financial assistance during their period of detention.

Syed Hamid said ISA detainees could also refer to the Social Welfare Department nearby to ensure their family members received assistance.

“Based on records at the Taiping detention centre, 28 people held under ISA there have submitted applications for financial assistance for their families.

“Of this, 17 detainees have had their applications approved and their families have received financial assistance from the district social welfare office as well as the Islamic relief agency Baitumal where they reside.

There were still six applications for financial assistance, which had yet to be considered by the department.

“Besides financial assistance, the department will also consider aid for education and health,” Syed Hamid said.

Immigration DG released on bail (Star)

Monday July 14, 2008 MYT 7:16:13 PM(Star)

Immigration DG released on bail

PUTRAJAYA: Immigration Department director-general Datuk Abdul Wahid Md Don, remanded last Friday over an Anti Corruption Agency (ACA) investigation into the issuance of visas for foreign workers, was released on bail on Monday. He was brought before Magistrate Mazuliana Abdul Rashid of the Kajang Magistrate's Court here who released him on an ACA bail of RM150,000 with two sureties, Bernama reported.

Handcuffed and escorted by three ACA officers, Wahid arrived at the court at 11am and was released 10 minutes later. Speaking briefly to reporters he said: "The ACA officers carried out their task courteously and professionally. I don't intend to comment further. Let the court decide on the case."

The ACA had so far arrested nine people over the case and the agency's director-general Datuk Seri Panglima Ahmad Said Hamdan has been quoted as saying that more people are expected to be arrested.

MADPET:- THERE SHOULD BE NO HARRASSMENT OF LAWYERS IN MALAYSIA - Investigate Allegations Of Police/Prosecutors Suppressing Of Evidence-

MEDIA STATEMENT – 11/7/2008

THERE SHOULD BE NO HARRASSMENT OF LAWYERS IN MALAYSIA

- Investigate Allegations Of Police/Prosecutors Suppressing Of Evidence-

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is concerned by the fact that the police has send a letter requiring lawyer N. Surendran, a Malaysian who is against Death Penalty and Torture, to meet the police concerning allegedly investigation into the statutory declaration/s made by private investigator P. Balasubramaniam.

On 3/7/2008, P Balasubramaniam made known a statutory declaration he had made allegedly on 1/7/2008 that linked Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak to murdered Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu.

More disturbing was the allegation contained in paragraph 49 of this Declaration, being that the police had caused to be left out certain matters he had told them in the statement he was finally asked to sign. “I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Najib Razak but when I came to sign my statement, these details had been left out…”

MADPET is also concerned about the allegation contained in paragraph 50, that the prosecution may have intentionally or otherwise failed to ask questions that will cause the name and/or involvement of Najib Razak to be disclosed. “…The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Najib Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Najib Razak and/or his wife…”

Prosecutors do and must have the duty to disclosure all facts to ensure that justice be done, more so in a murder case where a finding of guilt would result in the death penalty. Leave it to the judge to decide on the importance or relevance of facts and evidence, when he decides on the guilt or innocence of the accused.

On 4/7/2008, the following day, there was another media conference and a 2^nd Statutory Declaration was disclosed, and this new declaration not only revoked the 1^st Statutory Declaration, but also did go further to specifically revoke references to Najib Razak’s involvement. It was also reported that allegation was made that the 1^st Declaration was made under duress.

Thereafter, allegedly P. Balasubramaniam and his family disappeared.

On 5/7/2008, R. Kumaresan, the nephew of that now ‘infamous’ private investigator P. Balasubramaniam, accompanied by his lawyer N. Surendran, made a report that his uncle and family had gone missing.

Mr Surendran did today receive a letter from the police requiring his presence on 12/7/2008 (Saturday) at 3pm at Tingkat 6, Blok G, Unit Siasatan Jenayah Siber & Multimedia, Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Komersil (Commercial Crime Investigation Department), Jalan Dato Onn, 50560 Kuala Lumpur (Tel: 03-26163822). The letter was dated 11/7/2008, and was signed by one ASP Abdul Halid bin Hj Ludin, Pegawai Penyiasat (Investigating Officer).

The letter, that was issued under section 111 Criminal Procedure Code, states that the case being investigated is classified under section 199 Penal Code (False statement made in any declaration which is by law receivable evidence) with regard to a false statement made in a Statutory Declaration – referring to Dang Wangi Rpt: 23402/08.

On the face of it, there is no justification for the calling of Mr Surendran with regard to this particular investigation.

Firstly, N. Surendran is merely the lawyer of the nephew, concerned only about his uncle and family when they went missing.

Further, N Surendran is the lawyer of R. Kumaresan, and is bound by solicitor-client privilege, which means that a lawyer cannot be compelled to disclose legitimate communications, whether oral or written, passing directly between him and his client. This means that he would also not be able to disclose anything that transpired between him and his client.

MADPET is concerned that this may be yet another case of harassment of a lawyer, and this is unacceptable

We recall the Malaysian Bar Resolution that passed at an Emergency General Meeting on 10/10/1998, which saw the attendance of over 2,400 lawyers, that clear states that lawyers “…be allowed to carry out their duties freely without any harassment, hindrance or restraint by the Authorities...”

MADPET urge that lawyers in Malaysia, including Mr Surendran, be allowed carry out their functions without fear or favour and completely free from any sort of harassment, threats or retaliation from the government.

MADPET also calls for the immediate investigation into the allegations that have been made against the police and the prosecutors, who allegedly suppressed that part of the truth that implicated involvement of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

11th July 2008

Hanging Judge Ahmad Maarop sentence couple to death

When will it all end - and Malaysia abolishes the death penalty. Sentence them to life imprisonment, if need be, but not to be hanged.

Malaysia has ratified the Child Rights Convention - and surely the passing of a sentence of death is not in the "paramount interest of the child". So, this judge delayed the hanging until served their 15 years in jail.

Are they really the drug traffickers or just some fools who were asked to carry a package from one destination to another.

With the rise of cost of living - many may be forced to resort to these little tasks for some extra money, not really knowing what they are carrying most of the time. And Malaysia will send them to their death...

Thursday July 3, 2008 MYT 7:47:48 PM

Couple sentenced to death for trafficking heroin

By R.S.N. MURALI

KUALA TERENGGANU: A couple with four children, three of whom are below 16 years, was sentenced to death by the High Court hereThursday for heroin trafficking five years ago.

High Court Justice Ahmad Maarop also convicted them of possession of the narcotic and sentenced them to 15 years to jail, from their date of arrest in 2003, which they are to serve before their execution.

Justice Ahmad, now a Court of Appeal Justice, however, granted them a stay on the death sentence pending an appeal.

Azaha Abd Rani, 49, and his wife Zainun Mohd Noor, 42, both from Kelantan, were composed and unfazed when Justice Ahmad Maarop read out the verdict.

However, Azaha grasped his wife 's left hand when leaving the dock after the sentencing.

“Based on our country’s law, it is a mandatory death sentence for those convicted of drug trafficking and it’s our (court) responsibility to mete out the death penalty,” said Justice Ahmad.

The court also noted that Azaha, a taxi driver, had given a sworn statement while Zainun chose to remain silent without calling any witnesses in her defence.

The couple were charged under Section 39B (1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act and Section 12 (2) of the same act for trafficking and being in possession of heroin, respectively.

They were convicted of distributing 12.25g of heroin on December 7, 2003, in front of BP petrol kiosk in Kampung Jabi, Besut.

They were also convicted of being in possession of 9.57g of heroin on the same date, time and area. Earlier in mitigation, defence counsel Aziz Derasi appealed to the court for a lighter sentence in viewof the fact that the offence was their first and they were parents to four children aged 24 years, 15 years, 11 years, and nine years.

But the Deputy Public Prosecutor Othman Abdullah argued that there was only one sentence reserved for cases under Section 39B and that was the death penalty.

MADPET Statement on detainee forced to perform oral sex and tortured when complains

MEDIA STATEMENT – 21/6/2008

TORTURE IN POLICE LOCK-UPS MUST END

- Install CCTV with recording capabilities

to ensure rights be respected and abuses end -

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is shocked at the allegation that persons arrested by the police were beaten up and sexually abused, including being forced to perform oral sex on one another at the Kajang police station. (Malaysiakini, 20/6/2008 “Detainees claim forced oral sex in lock-up”). One of the victims was a juvenile.

What was even more shocking was that the same officer allegedly, after a complaint was made to the Magistrate, did again torture the detainee-victims because “…they informed the magistrate about it…” It was reported that the victims’ lawyer did say that the alleged perpetrator/s“…then made them lick his boots, sprayed Ridsect (insect repellent) on their face and they were beaten up with pipes…"

MADPET also wonders whether the Magistrate, after receiving the complaint, did cause immediate investigation to be commenced about the alleged torture, for any failure on the part of the Magistrate to act speedily should also be investigated.

In many of the police stations in Malaysia, especially in the lock-up areas and interrogation rooms, apparently there are close-circuit television (CCTV) installed but unfortunately it does not have any recording capacity. If there was recording capacity, then investigation would have proceeded speedily, and the perpetrator/s would have been easily identified.

There has just been too many deaths in custody, and allegations about police torture in Malaysia, and that makes it imperative that all police stations, including lock-ups and interrogation rooms, be immediately equipped with CCTV, with recording capabilities. This would definitely ensure that rights of those arrested and detained are respected and protected. It would also definitely deter incidents of torture and even killing.

In Hong Kong, lawyers of accused persons have access to these recordings. It can then be determined whether rights provided for in law have been accorded to a particular person, and also to confirm that has been no torture, threat, promise or other non-permissible actions.

MADPET is also disappointed that Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)’s response to this complaint, as reported, was to just send letters to get details of the arrests and the remand.

SUHAKAM should have immediately gone down to the venue of the alleged torture, and started gathering evidence. Being a police station, many potential witnesses may not be accessible later, and there is definitely the real possibility of witness tampering by the perpetrators, more so when they are police officers.

MADPET reiterates the call that the government immediately set up The Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), as was intended and proposed by 2 Royal Commissions. We do not need any other kind of “IPCMC”.

MADPET calls for an urgent investigation into this allegation of torture, and that the perpetrator/s be thereafter charged and tried in open court. Any other internal form of discipline is not acceptable.

Charles Hector

N. Surendran

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

21st June 2008

Detainees claim forced oral sex in lock-up (Malaysiakini)

MADPET issued a Media Statement based on this Malaysiakini report. Police alleged to have committed this shameful acts - and SUHAKAM writes to the Police for details of the arrest and remand -- and is "...confident that the police will give this serious attention and will make sure such complaints do not arise again" What about this complaint? Why is SUHAKAM not carrying out an immediate investigation - and the truth must be sought surely not just from the police (whereby police officers are the alleged perpetrators of these HR violations). If I want police to investigate - then might as well complain to the police. Why do we have SUHAKAM -- why are people complaining to SUHAKAM - surely not for SUHAKAM to just shift it back to the police for the police to investigate. Am sure when the complain was made to the Magistrate, she would in accordance to law would have already asked the police to investigate and revert to her/him.... (there are procedures set out as to what a Magistrate should do when she receives a complaint...) Detainees claim forced oral sex in lock-up

Soon Li Tsin | Jun 20, 08 5:30pm

Four individuals have lodged complaints of police abuses, including being forced to perform oral sex, during their remand to the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam). MCPX Lawyer S Karthigesan (right) has declined to name the individuals as police investigations into their initial arrests are still ongoing, but he was not circumspect about their alleged abuses. Originally, five individuals were arrested in Cheras on May 29 and held at the Kajang police station on a seven-day remand. During which two of them - one of them a juvenile - were forced to perform oral sex on each other. Four of them were also beaten up before getting their remands extended for another three days where the abuses continued. "The sergeant who made them perform oral sex on each other was angry that they informed the magistrate about it (abuses) and asked them why they made the complaint. "He then made them lick his boots, sprayed Ridsect (insect repellent) on their faces and were then beaten up with pipes by three or four police officers. "Only four of them were abused. One of them was never touched," Karthigesan said. The five also appeared to be victims of serial remand. It is a method of extending the period of detention without charging those arrested, by perpetually transferring detainees to police stations in different districts when their police remand orders lapse. The five were initially transferred to Cheras district police and then kept at the Salak Selatan Baru police station lock up. At this juncture, the father of one of the suspects, K Sukumaran (left), lodged a police report against the Kajang police station. At their next transfer point - Dang Wangi police district headquarters - four of the five lodged police reports, before they were transferred on to Brickfields police station for three days. Suhakam's intervention is necessary According to Karthigesan four were charged at the Ampang Sessions Court with alleged gang robbery, and one of them was released without being charged. Two of the quartet are out on bail, while the remaining two - unable to post the RM5,000 bail - are in Sungai Buloh Prison. Karthigesan hoped that Suhakam would get involved and asked for an investigation into these alleged police abuses. "There is a gross abuse of human rights here and we want a proper investigation done on this matter. Suhakam's intervention is necessary," he said. Suhakam commissioner N Siva Subramaniam, who was present to receive the complaint, said that they have sent a letter to the Kajang police chief on June 13 to get details of the arrests and the remand. "We will wait for an answer from them and this would be very serious if proven true. I am confident that the police will give this serious attention and will make sure such complaints do not arise again," he said at the press conference. He added that they have also sent a copy of that letter to federal police headquarters Bukit Aman for further action. After the press conference, Karthigesan said the five are related and are involved in a small family business.

Man to hang for drugs (NST) 17/6/2008. Hanging Judge Datuk Sulaiman Daud

2008/06/17

Man to hang for drugs

KOTA BARU: A chicken seller was sentenced to death by the High Court here after he was found guilty of trafficking in almost 2kg of cannabis six years ago.

Judge Datuk Sulaiman Daud passed the sentence on Ou Seng Sameae, 40, after the prosecution represented by deputy public prosecutor Shahidani Abd Aziz proved a prima facie case against the accused.

Ou Seng, from Narathiwat, Thailand, was charged with committing the offence in a house at Kampung Berek Gong Demin at 3.20pm on Jan 10, 2002.

In his judgment, Sulaiman said the court could not accept the accused's defence that the red bag containing 1,996.7gm of cannabis belonged to a friend named Ayub.

Defence counsel Ahmad Nizam Mohamed told the court that on the day in question, Ou Seng and Ayub had gone to the house of another friend, known as "Abang Mat" in Gunong, Bachok, in a car belonging to Ayub.
"The court finds it impossible for Ayub to leave the bag containing such a valuable item with the accused, as the accused had even placed the bag next to his feet in the car," said Sulaiman.

"Therefore, the accused was not an innocent carrier in this case."

Ou Seng appeared calm when Sulaiman passed the death sentence. - Bernama

Hindraf convoy calls for ISA repeal

2008/06/16 (NST)

Hindraf convoy calls for ISA repeal

KUALA LUMPUR: The Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) took to the streets yesterday over the detention of their leaders under the Internal Security Act.

The group of about 200, travelled in a convoy of more than 50 cars and six motorcycles with banners calling for the abolition of the ISA. They started from Rawang at 8.30am and ended in Klang about 5pm.

They travelled through Sentul, Brickfields and Shah Alam. Police were stationed at all major intersections but no untoward incidents were reported.

City police chief Datuk Muhammad Sabtu Osman confirmed the incident saying police did not intervene as it was a peaceful procession.

They gathered to appeal to the King - for the release of ISA detainees

Some have asked as to why they are protesting here ...and protesting there - risking to get arrested. Once or twice, would have been OK but this is really going overboard.

Well, when it comes to the ISA and Detention Without Trial - then REPEATEDLY we must raise the issue until at last the Prime Minister decides to release them who are being detained.

In a criminal case after trial, where the court finds you guilty and sentences you - there is some certainty as to how long you will be imprisoned. How good behaviour will reduce the length of your incarceration -- BUT with the ISA and other Detention Without Trial, there is NO certainty as to how long you will be locked-up. At one time, the Minister can make a 2-year Detention Order, and he can continue making it over and over.

With regard to the HINDRAF 5, it is sad that our Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is not releasing them even after MCA, GERAKAN and MIC, major partners in the BN have asked him to do so. Talk about showing respect to the views of your MAJOR partners in BN.

So on we go - repeatedly calling for the release of the many who are being detained under the ISA and other laws that allow for Detention Without Trial.

Sunday June 15, 2008

Three MPs, three PKR members held at Istana rally

By TEH ENG HOCK

KUALA LUMPUR: Three Members of Parliament were among six people arrested yesterday for participating in a rally in front of Istana Negara.

Kapar MP S. Manikavasagam, Subang MP R. Sivarasa and Ampang MP Zuraida Kamaruddin were arrested at 10.30am for protesting against the detention of Hindu Rights Action Force leaders under the Internal Security Act.

Three other PKR members were also arrested.

Special gifts: Children walking to Istana Negara in Kuala Lumpur with gifts for Tuanku Mizan yesterday.

Brickfields OCPD Asst Comm Wan Abdul Bari Wan Abdul Khalid said all of them were released on bail by 12.45pm.

He said police arrived at about 10am and asked members of the public, including tourists, to vacate the area around Istana Negara’s main gate.

“Everybody left except for a group who refused to leave. We gave them three warnings to disperse. Deputy OCPD (Supt Azri Abd Rahman) spoke to them, and at 10.20am, I gave them five minutes to disperse.

“At 10.25am, they still refused to leave so we arrested them. No force was used, and they also did not resist arrest,” he said.

At 10.35am, ACP Wan Bari said a group of 70 people, including children, alighted buses parked some distance away and walked to Istana Negara, the official residence of Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin.

“Each child was carrying a basket with flowers and a teddy bear and lined with yellow cloth. They left the baskets in front of the palace gate,” he said, adding that they left after they were asked to.

ACP Wan Bari said he could not comment further on investigations as “counter-reports have been made” against him for ordering the arrest of the six, and his comments would prejudice investigations.

The seventy children represented the 70 men currently detained under the ISA at the Kamunting detention centre in Taiping.

They were accompanied by their mothers as well as other family members.

The event was organised by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) and joined by members of the Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA.

According to Hindraf national event coordinator Kannan Ramasamy, they gathered to appeal to the King to advise Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to release all the ISA detainees.

Uthaya: Suhakam's conduct deplorable - MADPET (Malaysiakini)

Uthaya: Suhakam's conduct deplorable

Charles Hector | Apr 25, 08 3:48pm

I refer to the Malaysiakini report Suhakam: Uthaya wasn't denied treatment. Madpet (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is disappointed by the fact that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) made and pronounced conclusions about complaints about detention conditions and health care of an Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee in Kamunting Detention Centre without even meeting with the said P Uthayakumar. The Malaysian Human Rights Commission should never come to any conclusion or finding without at least meeting and talking to both sides. In this case, it was reported that the Suhakam team, led by Human Rights Commissioner Siva Subramaniam, had meetings with ‘…senior officials, the doctor and police personnel at the camp, as well as medical personnel in Taiping hospital’. It was also reported that ‘Uthayakumar was neither present during the four-hour probe, nor interviewed by the team’. When Siva Subramaniam was asked why Uthayakumar’s side of the story was not heard it was reported, ‘He pointed out that media reports were also sufficient to highlight Uthayakumar’s plight’. The manner in which this ‘inquiry’ was done and the conclusions reached are very wrong, and is a deprivation of Uthayakumar and his family’s fundamental right to be heard and participate in any inquiry and/or investigation. Uthayakumar is already a victim of a draconian law that allows for detention without trial - where there is no right to defend oneself; no right to a fair and open trial and no right to even go for judicial review of the alleged reasons for detaining him. As such, the manner in which Suhakam conducted themselves in this case makes it even more deplorable and is certainly unacceptable behaviour for a national human rights commission. Madpet seriously hopes that the making of such speedy ‘conclusions - in this case by Commissioner Siva Subramanian - was not affected by the fact that his current term expires in July 2008, and a belief that a ‘pro-government’ positioning now may assist chances of a re-appointment for another two-year term. Human rights commissioners and Suhakam must at all times be independent and be seen to be independent and fearless and should only be driven by human rights and justice considerations. If a human rights commissioner cannot do this by reason of fear or some other reason, then the proper and ethical thing to do is to resign. Madpet urges Suhakam to immediately retract its conclusions about the complaints by Uthayakumar, his family and/or his friends as reported in the media, and conduct a proper inquiry into these complaints in the proper manner – which would necessarily include that the fundamental rights to be heard and to participate be accorded to the alleged victim and the complainants. Madpet also calls for the immediate and unconditional release of Uthayakumar and all those currently detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and other laws that allow for detention without trial and that all laws that allow for detention without trial be repealed. The writer represents Madpet.

Hindraf wants Suhakam commissioner out (malaysiakini)

	Hindraf wants Suhakam commissioner out
	Syed Jaymal Zahiid | Apr 25, 08 12:12pm
	Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) lawyers have accused the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) of deceit and demanded for one of its commissioners to step down. Lawyer N Surendran claimed that Suhakam’s report by commissioner N Siva Subramaniam was utterly incorrect in suggesting that detained Hindraf leader P Uthayakumar is fine. "It’s a lie. The report is totally incorrect. Uthayakumar is in bad shape. He has been denied medical attention for more than a month now," he told reporters at a Hindraf gathering outside Istana Negara this morning. About 30 supporters gathered outside the palace gates to submit a memorandum seeking royal intervention for the release of Uthayakumar and four others held under the Internal Security Act (ISA). The memorandum was handed to a palace official by Vaishnavi, the five-year-old daughter of Hindraf chairperson P Waythamoorthy who is currently in self-exile in London. 'Blatant lie' Meanwhile, PKR Kapar MP S Manickvasagam, who was also present, claimed that Uthayakumar’s blood sugar level (right) had increased to a worrying point. This was caused by deliberate medical negligence on the side of the government, alleged the politician. Hindraf lawyer and DAP MP for Teluk Intan M Manogaran also lambasted the alleged denial of medical treatment, which he described as "inhuman." "We deplore Suhakam’s report, it is a blatant lie. Siva Subramaniam must step down immediately," he added. On Wednesday, Subramaniam, after visiting the Kamunting detention centre, said that Uthayakumar was given proper medical treatment by the authorities. He, however, did not meet Uthayakmar or any of the other four Hindraf detainees during his visit. Threat to BN, not nation In their memorandum to the King, Hindraf lawyers appealed to his highness to facilitate the release of the five. This action followed a recent media report stating that the King had consented to the government’s recommendation for the Hindraf leaders to be detained for two years [see letter below]. This decision was reportedly conveyed in letters sent by His Majesty to the five. Manogaran stressed that the use of ISA to detain the Hindraf leaders was utterly unjust and appealed to the King to raise the matter in his parliamentary address next Monday. "ISA is evil and the government that carries it is an evil government. We urge the King to look into the matter and justly react by releasing all of them," added Surendran. They argued that Hindraf is not a threat to national security but to the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional. The other Hindraf leaders under detention are M Manoharan, V Ganabatirau, R Kenghadharan and T Vasantha Kumar. All five were detained on Dec 13 shortly after they had organised a mammoth street rally which drew some 30,000 people. Watch 2-min video in Malaysiakini.tv

MEDIA STATEMENT – 24/4/2008

SUHAKAM’S CONDUCT UNBECOMING OF A HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

- Conduct proper inquiry into complaints concerning P. Uthayakumar

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is disappointed by the fact that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) made and pronounced conclusions about complaints about detention conditions and health care of an Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee in Kamunting Detention Centre without even meeting with the said P. Uthayakumar. This was reported by Malaysiakini(23/4/2008) in a report entitled “Suhakam: Uthaya wasn't denied treatment” and also by Bernama(23/4/2008) in a report entitled “Uthayakumar's claim of improper medical care untrue: Suhakam”

The Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) should never come to any conclusions or findings without at least meeting and talking to both sides.

In this case, it was reported that the SUHAKAM team led by Human Rights Commissioner Datuk Siva Subramaniam, had meetings with “…senior officials, the doctor and police personnel at the camp, as well as medical personnel in Taiping hospital…”

It was also reported in Malaysiakini that “Uthayakumar was neither present during the four-hour probe, nor interviewed by the team…”

When Datuk Siva Subramaniam was apparently “…asked why Uthayakumar’s side of the story was not heard….He pointed out that media reports were also sufficient to highlight Uthayakumar’s plight….”(Malaysiakini).

The manner in which this “inquiry” was done and the conclusions reached are very wrong, and is a deprivation of P.Uthayakumar and his family’s fundamental right to be heard and participate in any inquiry and/or investigation.

P. Uthayakumar is already a victim of a draconian law that allows for detention without trial - where there is no right to defend oneself; no right to a fair and open trial; and no right to even go for judicial review of the alleged reasons for detaining him.

As such, the manner in which Siva Subramanian and SUHAKAM conducted themselves in this case makes it even more deplorable and is certainly unacceptable behaviour for a National Human Rights Commission.

MADPET seriously hopes that the making of such speedy “conclusions” in this case by Commissioner Siva Subramanian, was not affected by the fact that his current term expires in July 2008, and a belief that a ‘pro-government’ positioning now may assist chances of a re-appointment for another 2-year term.

Human Right Commissioners and the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) must at all times be independent, and be seen to be independent, fearless and should only be driven by human rights and justice considerations. If a Human Rights Commissioner cannot do this by reason of fear or some other reason, then the proper and ethical thing to do is to resign.

MADPET urges SUHAKAM to immediately retract its conclusions about the complaints by P. Uthayakumar, his family and/or his friends, as reported in the media, and conduct a proper inquiry into these complaints in the proper manner – which would necessarily include that fundamental right to be heard and to participate accorded to the alleged victim and the complainants.

MADPET also calls for the immediate and unconditional release of P. Utayakumar, M. Manoharan and all those currently detained under the Internal Security Act(ISA) and other laws that allow for detention without trial.

MADPET also reiterates its call that the ISA and all laws that allow for detention without trial be repealed.

Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

24th April 2008

Suhakam: Uthaya wasn't denied treatment (Malaysiakini)

Suhakam: Uthaya wasn't denied treatment

Beh Lih Yi | Apr 23, 08 3:14pm

Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leader P Uthayakumar has not been denied proper medical treatment, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has found following a probe. Commissioner N Siva Subramaniam said the claims were found to be untrue during Suhakam’s visit yesterday to the Kamunting detention camp in Taiping, Perak. There have been rising concerns over the health of Uthayakumar, a diabetic for the past 12 years. He is currently being held under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in Kamunting. “His situation is under control and he is happy with the medicines given to him,” Siva Subramaniam told a press conference at the Suhakam headquarters in Kuala Lumpur today. Alos present was commission secretary Ahmad Yusuf Ngah. Siva Subramaniam said he led a team which met with senior officials, the doctor and police personnel at the camp, as well as medical personnel in Taiping hospital. Uthayakumar was neither present during the four-hour probe, nor interviewed by the team. The commissioner said his team discovered that certain claims were false - that Uthayakumar had been treated merely by a health assistant and that he had been discharged too soon from the hospital. It was also not true that he had been denied medicine for diabetes over the past month despite repeated requests to the director of the Kamunting camp. “His family wanted to provide medicine to Uthayakumar but under the rules and regulations (of the camp), the medicine needs to come from the health ministry,” he noted. Siva Subramaniam said the substance of medicine was found to be the same from both sources. “He told the doctor that he is satisfied with what is being given to him,” said the commissioner, who nonetheless stressed that it was the right of any detainee to receive proper medical treatment. Siva Subramaniam was asked why Uthayakumar’s side of the story was not heard. “We came to a conclusion that as far as diseases and confidentiality of medical treatment (are concerned), it should be maintained between doctor and patient; a third party shouldn’t know what’s happening,” he contended. He pointed out that media reports were also sufficient to highlight Uthayakumar’s plight. To another question, he said the detainee’s family had not approached Suhakam for help, but understands that over 30 police reports had been lodged over the claim that Uthayakumar was being deprived of due medical attention. Visit to Lenggeng tomorrow Uthayakumar is among five Hindraf leaders who were detained under the ISA on Dec 13 last year after organising a mammoth rally in Kuala Lumpur on Nov 25. This saw some 30,000 Indian Malaysians protesting against perceived marginalisation and discrimination. He was admitted to the Taiping hospital on April 7 after his sugar level rose to more than three times the normal level. He was discharged on April 10 and taken back to the detention centre, but his family insisted that he was still unwell. There have been calls from rights groups and politicians, including the MIC, to provide the lawyer-activist proper medical attention. There are currently 70 detainees in Kamunting under the ISA, a law which the government-backed human rights commission has consistently opposed. Siva Subramaniam also said he will lead a Suhakam team to the Lenggeng detention centre in Negri Sembilan tomorrow, after a riot on Monday. During the incident, about 60 Burmese detainees reportedly tried to pull down the perimeter fence and afterwards torched an administration building. More than 100 members of the people’s volunteer corps, riot police, civil defence department and fire and rescue service personnel had to be called in to contain the riot.

MADPET SAYS NO TO PROPOSAL TO WHIP ‘MAT REMPIT’

MEDIA STATEMENT – 22/4/2008

MADPET SAYS NO TO PROPOSAL TO WHIP ‘MAT REMPIT’

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is disturbed by the recent statement of Federal Traffic chief Senior Assistant Commissioner II Datuk Hamza Taib, as reported in the Star (18/4/2008), who said that “..Habitual illegal road racers and Mat Rempits will face whipping under proposed amendments to the Road Transport Act 1987.”

The report stated that “...under the proposed Section 42 (A), illegal racers can be jailed for up to five years and fined not less than RM5,000, and have their licences suspended for three years for a first offence…The penalty for second-time offenders would be a minimum of 10 years’ jail, three strokes of the rotan, not less than RM10,000 fine, and not less than a five-year suspension of the driving licence…”

Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".

Whipping is one such cruel, inhumane, degrading form of punishment, and there is no good reason why the punishment of whipping is still there in the statute books of caring compassionate Malaysia.

The only flawed reason why some may want to add whipping as an extra-punishment for repeat offenders of an offence under the Road Transport Act is possibly the belief that it will have a deterrent effect. This reasoning is baseless for there is no evidence whatsoever to support such a belief. It is also unlikely that Malaysian authorities will be able to supply Malaysians evidence that the introduction of the punishment of whipping has had a direct consequence in the reduction of any crime.

The Malaysian government must seriously look into root causes, which may reveal that it was the failings of the government itself that has led to such crime in Malaysia today, and if that be the case, then the taking of the easy way out by just blaming the “Mat Rempits” and the introducing whipping as an additional punishment is wrong and unacceptable.

"If you suffer your people to be ill-educated and their manners corrupted from infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded, sire, but that you first make thieves and then punish them?" -Thomas More

It should be noted that the Malaysian Bar, a body of about 13,000 lawyers, did in March 2007 pass a resolution unanimously calling for the abolition of the whipping sentence from the laws of Malaysia. The Malaysian Bar rejected and denounced ‘…the sentence of whipping as it is anachronistic and inconsistent with a compassionate society in a developed nation….’

MADPET calls for an immediate removal of the sentence of whipping from the laws of Malaysia.

MADPET calls also for an end of the execution of the sentence of whipping, which has been known to cause permanent physical and psychological damage to victims, including also impotency.

MADPET calls also for Malaysia to immediately ratify the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).

Charles Hector

for Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)

22^nd April 2008

Whipping, longer jail term for Mat Rempit proposed

Friday April 18, 2008

Whipping for illegal road racers

By KULDEEP S. JESSY

Mat Rempits and other would be illegal racers, beware!

KUALA LUMPUR: Habitual illegal road racers and Mat Rempits will face whipping under proposed amendments to the Road Transport Act 1987.

Federal Traffic chief Senior Asst Comm II Datuk Hamza Taib warned that once the amendments became law, they may be given three strokes of the rotan.

Those who are underage could face up to 100 hours of community service under the supervision of the Welfare Department.

Currently, police charge those involved in illegal racing under Section 42 (1) of the Act, which carries a maximum RM15,000 fine or not more than five years’ jail, and a two-year suspension of the driving licence.

Under the proposed Section 42 (A), illegal racers can be jailed for up to five years and fined not less than RM5,000, and have their licences suspended for three years for a first offence.

“The penalty for second-time offenders would be a minimum of 10 years’ jail, three strokes of the rotan, not less than RM10,000 fine, and not less than a five-year suspension of the driving licence,” SAC Hamza told reporters after Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan launched the Public Bank-police safety campaign, to address the Mat Rempit problem among youths, in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

A proposed Section 42 (A)(B) would also allow the police to seize the motorcycles used and for the machines to be disposed of once a conviction is obtained.

However, a proposal to take action against spectators under the same Act was rejected by the committee chaired by the Transport Ministry.

SAC Hamza said police would also take action against organisers of illegal racing under existing preventive laws.

2008/04/18 (NST)

Whipping, longer jail term for Mat Rempit proposed

By : Alang Bendahara

KUALA LUMPUR: Habitual illegal street racers or Mat Rempit will face whipping as well as a maximum 10-year imprisonment under proposed amendments by police to the Road Transport Act 1987.

Federal Traffic chief Senior Assistant Commissioner II Datuk Hamza Taib said under the proposal to amend Section 42 of the Road Transport Act 1987, second-time and habitual offenders would receive a maximum of three strokes of the rotan.

At present, he said, those who were involved in illegal race were charged under Section 42 (1) of the Road Transport Act 1987, which carries a maximum RM15,000 fine or not more than five years' jail, and a two-year suspension of the driving licence.

The proposed new Section 42 (A) for first-time offenders provides the same jail sentence but a minimum fine of RM5,000 and a three-year suspension of licence.

For repeat offenders, the penalty is a maximum of 10 years' jail, three strokes of rotan, a mandatory RM10,000 fine and a mandatory five-year suspension of the driving licence.
Minors must do community service for a maximum of 100 hours.

Another new sub-section, Section 42 (A) (B) of the act, will allow police to seize motorcycles which would be disposed of with or without a court order once offenders are convicted of the offence.

Speaking after the launch of the Anda Bijak, Anda Selamat road safety campaign organised by Public Bank here yesterday, Hamza said police had also wanted to act against spectators of illegal races but it was rejected by a committee chaired by the Transport Ministry.

"The proposal was dropped as there would be problems in differentiating between spectators and passers-by."

He said police would gather information on illegal race organisers and would forward the case files to Bukit Aman and the Home Ministry for action.

Action against them included sending them to the Sim-pang Renggam detention centre or putting them under restricted residence, he added.

On Wednesday, the Kuantan Magistrate Court sentenced illegal street racer Ahmad Afzal Sabari Zumadi, 28, to two years' jail, fine of RM6,000 and a two-year suspension of his licence.

Present during the road safety campaign launch was Federal Internal Security and Public Order director Datuk Hussin Ismail, who commended Public Bank for helping police educate school children on the dangers of illegal street racing.

Public Bank founder and chairman Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow said the bank would distribute 50,000 copies of the Road User Information Guide to schools through the Education Ministry.

Amnesty International Malaysia:- Release Stats on Executions...etc

17 April 2008 

Amnesty International Malaysia would hereby bring to
your attention the following response to the Deputy
Inspector-General of Police Datuk Ismail Omar’s
comment on the recent Amnesty International Report on
Death Penalty in Malaysia. We are of the view that the
observation made by Datuk Ismail Omar on the report is
incorrect and therefore his comment is misleading. 

The report titled “Death Sentences and Executions in
2007”, released on April 15 2008, merely asserts the
fact that information on executions and death penalty
in Malaysia, a country that retains and practices
death penalty as a form of punishment for a various
offences, is shrouded in secrecy. The report in every
sentence either directly or indirectly did not assert
or put forward any fact of arbitrary executions or
extra judicial killings by the police in Malaysia or
any other facts that undermine police investigations
and criminal procedures. 

The following is the exact paragraph taken from the
April 15 report titled “Death Sentences and Executions
in 2007” (AI Index: ACT 50/001/2008) that can be
referred to at our website at www.amnesty.org. 

“…Amnesty International remains concerned that
executions may have taken place in Mongolia and
Malaysia. However, due to the secretive nature of the
use of the death penalty the organization was unable
to obtain reliable information.” 

Amnesty International Malaysia therefore calls on the
government of Malaysia to make an official release on
all statistics on executions and death sentences in
Malaysia to date. We also urge the government to be
more transparent and report on cases and statistics of
death penalty and executions to the Parliament
annually. The United Nations in the past repeated
calls for the death penalty only to be used in an open
and transparent manner. 


K.Shan 
Campaigns Co-Ordinator 
Amnesty International Malaysia