BAR RESOLUTION FOR THE ABOLITION OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT

MALAYSIAN BAR RESOLUTION FOR THE ABOLITION OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT OF WHIPPING (passed unanimously at the 61st AGM of the Malaysian Bar on 17/3/2007)

Whereas:-

1. In recent times, authorities are clamping down with greater brutality on migrants who are deemed “illegal” under the Immigration Act. The increasing demonisation of foreigners in the media as criminals and trouble makers failed to acknowledge that very often these persons are in fact undocumented persons, asylum seekers, migrant workers and refugees who have endured unspeakable horrors escaping conflict stricken territories, and /or suffered at the hands of ruthless agents, traffickers and authorities.

2. Upon arrest, they end up spending long and indeterminate periods in remand, in overcrowded detention centres and under deplorable conditions. Common and recurring accounts given by these immigration detainees indicate that they are subjected to physical and emotional trauma , given stale food, live under conditions of poor sanitation and hygiene, and are not provided with adequate or prompt medical treatment.

3. Upon being brought to Court they often do not know what charges are brought against them. They are not informed of their right to legal representation, and in any event, are not provided with a reasonable opportunity to seek help. The lack of interpretation in appropriate languages renders the whole legal process a complete travesty of justice and human rights.

4. Invariably these migrants are induced and / or threatened with prolonged and indefinite detention to elicit guilty pleas, the full implications of which are neither properly explained nor fully understood by them.

5. Most alarming of all these violations is that the punishment of whipping is meted out without mercy and restraint.

6. Whipping is clearly intended to be a humiliating experience as it will produce huge red welts and permanent scars. It is also said to have caused impotence. The cane marks are permanent and these will be a source of humiliation to the prisoner for the rest of their lives. New Zealander, Aaron Cohen who received six strokes in 1982 for drug-trafficking recalled his ordeal :-

“I got six. Its just incredible pain. More like a burning - like someone sticking an iron on your bum. That’s the sort of feeling. Pain - just ultimate pain. The strokes come at a rate of one a minute - but it seemed like a lifetime to me. I waited and waited for the first one and as soon as I let my breath out - “baam”. Afterwards my bum looked like a side of beef. There was three lines of raw skin with blood oozing out.”

7. Where is the sense in imposing this brutal punishment on offenders of a victimless irregularity like a lack of appropriate documentation? Are Malaysians subjected to atrocities like this when they are found to be in breach of immigration laws abroad?

8. International organisations such as Amnesty International and the UN Human Rights Committee have condemned whipping and other forms of corporal punishment as cruel, inhumane or degrading punishment and contrary to human rights law. The UN Committee against Torture has called for the abolition of corporal punishment and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has stated that “corporal punishment” is inconsistent with the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.

9. It is therefore unsurprising that the World Refugee Survey in 2005 placed Malaysia as one of the worst offenders of refugee rights documenting cruel and inhumane treatment in our prisons and detention camps.

10. Whipping has also been imposed in a discriminatory manner because the Criminal Procedure Code permits the use of “light rattan” for the whipping of those convicted of “white collar” crimes notwithstanding the embezzlement of millions of ringgit.

It is hereby resolved:-
1. That we the Malaysian Bar, declare that the corporal punishment of whipping is cruel, inhumane and degrading.

2. That we the Malaysian Bar call for the abolition of the whipping sentence as prescribed by any legislation and particularly as against offenders of the immigration act.

3. That the Malaysian Bar leads public opinion rejecting and denouncing the sentence of whipping as it is anachronistic and inconsistent with a compassionate society in a developed nation.

4. That whipping has failed as a retributory and deterrent sentence and that it is time for Malaysia to subscribe to Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights i.e. “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” and reject it altogether as a form of sentencing in our country.

A court within a camp - Malaysia welcomes the world (Malaysian bar Website)

Contributed by Latheefa Koya

Wednesday, 14 March 2007, 07:54am

“Two months, two whips!” Another foreigner walks into Malaysia’s overcrowded prison with bloody marks on his back. Thanks to the efficiency of the Semenyih Special Immigration Court, even the prison system could not cope with the speed in which cases are solved mostly with the whip. Being a lawyer working on cases involving migrants, most of whom end being undocumented and were forced to overstay and because of rogue agents, or because of some Rela members’ lucky day of getting an extra RM80.00, I have witnessed the other side of Visit Malaysia Year 2007. Yes, it is RM80 reward for each migrant worker nabbed by Rela members. And it no longer falls under the definition of pocket money when you have more than two million migrants walking about freely on the streets, at least now, until the equally efficient police chief fulfils his dream of zero-migrant workers on the streets. Never mind whether he or she is documented or not– that’s not their job. The special courts such as at Semenyih have been set up to exactly decide on this. Meanwhile, welcome to Semenyih, where the other side of Visit Malaysia Year 2007 resides. These foreigners don’t don a black expensive burqa and shop for perfumes, neither do they carry a hotel key-card while loitering in Bukit Bintang’s sleazy areas. Semenyih is Malaysia’s answer to Auswitch and Shatilla, minus the chambers and the Israeli guns. The ‘criminals’ here did not snatch handbags or cheated a bank of millions; in contrast, they are dispossessed of all their belongings, left (sometimes for good) their families thousands of miles away, only to be nabbed on the street while on their way to the factories that employ them to work in places no Malaysian would ever want to even go, let alone work. Their arrestors are none other than youths, not dissimilar to countryside thugs, who themselves impoverished by unemployment, had joined the voluntary organisation once famed for fighting crimes in neighbourhoods and kampungs and therefore ridding the country of all the social ills we now hear of. This generation of Rela, on the other hands, religiously iron their uniforms every night bearing the Rela logo, to make some dirty money on a poor migrant’s plight the next day. Nobody can point out Semenyih in a road map. Why is a court set up in such a remote area, when it ‘hears’ (if one may be polite enough to describe the court’s activity thus) cases from Seremban, Sungai Buloh and as far away as Langkap and Juru? Or has the familiar refrain that “justice should not only be seen” taken an all new meaning by the administrators of this court, a court whose judge basks in the glory of seeing victims of poverty and human trade, transforming into chunks of meat to be jailed and flogged in the most dishumanely manner? But then again, why not? After all, detainees are rarely represented by lawyers, and there is no need to have a bank nearby to prepare payment for a bailout, especially when you have a judge who competes with award-winning comedians by asking such questions as “Why should I give bail to a foreigner?” The scene at the court is like an auction of slaves, only that no slaves are actually traded. The end result is the same: marks of whipping are left on the poor migrant, not unlike the black slaves of old America who are hotstamped on their backs. Mitigation takes an all new meaning in the court at Semenyih. A judge once retorted when told that a group of asylum seekers would like to prepare mitigation: “You can give me ten pages of mitigation, I will still whip them!” This court, is after all, designed for that and judges only care about answering their most important question of the day: “How many whips do I give today?” If a detainee claims trial, he or she only invites further scorn from the judge -“Don’t waste my time... how do you propose to prove your case?...”. I have seen how the judge, seeing that a detainee claims trial, would briefly stand down, during which the prosecution officer has a word or two with the detainee in the absence of his/her lawyer. Ten minutes later, the poor detainee would suddenly change his plea to ‘guilty’ and succumb to sentencing. The judge doesn’t care even to ask, even for procedural sake, whether the detainee–who comes from a place where even the word ‘coca-cola’ is unheard of, let alone the phrase ‘right to a trial’– knows the consequences of a guilty plea. So what sort of miracles do happen if he indeed claims trial? Often has been the case when Rela members would throw away the valid documents when making an arrest. With RM80 per head, you can bet any country thug would! Once the Immigration Prosecution Officer himself complained to the Judge that the mistake was on the arresting Rela officer, produces records of valid entry and visa. The case is duly dismissed.... Not! Remember, the court is set up to expedite sentencing, not solving cases, definitely not seeking justice. Decisions, decisions. What do they do now? The very raison d’etre of the court is being threatened by a genuine case. And decision.... The case is not thrown out. The DPP is to be referred. Meanwhile, he who misses the Whip shall be sent back to rot at the prison. And you still ask, what if the detainees had been forced to overstay because their agents cheated them, and unable to find jobs, surrendered themselves to the authorities? I have personally heard her remark (and here’s the part when one covers a child’s eyes and ears during a horror movie): “Saya tak boleh bagi you pergi free jer... ok... dua bulan dan dua sebatan...” (I can’t let you go just like that, ok... two whips and two months). To be an asylum seeker defined as undocumented, eventhough with the backing of UNHCR, is like buying a ticket to seeing a tiger performing in a cage. The tiger in this case has its claws firmly on the gavel. Once, almost fifty asylum seekers were brought to court unrepresented (as usual) by any lawyers. A pupil-lawyer working on migrants and refugees advised them to claim trial until a lawyer is found (before court was in session), for fear that they might be punished and whipped. When all of them claimed trial, the judge, standing down, threw a tantrum and even threatened the UNHCR officer with a police report. Sometimes, the judge confuses her role with that of a JAKIM officer. Consider this: a girl from China, pregnant by the way, had pleaded guilty. Her lawyer asked for a more lenient sentence to avoid her giving birth in a prison. The judge responded by asking whether she was married and who had fathered her child. Whether the detainee is a victim of circumstances, cheated by agents, first-time offender, or part of that strange and alien notion called “asylum seekers”, is not relevant. In this court, there is no time for such civilised immigration jargons. A-whip-delayed-is-a-whip-denied seems to be the driving philosophy behind this court. It is set up solely to expedite backlog cases and a legally cruel solution to overcrowding at camps, thanks to the hundreds of eighty-ringgit envelopes finding their way into the nicely ironed Rela pockets. The Semenyih detention camp itself has seen some of the worst cases of prisoner mistreatment by guards and which were documented not long ago. In it, witnesses have told of abuses most vile. These are documented reports, and yet no actions were taken. At the court, I have personally seen how a P.O. slapped a detainee in full public view. They are shouted at, treated like a convicted criminal. Their crime does not involve any victims. The only casualty here is the detainee’s self respect, and the authorities’ human semblance. Thinking back, there is no greater symbolism than to have within the camp a court devoid of any justice. Comments (1) >> This is shocking... Written by Charles Hector on 14 March, 2007 at 13:58 PM This is shocking, and this matter should have been brought out immediately when the incident occurred, especially when it was witnessed by an advocate and solicitor of the High Court. There should have been a complaint lodged against the said P.O., and possibly even a police report. To witness a wrong and not do anything about it can only propagate similar wrongful conduct by others in the future. In any event, Lat Koya must now lodge a police report, bring it to the attention of the AG and maybe even lodge a complaint to SUHAKAM. The Bar Council must also follow-up immediately, and that incident must be highlighted and the Bar Council must condemn strongly such behaviour be it by a P.O., a police officer or any other person. A couple of months ago an advocate and solicitor saw a detainee in the police custody at the Banting Police Station being "tortured" - and it was immediately highlighted. We, lawyers, have a duty to shout out when wrongs happen, especially when it happens in front of us. By the way, maybe the Bar Council could also tell us what has become to the Banting police station torture case - was anyone charged? What has happened to that investigation? Too many wrongdoings are swept under the carpet even after it has been highlighted and/or brought to the notice of the relevant authorities, and we lawyers and the Malaysian Bar must NEVER allow this "sweeping under the carpet" behaviour. Uphold the cause of justice without fear or favour - that is our calling. Lawyers and the Malaysian Bar have a duty to ensure that this is done. Do not deal with these kind of incidents through "secret" meetings - they have to be highlighted for all to know - and highlighting would definitely help ensure that such "torture" or incidents of "slapping detainees" never ever happen again.

Four more workers on death row - in Malaysia

Four more workers on death row

National News - Saturday, February 10, 2007

JAKARTA: Four Indonesian migrant workers are on death row for two separate murders in Malaysia. Migrant Care says the four were identified as Aida bin Sukardi, Erik bin Kartim, Wahyudi bin Boinen and Haliman bin Sihombing.

Aida, 23, of Bawean, East Java, is appealing to the Higher Court in Bayan Lepas against the death sentence he received on Jan. 4 for the murder of his boss in Kampung Jawa on Dec. 30, 2002. The Higher Court is scheduled to try the appeal in August 2007.

Erik, Wahyudi and Haliman are appealing to the Supreme Court in Shah Alam against a district court verdict sentencing them to death for killing their fellow worker, Irwan, on June 5, 2006. Their case is scheduled to be tried in March.

Migrant Care executive director Anis Hidayah called on the Indonesian government to lobby the Malaysian government to end capital punishment, saying it goes against universal principles of human rights.

A spokesman for the Manpower and Transmigration Ministry, Irianto Rusli Simbolon, said he had no knowledge of the cases, but pledged to look into them immediately. -- JP

Lost in Immigration (Malasyiakini)

Lost in immigration
Salbiah Ahmad
Feb 8, 07 11:37am

Home Minister Radzi Sheikh Ahmad should be commended for his ministry's attempt to develop guidelines to "handle refugees protected by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)". (Bernama, Feb 1)

This is quite a leap from his predecessor's relationship with this UN body. Azmi Khalid, the former home minister, had accused the UNHCR in March 2005 of "helping illegal migrants" by granting refugee status to too many immigrants to escape the crackdown, Operation Tegas. (AP, Mar 4, 2005). This was refuted by UNHCR spokesperson Ron Redmond.

However, the explanation for the ministry's guidelines is a cause of some concern. Radzi was quoted in Bernama as saying, "When we arrest them (refugees) the UNHCR will come and say they are under it's care. We don't recognise the UNHCR's action but on humanitarian grounds, we release them." "We do not recognise and accept the UNHCR-hosted refugees."

It would seem that the home minister has no qualms at all in refusing recognition to the protection work of the UNHCR. Thus the handling of refugees in the proposed guidelines may for all intents and purposes, be a reversal of all the processes and protocols painstakingly developed by the UNHCR in Kuala Lumpur for refugee protection.

The fact that Malaysia has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention is no longer a good reason as there is a growing body of human rights standards that the state no longer has an absolute right to turn individuals away from its borders.

Malaysia in good faith and in protection of her international image as a member of the UN had hosted the UNHCR in Kuala Lumpur. And now, Malaysia is turning its back on all that, by undermining the UNHCR and its work with relevant authorities, human rights groups and the judiciary in Malaysia.

Acting illegally

At present, Malaysia is treating refugees under its immigration laws. There is nothing in this law on refugee protection as this law did not conceive of this category of people at the time of its making. When such is the case, then the use of such a law over refugees, is not legitimate and is unconscionable. As a matter of argument, it can be said that the home minister has acted illegally by using this law over refugees.

Under the immigration law, "illegals" can be jailed up to five years, face a RM10,000 fine and six strokes of caning. About 18,000 "illegals" were whipped in 2003. The terms, "illegal migrant", "illegal immigrant" are problematic because they criminalise the person. Using these terms have the effect of pre-judging the person's status.

When a person is forced to flee from persecution, international humanitarian law recognizes that they may need to enter a country without authorization. It would thus be misleading to describe them as "illegals". A person may also be brought into the country through trafficking, in which case such a person should be recognized as a victim of a crime and not a wrong-doer.

Refugees here face a terrible humanitarian situation. They are not afforded refugee status, where they can receive protection under the Convention rules. This includes the right of work.

The UNHCR and Malaysian human rights campaigners had welcomed the ministry's proposal to allow refugees to work. In Feb 2005, the former home minister announced that the refugee community of Rohingyas (recognised as refugees), would be permitted to work. That experiment was abandoned due to glitches but that proposal was not reviewed for this refugee community nor for any other refugee community in Malaysia since then.

Humanitarian disaster

We have a humanitarian disaster where refugees cannot work and then persecuted when they do work as they need to, to keep body and soul together. In keeping refugees in a limbo, we are implicated in the humanitarian problem that we may have inadvertently set for them on our shores.

According to UNHCR sources, the number of migrants in the world has reached an estimated 200 million. The important distinctions between migrants, asylum seekers and refugees have been blurred. With it has come a growing degree of "asylum fatigue" which has threatened refugee protection. Control policies should distinguish between migrants seeking better economic opportunities and those people who are in need of international refugee protection.

Our present laws and policies are incoherent. Asylum seekers are not portrayed as refugees fleeing persecution and entitled to sanctuary. It is often overlooked that asylum seekers and refugees comprise only a small proportion of the tens of thousands of international migrants. It is with stronger reason that we need to safeguard the principle of asylum when we blur or confuse categories and distinctions.

Our control policies should recognise refugee protection which has also a history in the idea of safe passage or aman in the Islamic Law of Nations (precursor of a public international law). It should establish a status determination process for people fleeing human rights abuses. It should follow internationally accepted principles of non-refoulement. It should provide for humanitarian assistance to refugees in Malaysia.

The ministry should work closely with the UNHCR. The UNHCR has invaluable experience over issues of protection both under the 1951 Convention and outside of that. It has more than half a century of protection work. It does seem rather silly to ignore that body of work. We can and must learn from the UNHCR in developing the proposed guidelines.

SALBIAH AHMAD, a member of MADPET, is a lawyer and an independent researcher. MALAYA! as the name for this column was inspired by the meaning of 'Malaya' in Tagalog which means freedom. The events at the end of 1998 in KL offer a new inspiration. MALAYA! takes o­n the process of reclaiming the many facets of independence.

Declaration of the 3rd World Congress Against the Death Penalty

Final declaration of the 3rd World Congress against the Death Penalty

Paris, 1-3 February 2007


Assembled in Paris from 1 to 3 February 2007, on the initiative of Ensemble contre la peine de mort (Together against the Death Penalty), supported by the World Coalition against the Death Penalty,

We, citizens and representatives of civil society and public authorities, meeting in even greater number than at the first two World Congresses against the Death Penalty in Strasbourg in 2001 and Montreal in 2004, adopt this Declaration at the conclusion of discussions involving some 30 debates as well as testimonies, analyses and exchanges of experiences and strategies.

We welcome the fact that the death penalty is receding in the world and that since the Montreal Congress Greece, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Mexico, the Philippines and Senegal have abolished capital punishment, while no country has re-introduced it. We regret that, during the same period, some countries have resumed executions after prolonged moratoria, such as Bahrain in 2006, and that the death penalty is still applied on a large scale in a number of countries including China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Vietnam. We strongly condemn the initiatives in some abolitionist countries to reintroduce the death penalty and demand in particular that the Peruvian authorities renounce this effort.

We recognise that the process of abolition must be accompanied by a better consideration of the needs of victims and by an in-depth reflection on penal policy and prison systems, in the framework of an equitable and restorative justice.

We demand with one voice the end throughout the world of justice that kills. No authority has the right to strike out a person’s life. We recall that the death penalty is a cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, that it is contrary to human rights, that it has no utility in the fight against crime, and that it always represents a failure of justice.

The 3rd World Congress against the Death Penalty adopts the following recommendations:

1. We call on all countries to abolish the death penalty and to ratify international and regional abolitionist treaties, especially the Second Optional Protocol to the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

2. Following on from the statement at the UN General Assembly in December 2006, which was supported by an unprecedented number of countries from around the world, we solemnly appeal to all states of the world to stop all executions immediately.

Recognizing the great value that a successful resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly would have for the abolition of the death penalty worldwide, we invite the member states of the United Nations to take all necessary steps to ensure the adoption by the General Assembly of a resolution
- calling for an immediate and universal moratorium on death sentences and executions and the commutation of existing death sentences, with a view to the universal abolition of the death penalty;
- recalling that the death penalty violates human rights and fundamental freedoms; and
- encouraging the UN, its member states, and other relevant international, regional and sub-regional organisations to support the implementation of this moratorium, including through mobilizing resources and expertise.

We call on the citizens of the world to sign the petition, launched by the Sant’Egidio Community and supported by the World Coalition against Death Penalty, which has already attracted over five million signatures, in favour of a worldwide moratorium on executions.

3. We welcome the presence in Paris of many abolitionists from North Africa and the Middle East and their efforts to create national, sub-regional and regional coalitions. We hail the initiatives taken in Morocco, Lebanon and Jordan towards abolition and call on the countries of the region to abolish the death penalty.

4. Welcoming the presence in Paris of Chinese abolitionists, we call on the Chinese government, in the prospect of the Beijing Olympic Games in 2008 and the Shanghai Universal Exposition in 2010, to establish an immediate moratorium on executions with the objective of progressively abolishing the death penalty, and in particular to remove non-violent offences, including economic and drug offences, from the scope of capital punishment.

As, moreover, the Chinese Supreme Court from 1 January 2007 is to review all death sentences imposed by courts of first instance, we call on the Chinese authorities to remove the secrecy surrounding the administration of the death penalty.

5. We welcome the fact that, since the Strasbourg Congress in 2001, the world abolitionist movement has structured itself, with full respect for the diversity of its members, around the World Coalition against the Death Penalty, which was created in 2002 and now includes over 50 organisations.

We call on organisations and institutions that share the objective of abolition – non-governmental organisations, bar associations, trade unions and local governments - to join the World Coalition.

We call on abolitionists of the whole world to take part each year in the World Day against the Death Penalty, which will focus in 2007 on China in the Prospect of the Olympic Games in 2007 and in 2008 on Teaching Abolition in 2008. We call on all regional and international organisations, and the European Union in particular, to adopt 10 October as an official day in favour of universal abolition.

We call on the cities of the world to take part in Cities for Life on 30 November each year.

Finally, we call on members of parliament of the whole world, whose powers include that of voting for abolition, to sign this Declaration.

Paris, 3 February 2007

RELA’S “CATCH A MIGRANT AND GET PAID FOR IT” POLICY MUST END

RELA’S “CATCH A MIGRANT AND GET PAID FOR IT” POLICY MUST END

PROFESSIONAL LAW ENFORCERS MUST REPLACE VOLUNTEERS

Migrants are human beings and should not be treated as stray dogs, and the policy and practice of paying members of the People’s Volunteer Corps (RELA) RM80-00 for each undocumented migrant must be stopped (Star, Monday January 23, 2006). Now RELA is also asking for allowance of RM24.20 for lower ranking members and RM34.20 for officers given to those participating in trainings and courses could be extended for operations (Star, Wednesday December 27, 2006 - RELA seeks allowance for staff during ops).

Syed Shahir, President MTUC during his opening speech at the MTUC/ILO Follow up Workshop on Migrant Workers in Malaysia held on 4-6 December 2006 said that this practice of using these “uniformed part-timers who have some policing powers, who were offered and did receive cash rewards for each migrant arrested as an economic incentive and this was most disturbing and embarrassing.” He also went on to say that it was sad that Home Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Radzi Sheikh Ahmad was reported to have said RELA members would be again roped in for the planned crackdown on undocumented workers in 2007(Star, 14/10/2006).

MCA Public Services and Complaints Department head Datuk Michael Chong claimed that the reward offered had made RELA volunteers desperate to nab as many illegals as possible. He said this when handing over RM,2,400-00, being donations, collected by residents of Old Klang Road’s 4th mile area, to the widows, both of whom had two young children. Their husbands, Ahmad Apik, 35, and Edy Sathurrohman, 26, both Indonesians, drowned allegedly after jumping into the Klang river while trying to evade the RELA personnel. Let’s not forget the words of Michael Chong :” “These people may be illegals [undocumented], but they are still human beings,” (Star, Monday January 23, 2006). A wife loses her husband and 2 children lost their fathers, and RM1,200-00 in donations is a far cry from justice.

Its was reported that RELA arrested a total of 17,700 people believed to be illegal immigrants and screened 94,010 people up to September 2006. Out of that 17,700, Indonesians comprised the highest number of those arrested at 12,076, followed by those from Myanmar (2,089), Indians (963), Bangladeshis (923), Thais (402), Chinese (43) and others (1,200). (Star, Friday, September 29, 2006 -RELA arrests 17,700 suspected illegals)

What must be noted is that 94,010 people (or 76,310) persons were unnecessarily subjected to the uncomfortable experience of being screened. An by screening, if this meant squatting in sun waiting as what happened to some 1,500 who had to squat waiting at the Sepang District Council compound to have their particulars checked during one of the Ops Tegas (see picture in Star, Monday July 31, 2006), then this was an unnecessary violation of rights. Reports of late has also shown that many documented migrants have been unnecessarily arrested and been forced to spend time at detention centers, and also worth noting is that the 17,700 are only “believed to be illegal immigrants”, for many could really be documented workers, unnecessarily arrested sometimes because employers are holding on to the passports and identity cards.

17,200 MIGRANTS BUT ONLY 4 EMPLOYER ARRESTED?

Interestingly, it is reported that during the same period only 4 employers were arrested. Surely all these 17,700 “believed to be illegal immigrants” were not just in the employ or in the premises of just 4 employers. I believe that it is those that employ undocumented migrants are the ones who are responsible for the increasing number of undocumented migrants coming into our country. The other people responsible are unscrupulous and/or ‘false’ agents, and those who have facilitated the smuggling of persons into the country. Sadly, it seems that RELA and the other authorities have not acted against these other persons, safe for the undocumented migrants.

Last year, we also heard how some errant employer of undocumented migrants even got away with not paying wages to these workers just by reason of they being undocumented. Actions against errant employers must be increased – and if the employer is a company, then action must be taken against all Directors and also majority share-holders.

Alleged employers of undocumented migrants must also be immediately investigated, arrested, and charged just the same as what have been done with those believed to be illegal migrants. What the special treatment for employers. Only 4 employers been arrested last year is shocking – and I hope that it is not just those ‘small-time-employers” with little or no political connections only but also some of big ones as well.

OVERCROWDED DETENTION CENTERS

Malaysia has been arresting allegedly undocumented migrants with great eagerness, and it was reported in late September 2006 “that the number of illegal immigrants in detention centres nationwide is expected to reach critical stage by January next year. Home Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Radzi Sheikh Ahmad said: “There are about 7,467 illegal immigrants detained in 15 centres around the country and based on the progression of arrests made by RELA, we are expected to face a crisis for space by January. One of the biggest centers like the Semenyih Immigration Detention centre can only take in a maximum of 1,500 detainees while smaller ones can only accommodate up to a maximum of 500 people. (Star, Saturday September 30, 2006 -Number of illegals set to reach critical stage).It is January 2007 now, and one wonders whether Detention Centres are overcrowded now.

This is yet another reason why Malaysia needs to seriously review its strategy and policies concerning undocumented migrants. Clearly, mass arrests and deportations have not been working – and maybe we need to look at targeting employers that are providing employment, persons who are smuggling persons into the country and also maybe we should move towards a “come, find a job and self-registration” strategy. We cannot deny that Malaysia needs migrants.

But more importantly, what is most crucial at this stage is to immediately put an end to Malaysia’s usage volunteer ‘vigilantes’ in the crackdown on undocumented migrants for there are just too many incidences involving the RELA that is bringing shame to the nation and its people.

ESSENTIAL (IKATAN RELAWAN RAKYAT) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2005

The powers of 70,000[i] strong RELA was expanded in early 2005 when the Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) (Amendment) Regulations 2005, which came into operation on 1 February 2005. What was being amended was a Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) Regulations 1966 [P.U. 33/1966], which is a Regulations that came into being by virtue of powers provided for in Emergency (Essential Powers) Act, 1964 (30/64) (now the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979).

Section 6 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979, stated :- “For so long as the Proclamation of Emergency referred to in the preamble to this Act remains in force, the regulations made under the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act, 1964 (30/64) (except those regulations which the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may by notification in the Gazette declare not to be in force) shall be in force and shall have effect as if they have been made under this Act; and the regulations may be amended, modified or repealed as if they have been made under this Act.”.

Now, given the fact the Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) Regulations 1966 has now been amended Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) (Amendment) Regulations 2005, it settles once again that the Proclamation of Emergency issued by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on 15 May 1969 is still in force. Malaysia is still under a state of Emergency, and this is ludicrous.

The 2005 amendment to the 1966 Regulations now expressly allows a RELA member “where it has reasonable belief that any person is a terrorist, undesirable person, illegal immigrant or an occupier, to stop the person in order to make all such inquiries or to require the production of all such documents or other things as the competent authority may consider necessary”. It also permits the RELA to arrest without a warrant, may without a warrant and with or without assistance [of the police or immigration officers] enter and search any premises and also stop and search any vessel, vehicle or person, whether in a public place or not. The powers stated in this paragraph is exercisable if there is written authorization from a competent authority, who is defined as being the Director General(Ketua Pengarah), Deputy Director General(Timbalan Ketua Pengarah) and such other officers of the Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat as appointed by the Home Affairs Minister.

What is even interesting is that the 2005 amendments also provides for protection to these RELA volunteers whereby regulation 16 of the 2005 Amending Regulations clearly states : “The Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 shall apply to any action, suit, prosecution or proceedings against the Ketua Pengarah Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat, Timbalan Ketua Pengarah Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat or any member of the Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat in respect of any act, neglect or default done or committed by him in good faith or any omission omitted by him in good faith, in such capacity.".

A POSSE OF VOLUNTEERS WITHOUT A SHERIFF

What is disturbing is that the arms-bearing RELA members can go out stop, search, enter premises and arrest persons on their own without even the police or an immigration enforcement officer, and this is just not right and may lead to abuse of powers. There must be at least a professional enforcer of the law, be it a police or immigration personnel that accompanies these volunteers ‘vigilantes’. ’as they go out there performing their ‘duties’ The government’s possible justification in using RELA is that they do not have enough immigration and police personnel to deal with hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants in Malaysia – but surely it is very unsafe to send normal volunteers without any leadership and on-site guidance of at least one police or immigration personnel.

We are a civilized nation, and we have an appointed government who have appointed and trained professional law enforcers – and if there is inadequate law enforcers, then the proper thing to do is to appoint more police and immigration enforcement officers – not just go out and try to get volunteers with arms to enforce the law.

If cash incentives were also given to the police and immigration enforcement officers, like what is apparently done for the RELA members, I am sure that they too will be more efficient in the performance of their duties.

RELA ACTIONS IS CREATING A BAD NAME FOR MALAYSIA

It may be true that the RELA has been effective in arresting about 19,000 foreigners since February 2005 until October 2006, but at the same time it has visited injustices to so many more persons – Malaysians, documented migrants and others. A sampling of RELA behaviour can be seen from facts that have been taken from media reports, as follows:

* A landscape company spent six harrowing days trying to get its legal foreign workers out of a detention camp. The six foreign workers, all with legal travel and work documents, were whisked out of their quarters in a resort in Cherating in the wee hours of the morning on Dec 28 last year when RELA members “literally broke into their chalet and ordered them out.” (Star, Friday January 12, 2007).

* Five factories near here [Klang] alleged that at 1.30am on Saturday, a team of 30 to 40 RELA members (half not in uniforms) turned up to look for foreign workers, assaulted some and allegedly stole cash and valuables during the raid. The companies, who lodged police reports, said that all the workers had legal work permits. The workers of Latitude Tree Furniture Sdn Bhd claimed that RELA members had beaten them with canes and iron rods, leaving welts on their bodies. Two Bangladeshi workers sustained head injuries and were given outpatient treatment. The companies were not happy with the method used to search the premises and also said that “Detaining the workers is not a proper thing to do as it only disrupts operations of all our factories,”. They also said “…that such raids put fear in our workers and furthermore our workers claimed to have lost hand phones and cash after the raids.” (Star, Monday December 4, 2006 - Firms hit out at RELA raids)

* Residents of about 10 households in Taman Anggerik, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, complained that RELA personnel crashed into their homes after breaking door locks and smashing gates, and told them that they [RELA] were looking for illegal workers. The residents said the RELA personnel acted like gangsters and showed them no respect. When they asked the RELA personnel to explain why they crashed into their homes, they were told “we are the law.” Cash totaling RM3,756 in a drawer was subsequently found missing. (Star, Tuesday October 17, 2006 - RELA men break locks to enter houses)

* 22 workers of an IT company were beaten and made to do a 50m “duck-walk” at Section 30 in Shah Alam, RELA director-general Datuk Mahadi Arshad subsequently claimed that it was not a RELA operation, while stating that only 3 out of the 10 involved were RELA members. (Star, Thursday February 16, 2006 -‘Duck-walk’ incident not a RELA operation)

TIME TO DISBAND RELA OR GIVE THEM MORE APPROPRIATE DUTIES

In light of what we know has been happening when the volunteer RELA force, with powers exceeding normal powers that our police even have, have been let loosed in the general community, it is time now to review the usage of RELA and also the powers that have been bestowed on them. There have been too many abuses and complaints which have got into the media which includes assault (and also deaths), property damage, trespass, invasion of privacy and even theft – and it has involved not just the undocumented migrants, but also documented migrants and even Malaysian citizens. Enough is enough.

The RELA must be rounded-up and rested, and the professional police force and other professional enforcement forces must take over the role of policing Malaysia.

In fact, that Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) Regulations 1966 [P.U. 33/1966] must be repealed. If need be, a new law must be enacted for RELA – one that will re-define their role and duties focusing more possibly towards providing protection to Malaysians and trying to overcome the increasing incidences of snatch thiefs crimes and corruption in the country. RELA should maybe focus their attention to fighting corruption involving the police, other public officers, town councilors and elected representatives.

There is no situation now in Malaysia that can justify us still being under Emergency. It is time for the present government and the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong to revoke all existing proclamations of Emergency, and at the same time cause the repeal of all remaining legislations that have been enacted during periods of Emergency – whereby one such Act that has to be repealed is the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979.

Charles Hector

22 January 2007, Petaling Jaya

---

[i] Star, Saturday December 9, 2006 – “445 illegals nabbed by Rela”

ASEAN PAYS LIP SERVICE TO MIGRANT RIGHTS

Asean's empty declaration on migrant workers

Charles Hector Jan 23, 07 12:12pm

The heads of state and government of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), attending the 12th Asean Summit on Jan13 in Cebu, Philippines came out with an Asean Declaration On The Protection And Promotion Of The Rights Of Migrant Workers. Reading the title only, it all sounds very good for the promotion and protection of the rights of migrant workers but a deeper consideration of the said declaration itself reveals that it does very little for the protection and promotion of rights as everything declared is to be subject to the laws, regulations, and policies of the respective Asean member countries. In the preamble, it explicitly states recognising further the sovereignty of states in determining their own migration policy relating to migrant workers, including determining entry into their territory and under which conditions migrant workers may remain. By the usage of the words subject to the laws, regulations, and policies of respective countries, which is repeated several times in the document, the declaration basically allows that status quo be maintained as it is now in a particular country. Any advancement and protection when it comes, and if it comes, with regard to rights of migrants will depend on the particular member country and the Asean Declaration really does nothing about determining what or when or even whether anything will change for the better. Laws and regulations are written documents and as such it is clear whereas policy is a vague creature. What is the policy of Malaysia with regard to migrant rights? No one can at any time for sure say what it is. Some say that it is what the prime minister, relevant minister or director-general of immigration state in their speeches and statements. But this can and does change all the time, and one will find it next to impossible to try and claim rights based on such policies. It may have been reported in the media but then one can always turn around and say that the media got it wrong and it was not what was meant. We need to get our governments to lay down written policies (that are accessible to the public) for us to be really clear on what a government’s policy on a subject matter really is. In Thailand, the Cabinet made resolutions and this made policy clear but this is not so in Malaysia, and even if there were such resolutions, it has been kept away from the public. A close reading of the declaration will reveal that they are only talking about migrants from Asean sending countries and specifically those that are documented or those that become undocumented later by no fault of theirs. In the case of Malaysia, this declaration would not even cover the some 170,000 Nepali migrants, being the second largest nationality group of migrants workers, or those from countries like India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and other non-Asean countries. Undocumented migrants generally are also not covered and the only group of undocumented workers covered is made clear by the usage of the words [those that] have subsequently become undocumented, and with regard to families of migrants, it only addresses family members already residing with them, not new members of the family of migrants that may come to be in the future of that said receiving country. As such the millions of undocumented migrants, some of whom are really refugees, be it from Burma, Aceh , Southern Thailand and Southern Philippines, are not covered with regard to rights in this declaration. The extension of access of consular functions and diplomatic assistance of member Asean countries when an Asean migrant is arrested or committed to prison or custody or detained in any other manner, under the laws and regulations of the receiving state seem to be a good thing especially when in that receiving country there is no embassy and/or consulate of the country from where the affected Asean migrant originates. Undocumented workers As mentioned earlier, the declaration does not talk about rights of the about two to five million undocumented migrants in our country. Officially, the number of documented migrants in Malaysia is about 1.8 million, but interestingly a recent AFP report in October 2006 reiterated yet again that Malaysia’s 10.5 million strong labour force is made up of 2.6 million foreign workers. Undocumented migrant workers are the most victimised of the lot, but sadly the declaration clearly states that it is not concerned with the documentation of these group of workers when it stated: Nothing in the present declaration shall be interpreted as implying the regularization of the situation of migrant workers who are undocumented In some Asean countries like Thailand, migrant workers from Burma enter, find employment and then register themselves with the relevant government bodies. Likewise, Malaysian migrant workers in Singapore also get the job first and are then registered by their employers as workers. An ordinary Malaysian worker gets employed, and then only does his employer informs/registers the said worker with the Employees Provident Fund (EPF), for Social Security (SOCSO). The income tax department is also informed by the Employer. A similar system, where the obligations are placed on the employer (rather than the worker) would also work for migrant workers and that will solve the problem of documentation, and will result in much more cost saving for the receiving country. In fact, in South East Asia we should be striving for an Asean community of peoples, an Asean community of workers and we should be trying to do away with all these sending and receiving agents and government pre-employment documentation procedures. The Asean worker should be allowed to enter any Asean nation freely, but maybe on a restricted entry permit of two to four weeks, being the time for him to secure a job, and if he fails to do so, then he may be required to leave generally, but this should not be the case for those who are refugees. In Thailand, I believe, if a worker is not satisfied with his employer or his working conditions, he can leave and be allowed to stay in the country for a defined time during which he should find new employment. It is a good practice that Malaysia should also seriously consider. Consensus, not majority decision The biggest problem with Asean is that decisions are made by consensus and not by majority vote and this is a fact that cripples and impedes Asean from moving forward in the field of promotion and protection of rights. For example, if the majority of the Asean member nations are not happy with what is happening in Burma and want to make a statement of protest about Burma, Asean cannot do so because Burma (a member of Asean) objects. That’s why there may be gross human rights violations committed by some Asean member country, and Asean makes no statement or comment. Similarly the fact that some members of the Asean are not members of the World Trade Organisation prevents Asean from going into the WTO meetings and negotiating as a block for the good of the Asean people. I believe that it is this problem that has brought about this very weak declaration that has an impressive title and nothing more. It does not even set minimum standards or guarantee basic rights of workers. Maybe, the soon to be Asean Charter may be able to set some standards and require strict compliance by all member nations within a stipulated time frame. We shall have to wait and see. As it is, there really seems to be no sense for this declaration to have the secretary-general of Asean to submit annually a report on the progress of the implementation of the declaration to the summit through the Asean Ministerial Meeting. What is he going to report, save that each of the Asean member states have complied what is required of them in accordance with the requirement of their respective countries laws and regulations and policies. There were really no specific requirements that had to be complied by Asean member nations within any stipulated time frame. To be fair, there is an indication that an Asean instrument on the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers is to be developed but alas no time frame was set, and even if such an instrument is developed it must have in place a monitoring system, a complaints procedure and an adjudicating body with penalising powers that should be accessible to everyone, including the migrant workers and their families and not just Asean member states. We already have UN and ILO conventions dealing with the rights of workers, migrants or otherwise; and also migrant workers and their families that could very easily be adopted in toto or used as a basis for this upcoming Asean instrument. For the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers, we cannot be dealing with just the documented but also undocumented migrants. For refugees from member Asean countries now in other Asean nations, something more may be required, especially since most refugees are seeking asylum and protection from the wrath and possible persecution of their own country of origin. The instrument must also advocate the equality of persons and equal protection of the law in all Asean countries of all persons and all workers from member nations and even other countries. One group of workers that are presently left out in the employment laws of most nations is domestic workers and this new Asean instrument must provide for clear rights for this group of neglected workers. In Malaysia today, it is reported that there are about 320,000 domestic workers and as such this is no longer an insignificant or small number. Asean’s concern about the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers must be applauded but the declaration that emerged on Jan 13 was a far cry from what one would have expected from a group of nations that describe themselves as a caring and sharing community.

OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE OF JAPAN, THE HON. NAGASE JINEN

Ref.: TG ASA 22/2007.001

Minister Nagase Jinen

Ministry of Justice

1-1-1 Kasumigaseki

Chiyoda-ku

Tokyo 100-8977

Japan

24 January 2007

OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE OF JAPAN, THE HON. NAGASE JINEN

Dear Minister,

I am writing on behalf of Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)[1] to register our grave concern at the executions of four prisoners (Hidaka Hiroaki, 44, Hiroshima; Fukuoka Michio, 64, Osaka; Akiyama Yoshimitsu, 77, Tokyo; Fujinami Yoshio, 75, Tokyo) which took place on 25 December 2006.

This retrograde step runs counter to the universal protection of human rights and is at odd with the international trend away from the use of the death penalty. Very few countries currently carry out executions: provisional figures compiled by Amnesty International indicate that only 20 of the United Nation’s 193 member states carried out state killings in 2006. These executions in Japan, after a 15 month hiatus, will send a discouraging signal to nations in the Asia-Pacific region at a time when others – South Korea and Taiwan for example – are considering the abolition of the death penalty.

On his appointment in October 2005, your predecessor, the former Minister of Justice Sugiura Seiken, refused to sign execution orders due to his personal beliefs. This is not the first time a Minister of Justice in Japan has refused to sanction hangings. Former Minister of Justice Sato Megumu also refused to sign execution orders because of his religious beliefs.

During the four-year informal moratorium on death penalty between 1989 and 1993, homicides in Japan reached some of the lowest rates in modern times with 1,215 murders reported in 1991, well below recent figures such as the 1,419 homicides reported in 2004. Such figures contradict the argument that the death penalty is a uniquely effective deterrent against serious crime. The experience of other countries also shows that an absence of executions does not lead to an increase in homicide rates.

The four executions on 25 December run counter to a growing trend towards the abolition of the death penalty and a lessening in the number of executions; this global trend away from the use of capital punishment was highlighted in our recent report on the death penalty in Japan published in July 2006, “Will this day be my last?”: The death penalty in Japan” (AI Index: ASA 22/006/2006) The death penalty has already been abolished in Cambodia, Nepal, Timor Leste and recently in the Philippines. Currently the National Assembly of South Korea is giving serious consideration to abolition and the authorities in Taiwan have also indicated their desire to remove capital punishment from their laws. Japan seeks to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council; steps towards abolition of death penalty would demonstrate that Japan is progressing towards the full protection of human rights and showing strong leadership on this important matter.

We note your comments reported in various media sources that “…nearly 80 per cent of the people of this country have no objection to the existence of the death penalty”. After over 30 years researching the death penalty, Amnesty International believes that public support for the death penalty is overwhelmingly based on a desire to be free from crime as well as the erroneous belief that executions prevent murders. Amnesty International recognizes the right of citizens to create laws via their elected representatives; such laws must be formulated with respect for human rights. History is littered with human rights violations that had the support of the majority but in modern times are looked upon with horror. Slavery, racial segregation and lynching all had widespread support in the societies where they occurred but constituted gross violations of the victims' human rights. In more recent times, grave violations of human rights in Bosnia, Rwanda and East Timor all had the support of large sections of the population in those countries but were no less unacceptable because of such popularity.

Amnesty International's opposition to the death penalty does not in any way distract from the sympathy the organization and others feel towards the victims of violent crime and their loved ones. As an organization dedicated to working for the victims of human rights violations, Amnesty International is fully aware of the suffering caused by violent crimes. We believe that everyone in society should work to lessen violent crime and that all those impacted upon by such appalling acts as murder, rape and other crimes should be supported and helped as they rebuild their lives after suffering such trauma.

Amnesty International and the Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) urge the Japanese government to:

• Stop further executions;
• Commute all death sentences and impose an immediate moratorium on executions, pending abolition of the death penalty;
• End secrecy around the application of the death penalty and initiate a public and parliamentary debate on abolition of the death penalty by making available all information regarding the use of the death penalty;
• Implement procedural safeguards around the right to life and respect the rights of detainees, by improving prison conditions, allowing families, friends and lawyers greater access to prisoners, and ensuring prisoners have access to medical facilities.
  

I look forward to hearing from you on this important matter.

Yours sincerely,

Irene Khan

Secretary General

Enclosed: Amnesty International Report: “Will this day be my last?”: The death penalty in Japan” (AI Index: ASA 22/006/2006)

---

[1] The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN) was launched on 10 October 2006. ADPAN consists of lawyers, parliamentarians and activists from 16 countries: Australia, Hong Kong, France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, UK and USA.

ADPAN has 33 members, including 13 organizations: Hong Kong Society and Community Organization, Commission for Disappearances and Victims of Violence (KONTRAS) (Indonesia), Forum 90 (Japan), Catholic Human Rights Committee (South Korea), Malaysians against the Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET), Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights (USA), Philippine Human Rights Information Center (Philrights), Think Centre (Singapore), Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (TAEDP), FORUM-ASIA (Thailand), Comunità di Sant'Egidio (Italy), World Coalition against the Death Penalty and Amnesty International. See: http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/

Suspect found dead in police lock-up

Star, Monday January 22, 2007

Suspect found dead in police lock-up

SEREMBAN: A part-time lorry driver, who was being remanded to help in investigations into a robbery, died in the police district headquarters lock-up here yesterday.

District police chief Asst Comm Hasanuddin Hasan said that the 46-year-old man's body had been sent to the Tuanku Jaafar Hospital for a post-mortem.

“An investigation is being conducted, including looking at the CCTV (closed circuit television) recordings,” he said.

It is learnt that the suspect and two other men were detained in a restaurant at Jalan Tun H.S. Lee in Kuala Lumpur on Thursday.

Family members of the deceased and MIC official Shivarraaj Chandran met ACP Hasanuddin over the death yesterday.

The suspect's brother said that he received a telephone call from the police yesterday morning informing him of the death.

“He was fine when he was detained. When I asked the policeman what had happened, he said that my brother took a shower about 3am and then went to sleep.

“They found him dead at about 5am,” he said.

21 arrested in toll protest (Malaysiakini)

21 arrested in toll protest

Jan 21, 07 5:41pm (Malaysiakini)

After watching the anti-toll hike protest from the sidelines for the past two weeks, the police today did the reverse - arresting 21 demonstrators even before the protest had started. Among those arrested were protest leaders including Parti Keadilan Rakyat Information chief Tian Chua, PAS leader Dr Hatta Ramli and DAP leader Ronnie Liu. The demonstration in Cheras today was organised by anti-toll hike organisation Protes - a coalition of opposition parties, civil society groups, trade unions and student groups, in which Hatta is the movement's secretary. The arrested protestors have been taken to the Kajang police headquarters. Four protestors, including Tian Chua, were hurt in the melee with the police and had been taken to the hospital for treatment. All the protestors held at the police station were released at about 9.30pm on police bail and have been asked to report to the Kajang magistrate's court on Feb 5. Crowd in front of station Earlier, DAP secretary general Lim Guan Eng, who met with the police officials, told the media that he was given the assurance that the protestors would be released soon. "They said that they will release the protestors after taking statements from them," he said. A crowd of about 50 people has also gathered in front of the Kajang police station, waiting for the release of the protestors. The protest today in Cheras in Kuala Lumpur was the third in the series of protests organised by the coalition to oppose the hike in the toll rates at five Klang Valley highways beginning Jan 1. In the earlier two protests - the first at the Sunway City toll plaza along the LDP highway two Sundays ago and the second in Gombak last Sunday - the police force was widely commended for allowing the peaceful protests to proceed peacefully. However, it was a different story today. Shocked and surprised Just as the protestors - numbering less than 100 - were gathering at two places at the Cheras Batu 11 toll plaza at about 4pm today to show their displeasure against the hefty toll hike, the police issued them a warning to disperse. Kajang police chief ACP Rosli Mohd Nizam told the crowd to disperse as it was an illegal assembly. In one of the spots - near a concrete road barrier closing an alternate route which bypass the Cheras-Kajang highway toll - about 30 would-be protestors led by PKR leader Lee Kim Sin had gathered. The concrete barrier forces residents in the area to use the toll highway. However, some of them left the scene after the police warnings of dispersals. Later, about 40 others led by Bandar Mahkota Cheras Free Access Road Action Committee president Tan Boon Hwa came to the area with banners and flags. They were given five minutes to disperse, but the police started arresting the protestors in about three minutes. Tan (photo) and a few others put up a struggle, but eventually six at the concrete road barrier - including Lee Kim Sin - were arrested. There were about 80 police officers on the scene. In all, the police arrested 21 protestors in both the spots - the second spot being the rest area near the toll plaza. Both the regular police force and the anti-riot Federal Reserve Unit were involved in dispersing the crowd. Surprised and shocked by the harsh police action, the rest of the protestors slowly begin to disperse from the protest venues. A malaysiakini journalist was also held by the police. He was not officially detained but his camera was seized. He too was also taken to the Kajang police station. “I have not been detained but they are keeping me here. I can walk around and make phone calls,” said journalist Andrew Ong using his mobile phone. He has been told that the police were awaiting orders from the Kajang police chief. He said that the police wanted to see the photographs he took of the protest. He was later released with his camera after about two hours from the Kajang police station. Sharp rise Beginning Jan 1, the toll rates for five major highways in the Klang Valley increased between 20 to 60 percent. Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP) saw the highest rise with its toll rising from RM1 to RM1.60 while the Kuala Lumpur-Karak Highway's Gombak toll is now at RM5, an increase of RM1. The highway's Bentong toll was increased by 50 sen to RM3. The other affected highways are Shah Alam Highway, Cheras-Kajang Highway and the Guthrie Corridor Expressway. The hikes have drawn strong reaction from various groups including component parties of the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition. The protest in Sunway City was the most notable thus far which drew thousands of participants from all walks of life in denouncing the drastic hikes in toll charges. [photographs by Andrew Ong]