Thursday, September 28, 2023

No Lese Majeste For Malaysia – Everyone Is Equal Under The Law, Abolish Sedition Act And Restore Freedom Of Expression(MADPET)

Media Statement – 29/9/2023

No Lese Majeste For Malaysia – Everyone Is Equal Under The Law, Abolish Sedition Act And Restore Freedom Of Expression

Government Must Impose Moratorium pending abolition of the Sedition Act

There is growing concern when Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and his PH-BN Plus government seem to be moving towards something like ‘lese majeste’ in Malaysia that will criminalize actions and speech about the royalty. In June 2023, Malaysia’s government warned it would take “appropriate action” against any insults or threats towards the nation’s royal institution.

The draconian Sedition Act 1948 (a law enacted by the British colonial government) have continued to be used. In 3 years, 2020-2022, 255 persons were investigated under the act, but only 4 were charged. (Star, 21/3/2023). In 2023, the Act is still being used.

On 25/9/2023, Wan Ji, 41, finding of guilt of making seditious remarks against the sultan of Selangor was confirmed by the Court of Appeal who sentenced him to 9 months imprisonment.

In July 2023, the now Kedah Chief Minister was charged under Sedition Act for 2 offences in 2 different courts, one with regard to comments concerning the Selangor Sultan, and another concerning a statement about the Unity Government of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

In March 2019, the police also investigated organizers/participants of the Women's March in Kuala Lumpur under the Sedition Act 1948. This year, some participants were investigated for offences under the draconian Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 and another law.

Malaysians expected the repeal of the draconian Sedition Act when Anwar Ibrahim’s Pakatan Harapan(PH) wins the election but this did not happen after about 11 months in power.

No need to Review, just totally Repeal

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) reiterates the call for the TOTAL abolition of the Sedition Act 1948, and Cannot Agree with the Malaysian Cabinet’s position to keep it, and use it only to protect the King, Sultans and the Rulers of the States. “The Cabinet has agreed in principle for the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15) to be reviewed to ensure this law is used only to protect the institution of Rulers from any provocation,” she [Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Minister] said in a statement today. (Malay Mail, 25/7/2023).

On October 16, 2014, the Malaysian Bar held the “Walk for Peace and Freedom”, participated by about 1,500 lawyers to condemn the use of the Sedition Act 1948 and calling for its immediate repeal. In June 2020, SUHAKAM (Malaysian Human Rights Commission) called the Government to repeal Sedition Act 1948. without further delay. Many groups and persons have called for repeal.

Sedition Act criminalizes seditious tendency – intention irrelevant, truth is no defence, and freedom of expression sidelined

The Sedition Act makes it an offence of doing or saying things that ‘have a seditious tendency’ – that has a tendency ‘to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against…’. Hence, it does not matter if what was said was even the truth or a justified opinion, for all that matters is whether it had a seditious tendency or not.

Whether the maker of the statement had the intention of doing this act that caused a seditious tendency is irrelevant. Section 3(3) of the Act states that ‘For the purpose of proving the commission of any offence against this Act the intention of the person charged at the time… shall be deemed to be irrelevant if in fact the act had, or would, if done, have had, or the words, publication or thing had a seditious tendency.

In P.P. v. Mark Koding [1983] 1 MLJ 111, the court held that even an innocent or noble intention will not provide a defence. “It is immaterial whether the accused's intention or motive was honourable or evil when making the speech”

Even if the Sedition Act is repealed, Malaysia has other laws that could be used including the Penal Code offence of criminal defamation that could be used against anyone that committed crimes against the royalty.

Equality – No One Is Above The Law – the King says

Our Federal Constitution in Article 8(1) states ‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law. That means everyone is equal, including the King, Sultan and Rulers of State. Article 10(1)(a) states that every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression, and under the ‘restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient’ with regard this freedom, there is no mention about the royal institution or the rulers.

The King, Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri'ayatuddin Al Mustafa Billah Shah, recently reaffirmed the principle of equality of all persons, and that the law must not give special treatment or exception to anyone. He said that the law has only one language, one principle, one punishment and one application to anyone. (Sinar Harian, 5/9/2022). The King, in his wisdom, did not demand any special treatment for the royalty or the royal institution.

A Constitutional Parliamentary Democracy Not A Feudal State

Malaysia is a constitutional parliamentary democracy, not a feudal state.

The King and the Rulers no longer have absolute power generally. All is done by the King or Rulers, is on the advice of the Prime Minister or Chief Minister, whereby the King has no choice but to follow the advice of the party as provided in the Constitution, be it the Federal or State constitution. Even for the appointment of the Prime Minister, the King can only appoint the person who has the confidence of the majority of the Members of Parliament, not as he pleases.

As such, it is ignorant or wrong to personally blame the King or any Ruler, for the people he appoints including Judges, SUHAKAM Commissioners, Attorney General and members of the Cabinet.

Today. It must be acknowledged that the King did in the past appoint wrong people on the bad advice or indication of others, as we have the former Prime Minister Najib Razak and even the current Prime Minister who have been tried and found guilty of crimes by the courts.

Cabinet member Anwar was silent when Constitution amended removing ‘legal immunity’ of royalty

It must also be noted that the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1993 introduced Part XV Proceedings Against The Yang Di-Pertuan Agong And The Rulers, whereby Article 182(3)  states that, ‘The Special Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to try all offences committed in the Federation by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler of a State and all civil cases by or against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler of a State notwithstanding where the cause of action arose.’ Article 33A(1) states that ‘Where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is charged with an offence under any law in the Special Court established under Part XV he shall cease to exercise the functions of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.’

This Constitutional Amendment that made clear that there was no immunity for royalty and/or Rulers was made when Anwar Ibrahim was then a Cabinet Minister  of the then Barisan Nasional government.

Royalty’s  definition and involvement in wrongdoing

A problem in Malaysia is the definition of royalty, and the preferential treatment accorded by State, public officers and some to royalty primarily because of a prevalent ‘feudal mentality’. Would that affect tenders, contracts, logging permits and mining licences when royalty is involved in the business or application?  Even, when it comes to enforcement of the law, there seem to be disinclination when royalty is involved, and this is seen by the number of cases filed in the Special Court.

Should not the people have the freedom to highlight wrongdoings of the royalty, or the companies/businesses they are involved in? If the King appoints a Prime Minister who does not(or no longer) enjoyed the confidence of the majority, will it be an offence under Sedition Act to highlight this failing of the King or Royal Institution? If the Royal Institution or the Rulers does or says something that is unacceptable or wrong, can not concerned Malaysians highlight this?

The royalty have been involved in companies involved in logging (including illegal logging), mining, and other matters, are there have been allegation of wrongdoing highlighted.

Some of media reports indicate possible crimes by royalty or even royal institution :- Tiger habitat threatened by Malaysian royals’ mining plans (Mongbay,7/7/2021); Malaysia’s Johor royals linked to forests felled for oil palm plantations without full approval (SCMP,24/7/2022); Shocking expose of politicians, royalty in multi-billion medicine monopoly (13/6/2018 FMT); and Company linked to royalty in Lynas' waste disposal site project (Malaysiakini,24/2/2021).

Malaysia is still reeling from the IMDB, SRC and other scandals where the Executive arm of government is implicated as perpetrators for crimes (like corruption, money laundering, abuse of power, etc); or for the failure of enforcement and administration of justice. Then Prime Minister Najib Razak, current/former Prime Ministers, then/now members of the Cabinet are or have been implicated in wrongdoings against the law.

Hence, to maintain Sedition Act for the protection of royalty, or even royal institutions cannot be justified. Are we to be forbidden by law to be a good citizen in a democracy to highlight wrongs or suspected wrongs, or to publicly disagree with a statement/action of the royalty or royal institution?

Therefore, MADPET reiterates the call on the Malaysian government to immediately repeal the draconian Sedition Act 1948, and no longer come up with excuses for delaying the repeal.

MADPET also call on the Malaysian government to immediately impose a MORATORIUM on the use of the Sedition Act, so that no one will ever be again investigated, arrested, detained for investigation or charged for any offences under the Sedition Act. Malaysia, in 2018 imposed a moratorium on execution and Malaysia did not hang anyone after that.

MADPET also reiterates the call for the immediate repeal of bad laws, and/or draconian provisions in law.

Charles Hector

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

 

 

PM Anwar says sedition charges against Malaysian Opposition politicians to protect royal institution, not flexing his power




Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim says the unity government is not abusing the law to charge federal Opposition leaders but to protect Malaysia’s royal institution. ― Bernama pic
Follow us on Instagram, subscribe to our Telegram channel and browser alerts for the latest news you need to know.

By Shathana Kasinathan
Saturday, 23 Sep 2023 11:23 AM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 23 — The unity government is not abusing the law to charge federal Opposition leaders but to protect Malaysia’s royal institution, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said in an interview with international news broadcaster CNN.

Currently in New York for the United Nations General Assembly, Anwar was responding to the perception his administration is using the colonial-era law that his Pakatan Harapan coalition had demanded to be reformed to quell critics now that he is in power.
 
"When you attack the Rulers, the Sultans, we have a law. Unless we are able to make some amendments to the law, then we can consider whether to charge or not. I think there is a need to protect the institution. That's what the people have decided from independence. That's the system we inherited.

“There's a law until we are able to amend that law, and the law persists,” he told CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour in an interview yesterday.

They were alluding to the use of the Sedition Act against PAS politician Datuk Seri Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor who was accused of making remarks that insulted the Selangor sultan in the appointment of Anwar’s party colleague Datuk Seri Amirudin Shari as the state menteri besar.

Sanusi, who is also Kedah menteri besar, was charged in July with two counts of sedition ahead of key elections in six states on August 12 that maintained the status quo.

Following criticism against the Anwar administration after the charging, the Selangor Royal Office released a statement categorising Sanusi's comments as an affront to the integrity of the state royal institution.

During the CNN interview, Amanpour noted that PKR’s Pasir Gudang lawmaker Hassan Abdul Karim had previously commented about Anwar’s focus after becoming prime minister.

She asked Anwar to comment on Hassan’s view that Malaysia’s 10th PM appeared to be occupied with preserving his government's power rather than advancing the promised reform agenda.

“Look at it positively, as a member of my party expressing criticisms against me, that is a very democratic process.

“You see, any criticism against the prime minister or the government, I don't charge for sedition. I have been abused on a daily basis, but none has been charged,” he replied. - Malay Mail, 23/9/2023


Azalina: Cabinet agrees to restrict Sedition Act to only royalty issues

 
 
P Azalina: Cabinet agrees to restrict Sedition Act to only royalty issuesrime Minister’s Department (Legal and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said she had presented today the outcome of a recent dialogue on the 3R issues — religion, race and royalty — to the Cabinet. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin

KUALA LUMPUR, July 25 — The Cabinet has agreed that changes should be made to limit the Sedition Act 1948’s use to only matters involving the royalty, minister Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said today.

Azalina, who is minister in charge of law and institutional reform, said she had presented today the outcome of a recent dialogue on the “3R” issues — religion, race and royalty — to the Cabinet.

“The Cabinet has agreed in principle for the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15) to be reviewed to ensure this law is used only to protect the institution of Rulers from any provocation,” she said in a statement today.

“Other aspects regarding provocation involving religion and race will be scrutinised, including enacting new laws if necessary regarding national harmony and unity by taking into account the institution of the Rulers as the head of the religion of Islam, and international best practices and principles.

“The Prime Minister’s Department’s Legal Affairs Division (BHEUU) will take the appropriate steps to review the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15) in detail and ensure that proposed amendments that will be proposed are truly intended to protect the institution of Rulers holistically,” she concluded.

The “3R” legal dialogue that Azalina was referring to was held on July 21 at the Asian International Arbitration Centre, and which was attended by over 50 representatives from the government — including the National Unity Ministry, the Home Ministry, the police, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) — and non-governmental organisations such as legal professional bodies, civil society organisations, academics and religious organisations.

Previously on July 21, Azalina had said the government intended to review the relevance of several laws — including the Sedition Act 1948 — that can be used to deal with “3R” issues to ensure that they keep up with current developments, as some of these laws were enacted seven decades ago.

Azalina had also noted that enforcement agencies are facing challenges in terms of investigation and prosecution, in light of the rapid spread of information through advanced technology, fake or hacked online accounts, anonymity and artificial intelligence.

Azalina said participants of the 3R legal dialogue and focus group discussion on July 21 were asked to discuss three main options, including whether Malaysia needs to abolish existing laws such as the Sedition Act and to replace it with new laws containing offences that are more specific and whether new laws that are criminal or quasi criminal/civil should be introduced.

The two other options that the participants were asked to discuss was whether Malaysia should amend existing laws to ensure that the issue of 3R provocations can be handled holistically, and whether Malaysia should maintain status quo where no changes to the country’s laws are required and where efforts to tackle 3R provocations could instead be continued through different approaches.

Azalina had at that time said the government would continue to involve stakeholders in considering a holistic policy and legal direction as a guide for the government in tackling 3R issues while also encouraging tolerance, harmony and unity. She had said the July 21 3R legal dialogue’s outcome would be presented to the Cabinet.

At that time, Azalina said the unity government supported the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed to Malaysians under the Federal Constitution and in line with the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, while also taking into account that such freedom should be used responsibly. - Malay Mail, 25/7/2023


Home Minister: 255 investigated for sedition from 2020 to 2022, only four charged
 

By MARTIN CARVALHO, TARRENCE TAN and GERARD GIMINO Nation


Tuesday, 21 Mar 2023 9:10 AM MYT




KUALA LUMPUR: A total of 255 suspects were investigated under the Sedition Act over a three-year period, says Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail.

The Home Minister said the investigations by the police were conducted between 2020 and 2022 with only four cases charged in court.

"In 2020, a total of 117 investigations papers were opened which led to the arrest of two men.

"However, no cases were prosecuted in court," he said in a written reply to a question raised by Datuk Ngeh Koon Ham (PH-Beruas) in the Dewan Rakyat on Tuesday (March 21).

Ngeh wanted to know the number of individuals investigated, detained and charged under the Sedition Act between 2020 and 2022.

He also wanted to know the gender, race and age of those investigated, detained and charged.

In 2021, Saifuddin said that a total of 84 investigations were conducted in with 36 arrests involving 29 male and seven female suspects, with their ages ranging from their 20s to their 60s.
He said that of those detained, 27 were Malays, five Chinese, three Indians and one of other race.

"Only two cases, involving two Malay male suspects in their 30s, were charged," he added.

Saifuddin said that a total of 54 investigations were carried out resulting in 24 arrests in 2022.

He said all suspects were males between 20 to 70 years old, of which 12 were Malays, five Chinese, two Indians and five of other races.

He added that only two Malay male suspects, in their 20s and 30s, were charged in court.- Star, 21/3/2023

Laksana prinsip keadilan tanpa pilih kasih: Agong
oleh NIK AMIRULMUMIN NIK MIN 05 September 2022 01:20pm

Al-Sultan Abdullah menyempurnakan Perasmian Kompleks Mahkamah Syariah Negeri Pahang yang dimasyhur dengan nama Kompleks Syariah Al-Sultan Abdullah di sini pada Isnin.

KUANTAN - Tiada sebarang keistimewaan atau pengecuali kepada pihak yang melakukan kesalahan dalam melaksanakan keadilan.

Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri'ayatuddin Al Mustafa Billah Shah bertitah, ketegasan prinsip keadilan Islam juga tidak membenarkan sebarang ketidakadilan kepada sesiapa pun termasuk pihak yang tidak disenangi.



Titah Seri Paduka Baginda, undang-undang hanya memiliki satu bahasa; satu prinsip; satu hukuman dan satu aplikasi kepada sesiapa pun.

"Keadilan yang diamalkan tanpa memilih kasih berjaya mengangkat martabat Islam pada zaman Rasulullah.


"Prinsip keadilan yang telus dan terbuka turut berjaya membangunkan masyarakat yang adil, saksama, makmur dan sejahtera,"titahnya.

Seri Paduka Baginda bertitah demikian dalam titah diraja sempena Majlis Perasmian Kompleks Mahkamah Syariah Kuantan yang dimasyhur dengan nama Kompleks Syariah Al-Sultan Abdullah di sini pada Isnin.


Turut berangkat, Raja Permaisuri Agong,Tunku Azizah Aminah Maimunah Iskandariah dan Pemangku Raja Pahang,Tengku Mahkota Tengku Hassanal Ibrahim Alam Shah Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri'ayatuddin Al Mustafa Billah Shah.

Hadir sama, Menteri Besar Pahang, Datuk Seri Wan Rosdy Wan Ismail dan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri (Hal Ehwal Agama), Datuk Idris Ahmad. - Sinar Harian, 5/9/2022

 

MALAYSIA'S MONARCHS OF MAYHEM

SINGAPORE -- Britain's royal family may be having a rough time these days, but at least none of its members has been accused of clubbing a golf caddy to death, fatally shooting a man from a helicopter or beating up a field-hockey coach.

These and other alleged offenses by the sultan of Johor, one of Malaysia's nine hereditary rulers, are being discussed publicly for the first time in the former British colony amid an unprecedented spate of royal-bashing that has accompanied the easing of a taboo against criticizing the sultans.

Fed up with a history of abusive, sometimes violent, behavior by some of the constitutional rulers, the Malaysian Parliament is considering a government proposal to strip the nine sultans of their immunity from prosecution.

With members of Parliament now airing charges of royal misbehavior openly, the normally docile Malaysian press has been having a field day recounting lurid tales that would have been punishable under the country's Sedition Act only a few weeks ago. The act, which prohibits any questioning of Malaysia's form of government, remains in force, but now is being largely ignored with regard to the sultans.

Under the Southeast Asian country's unique rotating monarchy, the sultans, who serve as titular rulers of nine of Malaysia's 13 states, hold elections among themselves every five years to choose one of their number as king. The controversial sultan of Johor, Mahmood Iskandar ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Ismail, 60, was king of Malaysia from 1984 to 1989 and now again rules his state of Johor on the southern tip of peninsular Malaysia across from Singapore.

Trouble for the royals began brewing in July when one of the sultan's younger sons, Tunku Abdul Majid Idris, 22, allegedly beat up the opposing goalkeeper after a field-hockey match that his team lost. The Malaysian Hockey Federation suspended the prince from playing in tournaments for five years.

In response, the sultan orchestrated the abrupt pullout of a Johor school hockey team from a national tournament in November, a move sharply criticized by the team's coach, Douglas Gomez. The hot-tempered sultan summoned Gomez to his palace Nov. 30 and thrashed him in the presence of royal bodyguards, Gomez reportedly told police. Police are investigating the incident.

Earlier this month the Malaysian Parliament publicly accused the sultan of beating the coach and unanimously passed a censure motion, the first time such an action had been taken against one of the hereditary rulers. Then on Dec. 15 Idris, who is not covered by the royal immunity, was charged in court with assaulting the goalkeeper. He faces up to a year in jail and a fine if convicted.

"If such incidents are repeated, it will affect the public's opinion of royalty like is happening in the United Kingdom," Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad told reporters.

After the censure motion, Mahathir, who has clashed with the sultans previously during his 11-year tenure, called for constitutional changes to remove the rulers' immunity from legal proceedings. A debate on the matter is scheduled for January. A potential obstacle is that under the constitution, any changes to the sultans' privileges must be approved by their "Council of Rulers," essentially giving the sultans a veto power.

Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Ghafar Baba warned that while no one is yet calling for abolition of the monarchy, its fate lies in the sultans' hands. "A fair king is respected," he said, "a cruel king dethroned."

He said that although the constitution gives the sultans certain rights, "it does not allow them to assault, kill or hurt any citizen."

Another member of Parliament, Shahidan Kassim, charged during the session that the sultan and his eldest son, Tengku Mahkota, were implicated in 23 criminal incidents since 1972 ranging from rape to assault and homicide.

Among the examples aired in Parliament was Mahmood Iskandar's conviction for manslaughter in 1977 on charges of shooting a man in a boat from a helicopter, ostensibly to prevent a smuggling attempt. He was sentenced to six months in prison, but his father, who was then Johor's sultan, pardoned him. He succeeded his father as sultan in 1981.

In another case, members of Parliament asserted, Mahmood Iskandar, while serving as king in 1987, bludgeoned a caddy to death with a golf club, reportedly for sniggering over a bad shot. The incident had long been rumored, but never previously publicized, and no action against the king was ever taken.

Neither Mahmood Iskandar nor his sons have commented on any of the allegations, which were published in the Malaysian press as a result of having been raised in Parliament.

Another ruler, Sultan Ismail Petra of Kelantan, stirred controversy earlier this year when he refused to pay the required duty on a Lamborghini Diablo sports car that he had imported. Invoking his royal untouchability, he walked into a customs area and drove off in the car.

In a separate case, government officials said this month that the royal family of Pahang was linked to contractors involved in illegal logging in that state.

While the sultans have long been revered among ethnic Malays in the racially diverse country, they have increasingly aggravated the growing Malaysian middle class in recent years with their inside-track involvement in all kinds of businesses, in addition to the payments they draw from federal and state budgets, political analysts said.

Nearly $50 million a year is paid to the royal families in federal stipends, Malaysian officials estimate, and millions more go for royal residences, vehicles and natural-resource concessions. - Washington Post, 29/12/1992

 

Tiger habitat threatened by Malaysian royals’ mining plans

The mining project is due to last two years, but the damage will persist long after. The EIA recommends necessary land rehabilitation to combat continued environmental disturbance after the project has wrapped up. While some of the rehabilitation can be carried out alongside the mining itself, the EIA clearly states that revegetation of the land will likely require continued waste treatment and regular fertilizer inputs due to the high toxicity of mine waste. However, in the proposed project timeline, there is no indication of a plan to continue this rehabilitation after the mine shuts.

Golden Prosperous Resources did not respond to questions from Mongabay.

The project is awaiting approval from the Department of Environment and, thanks to its royal backers, can expect little in the way of public resistance; portraying the royals in a negative light is enough to land a citizen in jail in Malaysia. These gag laws make it very difficult for politicians, activists and citizens to protest projects bearing the royal stamp of approval. In early June, for example, Malaysia’s Muda youth movement slammed officials for allowing the continued exploitation of Tasik Chini — but did not berate the royal family for its role in the exploitation.

“The richer they have become the more influential it has made them so that people are now fearful to speak in terms that are not groveling let alone critical because of what might happen to them,” Rewcastle Brown said. “In particular there is a willingness on the part of the police and judiciary to abuse old-fashioned sedition laws to arrest and prosecute people just for speaking critically about such practices.”

Deforestation in Peninsular Malaysia. Projects that require, and get, approval for deforestation are common in Malaysia. Image by Stratman via Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).

Projects like these are extremely common in Malaysia. Despite the Som Forest being a gazetted as a forest reserve, the EIA report reveals there are many other mines, plantations and logging projects neighboring the site, which is secondary forest itself, having been logged just decades ago. Indeed, just 23 days after submitting this proposal, Golden Prosperous Resources submitted another to log 124.38 hectares (307.35 acres) of the Bukit Ibam Forest Reserve. Details of this EIA are not yet available to the public.

Banner image of a Malayan tiger (Panthera tigris jacksoni) by Brice De Reviers via Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0). Source: Mongbay, 7/7/2021

 

Another royalty-linked mining project
Published:  Jun 23, 2021 6:12 AM
Updated: 7:35 AM



Another royalty-linked mining project

A company with links to the Pahang royal family is planning to excavate iron from a degazetted forest reserve at Kuala Tembeling in Jerantut - which is home to several protected species, including the critically endangered Malayan Tiger.

The company is linked to Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah's younger sister, Tengku Nong Fatimah.

Previously, Malaysiakini reported that the monarch's aunt, Tengku Hanizar Tengku Muhammad, co-owned a company that plans to mine minerals near Tasik Chini, in Pekan.

Both projects had appointed Golden Prosperous Resources Sdn Bhd as the contractor.

The project in Kuala Tembeling sits in the middle of the Som Forest Reserve. Curiously, its mining lease will end next month but site clearing is only scheduled to begin in August this year.

Malaysia’s Johor royals linked to forests felled for oil palm plantations without full approval

  • Satellite images show hundreds of hectares of trees cleared from a site by a company Johor’s royal family part owns, without the proper approvals
  • Locals say nearby plantations turned rivers itchy, sour and at times coffee-black – and drove elephants out of the forests into surrounding villages - SCMP, 24/7/2022

Shocking expose of politicians, royalty in multi-billion medicine monopoly

A 12-page document is submitted to the health minister, claiming corruption in the supply of drugs to the government.

PETALING JAYA: Shocking and detailed revelations have emerged on how companies linked to politicians close to the previous government control the supply of billions of ringgit worth of medical drugs to the government, giving them a monopoly that could have increased the cost of drugs supplied to government hospitals and clinics nationwide.

The 12-page dossier sighted by FMT, which was submitted to Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad today, confirmed his statement last week that pharmaceutical giant Pharmaniaga did not have a monopoly on the supply of drugs to his ministry as widely speculated.

Instead, the document listed 20 companies with links to prominent politicians, including former ministers who represent the top echelons of the Umno leadership.

The companies acted as “tendering agents” over a four-year period between 2013 and 2016, reaping contracts worth a total of RM3.7 billion.

The tendering agents, according to the document, acted for more than 70 pharmaceutical companies, all of whom used only the “same few official-owned tendering agents”.

“The reason is clear, and it is none other than corruption,” said the dossier.

A quick check by FMT revealed that the lion’s share of RM1.4 billion, or some 38%, went to a company owned by the uncle of a former minister and senior Wanita Umno politician.

Other personalities with ties to the companies include members of the royal family, a former high ranking Felda officer, a former ambassador to the US, a former official of the health ministry and a former minister who lost in the recent election.

It is understood that the supply of medicine to the government by international pharmaceutical companies is done through local subsidiaries through a tender process.

Explaining the process, the whistleblower said “tendering agents” are appointed by international pharmaceutical companies.

“International pharmaceutical companies collude with official-owned tendering agents to bid rig. By refusing to supply or deal to other resellers and tendering agents, international pharmaceutical companies grant official-owned tendering agents a monopoly, thus securing an automatic win in a tender,” said the whistleblower, whose identity is being withheld.

“Foreign companies cannot participate in a Malaysian government tender directly, but instead must go through a Malaysian distributor, reseller or tendering agent.

“When the health ministry puts out a procurement tender, international pharmaceutical companies will engage Bumiputera tendering agents to bid for the tender according to the tender specifications,” the dossier said.

The whistleblower explained that tendering agents are paid a percentage of commission based on every tender won, and earn clean profit since they do not handle marketing, logistics or distribution activities.

“From at least 2011 to the present, international pharmaceutical companies have been paying bribes to high ranking officials/politicians to assist in obtaining or retaining business in Malaysia in violation of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

“These corrupt payments are concealed as commission payments to official-owned tendering agents,” it added.

When contacted by FMT, Dzulkefly said his office was going through the document. - FMT, 

 

Company linked to royalty in Lynas' waste disposal site project

Bukit Ketam, located around 35km from Kuantan town, was an unassuming place until recently when Lynas Malaysia announced it will be building its permanent disposal facility (PDF) there to store toxic waste from its factory near Kuantan port.

While much attention was on the rare earth firm, what is taking shape at Bukit Ketam is much bigger than Lynas, and a firm linked to Pahang royalty has been tasked to set the plan in motion.

A total of 202.35 hectares, the size of 283 football fields, has been carved out of the Bukit Kuantan permanent forest reserve, to be converted into a Multi-Category Industrial Scheduled Waste Disposal Site (MCISWDS).

Lynas' PDF will only occupy 58.25 hectares or 29 percent of the overall site.

Gading Senggara Sdn Bhd (GSSB), a private firm linked to Pahang royalty, will be the contractor of the MCISWDS. Likewise, Lynas appointed the same company to build its PDF there.

GSSB, founded in July 2012 as Puncak Trillium Sdn Bhd, changed to its current name in December 2014.

A Malaysiakini check on the firm with the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) revealed that the majority shareholder, with a 50 percent stake, is Pahang Regent Tengku Hassanal Ibrahim Alam Shah.

The second-largest shareholder is Gading Group chief executive officer Johari Harun, who is also the Bentong Umno vice-chief. He controls a 40 percent stake.

The remaining 10 percent is held by one Mohd Firdaus Redzuan. The company information is based on records it submitted to the CCM as of Oct 5, 2020.

The company's directors are Johari, Firdaus, and one Ahmad Radzi Zaini.

Environmental struggles

The mega-contract is another project that the people of Kuantan have to deal with as the town struggles to balance the environment and industry over the last decade.

The path from town to the future MCISWDS site is flanked by oil palm plantations with road tainted with red dirt, a reminder of the rampant bauxite mining in 2015 that left parts of Kuantan covered in red dust.

The mining frenzy, which saw oil palm smallholders giving up their land for mining in exchange for stacks of cash, eventually forced the federal government to intervene by imposing a moratorium on exports from the Kuantan port.

The MCISWDS itself was a byproduct of environmentalists protesting against Lynas' Advanced Material Plant in Gebeng, Kuantan since 2010.

Its processing of rare earth material at the facility produces toxic waste, including radioactive Water Leach Purification (WLP) residue.

While the waste has low radioactivity, its build-up over the years raised concerns.

The previous Pakatan Harapan government, which as the opposition had supported protests against the facility, unsuccessfully tried to get the waste sent back to Mt Weld in Western Australia, where the original rare earth was mined from.

However, Lynas Malaysia agreed, as part of its new licensing condition, to move its cracking and leaching operations, which produces the radioactive waste, back to Western Australia.

The waste already produced here since 2012 remains a problem and this is where the PDF comes in.

But the MCISWDS project is significantly larger than Lynas' PDF and it is not yet clear what other forms of waste will be stored at the facility.

A waste dumpsite until 2119

The MCISWDS in Pahang will hug the state's border with Terengganu. Adjacent to the site, on the Terengganu site of the border, is a vast durian plantation.

Information on the MCISWDS is still limited but some details can be gleaned from the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report on Lynas' PDF, located within the site.

According to the EIA, the Pahang government, Kuantan Municipal Council, Land Office, Pahang Forestry Department, Pahang Public Works Department, Terengganu government, Syarikat Air Terengganu, and Kemaman Municipal Council have no objections to the Lynas PDF.

Supporting documents also revealed that the Pahang government already excised the MCISWDS area from the Bukit Kuantan Forest Reserve, which was gazetted as a permanent forest reserve since 1962.

The forest in the project site will be felled before construction begins.

Under Section 13 of the National Forestry Act 1984, the "state authority" can excise a permanent forest reserve by publishing a gazette specifying the extent of such land and a fixed date.

The interpretations of Acts 1948 and 1967 defines "state authority" as the ruler of a state.

The accompanying land grant in the EIA showed the site is now listed for industrial use for a period of 99 years - from Aug 14, 2020 until Aug 13, 2119.

While the waste, at least for Lynas, will be stored there permanently, the EIA said the site could still be converted into a public recreational park in the future.

According to the Lynas PDF project implementation timeline, the land clearing was scheduled to start in the middle of this month.

GSSB had applied to the Pahang Forestry Department for the land clearing in October 2020.

The Pahang Forestry Department has informed the Department of Environment last November that it did not have any objections, as long as GSSB left the forest surrounding the project site untouched.

Malaysiakini has contacted GSSB for a response and requested further information about the MCISWDS project. - Malaysiakini, 17/2/2021

Cops investigating Women's March organisers under Sedition Act
Published:  Mar 14, 2019 7:27 PM
Updated: Mar 9, 2021 12:19 PM
 
Police are investigating the organisers of last Saturday's Women's March in Kuala Lumpur under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948.

In a statement today, the organisers said they are also being probed under Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012.

If convicted under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act, a person can be slapped with a three-year jail term, or RM5,000 fine, or both.

"(We) will comply with the process despite these laws being unfairly and disproportionately being used against us," said the organisers.

The International Women's Day March last Saturday had, among others, called for an end to child marriage and gender-based violence.

However, this message was overshadowed by the focus on the presence of some participants from the LGBT community. - Malaysiakini,

 

Saturday, September 09, 2023

SUHAKAM Commissioners must resign or be removed for failure to investigate into complaint lodged against Chairman, and for later referral of the complaint to be dealt by the Prime Minister’s Department(MADPET)

 

Media Statement – 10/9/2023

SUHAKAM Commissioners must resign or be removed for failure to investigate into complaint lodged against Chairman, and for later referral of the complaint to be dealt by the Prime Minister’s Department

National Human Rights Institution must be independent, and be seen to be independent especially from the State

SUHAKAM is Malaysia’s National Human Rights Institution, and it must always be independent and be seen to be independent, especially from the government, but when the Human Rights Commission decided to not inquire and decide on a complaint lodged with SUHAKAM alleging, amongst others, racial discrimination and abuse of power by a fellow Commissioner, and later to refer to it to the legal affairs division of the Prime Minister's Department, this impacted the perception of  independence of SUHAKAM, which may also well be considered a failure of duties of SUHAKAM commissioners. After being appointed by the King (Yang Di-Pertuan Agung), like Judges, SUHAKAM Commissioners must be independent, and committed to the protection and promotion of human rights.

By asking a division in the Prime Minister to deal with the inquiry of a complain submitted to SUHAKAM, it may give the wrong impression that SUHAKAM is under a division in the Prime Minister’s Department. With 8 Commissioners, the inquiry against even a fellow Commissioner should still be done by SUHAKAM.(Star, 24/6/2023)

As such, all SUHAKAM Commissioners, or those involved in the decision-making in not doing the inquiry and referring the complaint to the Prime Minister ought to resign, or even be removed to restore the credibility and independence of SUHAKAM.

Now, even the Human Rights Commission Of Malaysia Act 1999(HRCM Act)’s grounds for disqualification/removal as stated in Section 10, amongst others, that says that If any Commissioner had ‘…(ii) … misbehaved or has conducted himself in such a manner as to bring disrepute to the Commission; or (iii)… in conflict with his duties as a member of the Commission.’,

In this case, firstly, they failed in their duty to duly investigate or do a public inquiry and decide on a complaint against fellow SUHAKAM Commissioner, and secondly, they elected to refer it to the Prime Minister’s Department asking for the  ‘…allegations to be looked into by an independent body…’. This is totally absurd.

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is appalled at how the complaint to SUHAKAM regarding the serious allegation about human rights violations against the now immediate past Malaysia’s National Human Rights Institution (SUHAKAM)’s Chairman was dealt with.

Complaint Against SUHAKAM Chairman – racial discrimination, etc

In brief, in March 2023, a complaint was lodged by several complainants with SUHAKAM against the then SUHAKAM chairman Prof Datuk Dr Rahmat Mohamad alleging human rights violations like racial discrimination and abuse of power. Racial discrimination is a serious human rights violation, that is also specifically mentioned in the United Nations General Assembly’s Paris Principles (‘Principles Relating to the Status of National Human Rights Institutions’) that sets out the minimum standards that NHRIs must meet in order to be considered credible, independent and to operate effectively.

Then on 28 April 2023, the said the Chairman files a law suit against one of the complainants, a senior SUHAKAM staff alleging, amongst others, defamation. This, itself is conduct unbecoming of a SUHAKAM Commissioner.

Did a SUHAKAM Commissioner file the law suit in court to prevent SUHAKAM from inquiring into the complaint?  

Section 12(2) of the Human Rights Commission Of Malaysia Act 1999(HRCM Act) states that ‘The Commission shall not inquire into any complaint relating to any allegation of the infringement of human rights which-    (a) is the subject matter of any proceedings pending in any court, including any appeals; or    (b) has been finally determined by any court.’

Can we then say that this SUHAKAM Commissioner had ‘… misbehaved or has conducted himself in such a manner as to bring disrepute to the Commission; or (iii) has acted in contravention of this Act and in conflict with his duties as a member of the Commission…’, which is also a ground for disqualification and removal as SUHAKAM Commissioner?

Then, on 16/6/2023, SUHAKAM comes out saying the Chairman will withdraw the suit. Has the suit been withdrawn yet? Should it not have been the Chairman himself that made this statement, and not SUHAKAM? In any event, there is no news about any withdrawal of the suit in court, and if he did, the withdrawal should be a withdrawal with no liberty to file afresh.

If the court action has already been withdrawn, then SUHAKAM is now free inquire and decide on the complaint against Chairman Rahmat Mohamad. SUHAKAM must therefore retract its decision to refer to Prime Minister’s Department, and do the inquiry themselves. Even if the Chairman resigns, an inquiry and decision must still be made and decided by SUHAKAM.

Then, on 24/6/2023, it is reported that ‘The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) says it will refer matters related to allegations against its chairman to the legal affairs division of the Prime Minister's Department… the commission said it was imperative for such allegations to be looked into by an independent body…’(Star, 24/6/2023).

What did the government then do? The Minister’s appointment to another position was wrong.

It seems that no independent inquiry was done, and the complaint is yet to be dealt with. Was there a human rights violation or not remains an unanswered question.

What happens is the Minister appointed the sitting SUHAKAM Commissioner to another big position, possibly one that comes with remuneration on 23/8/2023, and Rahmat resigned on 31/8/2023. ‘…The Legal Affairs Division (BHEUU) of the Prime Minister's Department said Rahmat is now the Asian International Arbitration Centre (AIAC) Advisory Board chairman for 2023-2025 term, following an appointment made by the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said on Aug 23…’(NST, 28/8/2023)

MADPET is of the position that it is wrong for the Minister or Government to appoint a sitting SUHAKAM Commissioner to another position, possibly one with allowances, remuneration or powers. It is different if the appointment comes long after he ceases to be a Commissioner, but it not the case here.

No sitting SUHAKAM Commissioners must be appointed to other positions by the government, as this affects the Independence of SUHAKAM and/or the said Commissioner. Noting that the State or State linked entities/persons may often be the alleged violators of human rights, such ‘appointment’ can be perceived as ‘bribes’ and may impact the perception of independence of Commissioners and SUHAKAM itself.

SUHAKAM’s independence and perception of independence from government is of paramount importance, as reasonably SUHAKAM will have to deal with all kinds of complaints of violations of human rights, where in many cases, the alleged perpetrator may be the government, government departments/agencies or officers, Government owned or linked companies, Ministers and even the Prime Minister.

Noting what has happened, MADPET calls for the immediate resignation of all SUHAKAM Commissioners, or alternatively that they be removed as SUHAKAM Commissioners.

MADPET notes that no individual Commissioner have to date come out publicly and stated his/her objection to the decision for SUHAKAM not to inquire into the complaint, and/or the decision to ask the legal affairs division of the Prime Minister's Department to deal with it vide an independent inquiry. No Commissioner have also come out publicly stating that he/she was not part of the decision-making process.

MADPET calls for Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said to apologize, explain her actions that undermined the independence of a SUHAKAM Commissioner, and to immediately revoke the 23/8/2023 appointment of the sitting SUHAKAM Commissioner as the Asian International Arbitration Centre (AIAC) Advisory Board chairman. This is important to affirm the Malaysian government’s acknowledgement that SUHAKAM is a truly an independent National Human Rights Institution, which the people can rely on.

As the former SUHAKAM’s Chairman’s case has allegedly been withdrawn, MADPET calls for SUHAKAM to conduct an immediate investigation/inquiry and make a decision on the complaint made against the then SUHAKAM Chairman. A resignation does erase the fact that there was a complaint about human rights violation. A human rights complaint to SUHAKAM must always be investigated and decided by SUHAKAM.

Not dealing with a complaint/petition to SUHAKAM is bad, and it may affect people’s perception about the independence and commitment of SUHAKAM to Human Rights. We do not want to give the impression that certain complaints of human rights violations especially when the alleged HR violators are SUHAKAM Commissioners/staff, Government or government-linked entities/persons may simply not be independently investigated/inquired and decided by SUHAKAM.

SUHAKAM is and never should be or be seen as a defender of government actions or omissions that are rights violations. Neither is SUHAKAM a government’s representative or apologists. SUHAKAM is a National Human Rights Institution that defends and promotes human rights, and who is also brave to speak out even against the government, the Prime Minister, Minister, government-linked entities/persons or anyone when their actions violate human rights.

MADPET calls on SUHAKAM and its Commissioners to always ensure their independence and perception of independence, and to always defend and promote human rights without fear or favour.

Charles Hector

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

 

 

Extract from the Act

 

 10  Disqualification (HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF MALAYSIA ACT 1999)

A member of the Commission may be removed from office by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong if-

(a) the member is adjudged insolvent by a court of competent jurisdiction;

(b) the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, after consulting a medical officer or a registered medical practitioner, is of the opinion that the member is physically or mentally incapable of continuing his office;

(c) the member absents himself from three consecutive meetings of the Commission without obtaining leave of the Commission or, in the case of the Chairman, without leave of the Minister;

(d) the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, is of the opinion that the member-

(i) has engaged in any paid office or employment which conflicts with his duties as a member of the Commission;

(ii) has misbehaved or has conducted himself in such a manner as to bring disrepute to the Commission; or

(iii) has acted in contravention of this Act and in conflict with his duties as a member of the Commission.

12  Commission may inquire on own motion or on complaint

(1) The Commission may, on its own motion or on a complaint made to it by an aggrieved person or group of persons or a person acting on behalf of an aggrieved person or a group of persons, inquire into an allegation of the infringement of the human rights of such person or group of persons.

(2) The Commission shall not inquire into any complaint relating to any allegation of the infringement of human rights which-

(a) is the subject matter of any proceedings pending in any court, including any appeals; or

(b) has been finally determined by any court.

(3) If the Commission inquires into an allegation under subsection 12(1) and during the pendency of such inquiry the allegation becomes the subject matter of any proceedings in any court, the Commission shall immediately cease to do the inquiry.




Allegations against Suhakam chief referred to PM Dept's legal division

By SYED UMAR ARIFF Nation

Saturday, 24 Jun 2023 7:55 PM MYT


PETALING JAYA: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) says it will refer matters related to allegations against its chairman to the legal affairs division of the Prime Minister's Department.

In a statement on Saturday (June 24), the commission said it was imperative for such allegations to be looked into by an independent body.

It was reported last week that Suhakam chairman Prof Datuk Dr Rahmat Mohamad had filed a lawsuit against a staff member who had accused him of power abuse.

However, the suit was dropped in favour of an independent internal investigation.

"Therefore, Suhakam has decided to refer this matter to the Legal Affairs Division of the PM's Department for advice and direction to ensure the inquiry remains transparent and independent.

"We stand by our commitment to ensure an independent inquiry shall be conducted to preserve the trust and confidence of the public," it said. - Star, 24/6/2023

 

Suhakam chairman to withdraw lawsuit against employee

by RADZI RAZAK / pic BERNAMA

THE Malaysia Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) today announced chairman Prof Datuk Dr Rahmat Mohamad (picture) will withdraw a defamation suit against the commission’s own senior officer in light of some complaints being highlighted in the media.

The Commission said the lawsuit, which was filed on April 28, was not a result of a complaint by the said senior Suhakam staff, but was a result of a defamation that was communicated before the official complaint was filed.

The lawsuit was brought into contention by human rights group Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) which held its press conference earlier today, criticising Rahmat and Suhakam for foregoing internal complaints with external civil action against their own employee.

The commission also takes note and thanks Suaram and the media for exposing the allegations of internal repression that took place at Suhakam.

“The commission was informed that the chairman will withdraw the defamation suit case that has been filed and will give way to an independent internal investigation that will not implicate any member of the commission.

“All accusations and complaints that have been disclosed to the media will be investigated regardless of whether they involve members of the commission or Suhakam staff,” said the commission in a statement today.

Suhakam also promised to conduct an internal audit for its internal mechanism as well as place an integrity officer from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to facilitate the matter.

In expressing its commitment to combating all forms of racism and ensuring that the commission, as a national human rights institution, is free from racism, Suhakam will also expedite the internal policy regarding office discrimination, sexual harassment, whistleblower and racism within 30 days from today.

“The commission also hopes that no party politicises this issue and gives focus to the agenda in strengthening human rights in Malaysia,” said the statement. - Malaysian Reserve, 16/6/2023

Suhakam chairman to withdraw defamation suit against staff member

Human rights commission to launch an internal investigation after allegations of abuse of power surface.

43 Shares
facebook sharing button Share
twitter sharing button Tweet
whatsapp sharing button Share
email sharing button Email
Suhakam chairman Rahmat Mohamad has reportedly dropped his defamation suit as the commission overhauls its internal complaints procedure.

PETALING JAYA: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) says its chairman, Rahmat Mohamad, will withdraw a defamation suit he filed against his own staff member last month.

In a joint statement issued by the commissioners, Suhakam said the suit was being dropped to facilitate an independent internal investigation that does not involve any members of the commission.

“All allegations brought to the attention of the media will be investigated regardless of whether they involve members of the commission or Suhakam staff,” they said.

Suhakam said it will conduct an internal audit and ask the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission if it will assign an integrity officer to Suhakam.

“The commission acknowledges the importance of mechanisms for resolving internal issues within Suhakam,” it said.

Suhakam added that internal policies covering discrimination, sexual harassment, whistle-blowers and racism will be expedited within 30 days.

Earlier today, rights group Suaram raised concerns about the defamation suit.

Rahmat began the lawsuit after the staff member alleged he had abused his powers to influence a Suhakam hiring panel to favour a specific candidate for the position of chief assistant secretary.

The staff member had reportedly lodged an official internal complaint against Rahmat in April, which resulted in the lawsuit.

Suhakam also faced scrutiny after Seputeh MP Teresa Kok, on Wednesday, said the human rights commission had been “silent” on abuse of power by enforcement agencies.

Kok said that aside from its commissioners being relatively unknown to the public, Suhakam also appeared to be “quieter” than before. - FMT, 16/6/2023

 

Rahmat resigns as Suhakam chairman

PUTRAJAYA: Prof Datuk Rahmat Mohamad is resigning from his post as the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) chairman effective Thursday (Aug 31).

The Legal Affairs Division (BHEUU) of the Prime Minister's Department in a statement said Rahmat was appointed to lead the commission for the 2022-2025 term.

"He carried out various initiatives including the success of the 2020 Suhakam annual report and financial statement in Dewan Rakyat on June 12 to 14," read the statement.

According to the statement, the government would appoint an interim chairman soonest to ensure Suhakam's governance proceeds smoothly during this transition phase, until a new chairman is appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

The division said Rahmat is now the Asian International Arbitration Centre (AIAC) Advisory Board chairman for 2023-2025 term, following an appointment made by the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said on Aug 23.

"The appointment is in line with his background in the field of international legislation and his experience as the fifth secretary-general of the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organisation (AALCO)." - NST, 28/8/2023

Sunday, August 27, 2023

Repeal SOSMA, and not make small amendments. Repeal Detention Without Trial Laws – POTA, POCA and DD(SPM)A (MADPET)

 

Media Statement – 27/8/2023

Repeal SOSMA, and not make small amendments. Repeal Detention Without Trial Laws – POTA, POCA and DD(SPM)A

Lawyers including late Karpal Singh threatened to boycott cases that used ESCAR (a law like SOSMA)

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is pleased that the PH-BN government is looking as Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012(SOSMA), and may likely restore the bail granting discretion to judges.

At present, the Act enacted by Parliament prohibits bail pending the end of the criminal trial, which means that the accused of any offences listed as SOSMA offences are forced to languish in detention until the end of the trial – this is draconian as it ignores the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Further, it is totally unjust for any possibly innocent individual because of denial of bail results in having to languish in detention until the completion of trial, noting that trials in Malaysia can take a long time to end, maybe even years. Imagine the suffering also caused to the family, children and dependents of these possibly innocent accused persons. What happens when they are found not guilty?

Leave it to the judges to determine whether bail be allowed or not, and it is wrong for Parliament by law to steal from judges this power to determine whether bail be granted or not.

It was reported that ‘The federal government has no intention to repeal the controversial Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA), Ramkarpal Singh said today. Instead, the deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) said the government plans to introduce two amendments to the law, one of them being the issue of bail.’(Malay Mail, 23/8/2023).

MADPET is disappointed that this PH-led government’s position, as expressed by the late Karpal Singh’s son, is not to repeal SOSMA, and, as such, we reiterate that what is needed urgently is the abolition of SOSMA, not simply making some minor amendments here and there.

All Criminal Trials must comply Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Code

All persons should equally be given a FAIR TRIAL, in compliance with the existing Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Code. Now, those accused of SOSMA listed offences are discriminated and not accorded the same fair rights in a trial.

There is no justification for the allowing any exception on the strict compliance of the Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Codes that ensures the standard for a fair trial in Malaysia. If there is a need, then amend the Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Code, and apply the same standards and procedures to all accused in all criminal trials.

SOSMA – a violation of constitutional guarantee of equality?

SOSMA is a bad law, similar to the ESCAR (Essential (Security Cases) Regulations, 1975), that violates the right to a FAIR TRIAL, as it provides to provide for special measures relating to security offences, etc including the use and admission of evidence currently prohibited by Malaysia’s Evidence Act.

Noting that our Federal Constitution provides for in Article 8(1) that ‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.’ SOSMA is a violation of this Constitutional guarantee. It allows for a class of accused persons to be tried differently, not in full compliance with Malaysia’s Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Code – hence a violation of Article 8.

Even late Karpal Singh and the Bar opposed ESCAR ( a law like SOSMA)

SOSMA, being an Act to provide for special measures relating to security offences, is just like the ESCAR (Essential (Security Cases) Regulations, 1975) which was strongly opposed to the late Karpal Singh, Malaysian lawyers and the Bar. Lawyers threatened the boycott any cases that used ESCAR, that permitted the avoidance of strict compliance of the Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Code.

The government’s reaction to the Malaysian Bar then was the amendment of the Legal Profession Act 1976, that, amongst others, barred young lawyers (below 7 years of practice) from holding bar leadership positions and being in Bar Committees, an increased quorum for General Meetings.

Hence, the retaining of SOSMA is certainly NOT what lawyers including the late Karpal Singh, and the better Pakatan Harapan of the past wanted.

Hope, that the current PH-led government will revert back to its earlier just position and abolish SOSMA speedily.

SOSMA repealed the ISA, but is not a replacement Detention Without Trial (DWT) law

SOSMA is not a detention without trial law, as all those charged under any SOSMA listed offence will be accorded a TRIAL, whereby prosecution is duty bound to prove in an open court beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the crimes he/she was charged with.

In a Detention Without Trial, like the then Internal Security Act (ISA), and the present Prevention Of Crime Act 1959(POCA), Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (POTA) and the Dangerous Drugs(Special Preventive Measures Act 1985 [DD(SPM) Act], which are detention without trial laws, there will be NO TRIAL and the accused does not have the opportunity to defend themselves in court. For all SOSMA listed offences, there is a trial.

Confusion may have arisen because the draconian ISA was repealed by Section 32 SOSMA in 2012, which states ‘ (1) The Internal Security Act 1960 [Act 82] is repealed….’, but this certainly does not mean that SOSMA replaces ISA and is a ‘new’ Detention Without Trial law.  It is not.

After ISA repealed, a new law POTA, and POCA’s scope increased resulting wider scope for DWT

What happened after the repeal of the draconian Detention Without Trial laws, ISA in 2012, and the Emergency (Public Order and Crimes Prevention) Ordinance 1969 was repealed in 2013 was that a new DWT Trial law Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015(POTA) was enacted. The existing Prevention Of Crime Act 1959(POCA) was amended in 2014 and thereafter to increase the scope of alleged crimes that would make suspects be subject to detention without trial.

Like ISA, Detention Without Trial laws are draconian also because judicial review or court challenges of the reasons for the arrest, detention or restriction is not allowed.

Hence, not only is there a denial of the right of fair trial, but also the denial of the right to challenge the reasons it was used on you. This facilitates miscarriage of justice, including the possibility that an innocent person being wrongly arrested, detained and restricted. This is why Malaysia must abolish all Detention Without Trial(DWT) laws.

Even if politicians are not victims, Repeal POCA, POTA and DD(SPM)A

Some say that the ISA was strongly opposed by politicians and political parties, after politicians fell victim to this DWT law in Operation Lallang in 1987. So, until politicians fall victim to POCA, POTA or the DD(SPM)A, Malaysian politicians may not repeal these remaining DWT laws. It seems that political parties and government do not care if ‘unknown’ Malaysians become victims of DWT laws. MADPET hopes that this not be the case, and call for the immediate repeal of all DWT laws.

Anwar’s and PH’s ‘reasons’ for not repealing bad laws unacceptable

Some say, that the current PH-led government is backtracking or making U-turns in its commitment to abolish draconian laws or provisions in law because it did not manage to obtain majority in the last General Elections, forcing it to form a coalition government with other parties who do not care about human rights.

This is a lame excuse, as PH managed to win  won 81 seats out of 112 seats required to form government, which means it has more than 50% in Cabinet that is all that is required to table laws, and MADPET believes that there are sufficient non-PH MPs and Opposition MPs that will pass any good laws that promote justice and human rights. Hence, the excuse of PM Anwar Ibrahim’s PH-led government or Pakatan Harapan(PH) for not repealing bad laws is not justifiable, and may not be accepted by the public. Table the required Bills to repeal bad laws, and bad provisions in some laws.

MADPET reiterates the call for the immediate repeal of SOSMA, and all Detention Without Trial Laws, being Prevention Of Crime Act 1959(POCA), Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (POTA) and the Dangerous Drugs(Special Preventive Measures Act 1985 [DD(SPM) Act]. MADPET also calls for a MORATORIUM on the usage of these draconian laws pending abolition.

Charles Hector

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


Deputy law minister says govt will amend Sosma, repeal ‘not in the pipeline’

Deputy law minister says govt will amend Sosma, repeal ‘not in the pipeline’
Deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Ramkarpal Singh speaks at a press conference in Putrajaya August 23, 2023. —Picture by Shafwan Zaidon

PUTRAJAYA, Aug 23 — The federal government has no intention to repeal the controversial Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma), Ramkarpal Singh said today.

Instead, the deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) said the government plans to introduce two amendments to the law, one of them being the issue of bail.

“We are looking at several aspects, the question on bail is the issue we are looking into now. There are two recommendations. However, in our improvement of the Act, it will proceed in stages accordingly.

“Repeal is not in the pipeline,” he told reporters after flagging off a brisk walk in conjunction with Merdeka this month at the ministry here.

At present, Section 13 of Sosma only allows for bail if the offender facing a security offence is one who is below 18 years, a woman, sick or infirm person.

Introduced in 2012 as a replacement to the colonial-era Internal Security Act (ISA), the equally controversial preventive detention law retained its predecessor's clause which allows for suspects of an investigation to be detained without trial for up to 28 days at a time.

When asked when the Cabinet would deliberate on the matter, Ramkarpal said there was no definite timeline as of yet but did confirm it will be done within this year.

"At this point in time we have more or less completed most of the engagement with stakeholders, so now it's bringing said proposals for [Cabinet's] consideration.

"No timeline but at the earliest," he said.

Earlier this month, Ramkarpal had in an issued statement said the proposed amendments were now jointly being studied by the Home Ministry, the Royal Malaysia Police and the Attorney General’s Chambers.

Prior to the issuance of Ramkarpal's statement, a hunger strike by family members of Sosma detainees in front of the Sungai Buloh Prison had taken place.

Last December, Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail defended the retention of Sosma, saying "the law allows the court process to take place,” which led to much criticism from political figures and rights groups over the country’s stance on the protection of human rights.

His stance has put him in conflict with some allies in Pakatan Harapan (PH) as well as civil society groups that have pointed out the apparent hypocrisy in defending the preventive detention law that the coalition previously rejected when it was in Opposition.

Saifuddin Nasution's predecessor, Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin had in March 2022 said parties who do not agree with Sosma are those who want to make room for criminals and terrorists to dominate the country.

Hamzah had then too defended the government's stance of retaining Sosma with further amendments to extend enforcement of the 28-day detention period, noting that the law is still relevant and crucial to ensuring public order and national security. - Malay Mail, 23/8/2023

Bail for detainees among recommendations to improve Sosma

Nation
Wednesday, 23 Aug 2023 1:21 PM MYT

PUTRAJAYA: A provision allowing bail for detainees is being considered as part of the recommendations to improve the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma).

Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Ramkarpal Singh when asked about developments on Sosma said that efforts to improve the Act are now almost complete.

According to him, several engagement sessions with stakeholders including the Home Ministry, the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM), the Attorney-General's Chambers and family members of Sosma detainees have been held whereby the recommendations received will be presented to the Cabinet soon.

"The recommendation to allow bail (for Sosma detainees) is an issue we are looking into now. Repeal (of the Act) is not in the pipeline but we are looking into improvements," he told reporters after participating in the Merdeka 'brisk walk' activity organised by the law and institutional reform portfolio agency here Wednesday (Aug 23).

Currently, a person arrested under Sosma cannot be bailed except for a juvenile (under the age of 18), a woman or a person who is sick or infirm subject to the discretion of the court.

Ramkarpal said all Sosma improvements will not be implemented in one go but will be done in stages.

In February, Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail said the Unity Government did not intend to repeal the Act, but would make improvements.

According to Saifuddin Nasution, it is because PDRM still needs the law so that immediate action can be taken to avoid any public panic and threats to the nation's sovereignty and the well-being of the people.

Earlier in his speech, Ramkarpal called on the members of the Legal Affairs Division (BHEUU) to continue to strengthen the bonds of brotherhood and mutual respect in line with the concept of Madani Malaysia which emphasises unity.

In conjunction with the 66th National Day, BHEUU has organised a number of activities including a Jalur Gemilang (naitional flag) raising ceremony, independence talks and a visit to the Declaration of Independence Memorial in Melaka. - Bernama - Star,23/8/2023

 

Ramkarpal: Abolishing Sosma not in pipeline, govt to improve it instead

The government has no intention to repeal the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act which allows detention without trial for 28 days.

Instead, according to Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Ramkarpal Singh, Putrajaya aims to improve the law by introducing several amendments in stages.

"It's not in the pipeline. But we are looking at improvements," he told reporters in Putrajaya this morning when asked if there is any plan to abolish Sosma.

Ramkarpal said the ministry has completed the groundwork in reviewing the act, which included engagement sessions with stakeholders.

While there is no timeline set for the review, the deputy minister said they plan to bring proposals from the engagement sessions to the cabinet soon.

"There is no timeline as such, but as I said, our groundworks are more or less completed. Now we are preparing the summary.

"At this stage, we plan to bring up two main proposals to the cabinet for Sosma improvements. These (the improvements) will not be done at one go, but perhaps in several stages," he said.

The two main proposals include improving Sosma on the question of bail, added Ramkarpal.

Controversial law

Sosma is a controversial law which allows up to 28 days of detention.

While the government has said it was planning to review Sosma provisions, human rights activists have been pushing for a complete repeal.

Family members of 69 Sosma detainees launched a hunger strike outside the Sungai Buloh Prison

Last month, about 100 family members of 69 Sosma detainees launched a hunger strike outside the Sungai Buloh Prison to demand the release of their family members, who are imprisoned without trial.

About 34 detainees are reportedly being held at Sungai Buloh while the remainder are in Alor Setar, Kedah.

Following this, Ramkarpal urged them to remain patient as the government is reviewing improvements to the act. - Malaysiakini, 23/8/2023

Home minister: 624 individuals arrested under Sosma, 195 currently on trial

Home minister: 624 individuals arrested under Sosma, 195 currently on trial
In a parliamentary reply today, Saifuddin revealed that 195 offenders are currently on trial, with 147 charged under criminal conspiracy, 47 for human trafficking, and two for terrorism. — Bernama pic

KUALA LUMPUR, March 3 — Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail said that 624 people were arrested under Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) 2012 last year.

In a parliamentary reply today, Saifuddin revealed that 195 offenders are currently on trial, with 147 charged under criminal conspiracy, 47 for human trafficking, and two for terrorism.

“For the year 2022, the Royal Malaysian Police have arrested a total of 624 people under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma). Of these, 71 arrested have been charged in court, 401 have been sentenced, 140 have been released and 12 are still under investigation.

“The ethnic breakdown consists of 247 Malays, 83 Chinese, 89 Indians, 47 Other Races and 158 foreign nationals, all aged between 18 to 69 years old,” he said.

Saifuddin Nasution was responding to Sosma questions posed by Perikatan Nasional’s (PN) Tasek Gelugor MP Datuk Wan Saiful Wan Jan and DAP’s Raub MP Chow Yu Hui.

Apart from Sosma, the minister also revealed that 132 people were arrested under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA).

Previously, it was reported that the new government is willing to sit down with various stakeholders to review laws that have the potential to be abused for political purposes. - Malay Mail, 3/3/2023