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

Friday, June 16th, 2023 at Breaking News | News

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.

FMT Reporters - 16 Jun 2023, 4:39pm

43 Shares

Share

Tweet

Share

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

By Mohd Iskandar Ibrahim - August 28, 2023 @ 8:14pm

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

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

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 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

By Kenneth Tee

Wednesday, 23 Aug 2023 10:07 AM MYT

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

Hariz Mohd

Published:  Aug 23, 2023

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

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

By Shahrin Aizat Noorshahrizam

Friday, 03 Mar 2023 11:10 AM MYT

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

 

Possible Enforced Disappearance of Myanmar HRD Thuzar Maung and her family in Malaysia on 4/7/2023 - Speedy Transparent Investigation needed (MADPET)

 

Media Statement – 18/7/2023

Speedy Transparent Investigation needed in Possible Enforced Disappearance of Myanmar HRD Thuzar Maung and her family in Malaysia on 4/7/2023

MADPET (Malaysian Against Death Penalty and Torture) is concerned about Malaysia’s and the Malaysian police’s diligence in investigating the incident of 4/7/2023 when Human Rights Defender Thuzar Maung(46), her husband, Saw Than Tin Win(43),  her daughter, Poeh Khing Maung(16); and sons Aung Myint Maung(21) and Thukha Maung(17) was possibly enforced disappeared from their home in Kuala Lumpur.  If the Malaysian authorities fail ‘…to investigate the case ‘diligently and seriously’ (and) had hampered the progress (of the investigation)…’, it may be evidence of enforced disappearance.

It was reported that all 5 are UNHCR recognised refugees, and have been in Malaysia since 2015 when they fled from Myanmar, to escape persecution and growing violence against Muslims.

Thuzar Maung, also spelled Thu Zar Moung, is an outspoken supporter of Myanmar’s pro-democracy movement. She is, amongst others, also the chair of the Myanmar Muslim Refugee Community and Myanmar Migrant Workers Committee.

According to a Human Rights Watch(HRW) statement

‘….On July 4, 2023, unidentified men abducted Thuzar Maung, 46; her husband, Saw Than Tin Win, 43; her daughter, Poeh Khing Maung, 16; and sons Aung Myint Maung, 21, and Thukha Maung, 17, from their residence in Ampang Jaya, Kuala Lumpur, based on reports from witnesses and CCTV footage. Thuzar Maung, also spelled Thu Zar Moung, is an outspoken supporter of Myanmar’s pro-democracy movement…

….At about 4:30 p.m. on July 4, a car entered the gated community where the family lives. The driver told the security guards they were police. Two hours later, Thuzar Maung was on the phone with a friend, who heard her yell to her husband that unknown men were entering the house, before being disconnected. At about 7:10 p.m., the same car and the two cars owned by Thuzar Maung’s family were seen leaving the compound. Thuzar Maung’s phone and the phones of her husband and children appear to have been immediately turned off, as no calls have gone through since….

CCTV footage at the guard booth captured the license plate of the “police” car, which Malaysian police have since identified as fake. The footage also captured a black-gloved hand of the driver of one of Thuzar Maung’s cars holding out the gate card to exit the compound. Vehicle logs show that the same car had entered the gated community on June 19. Thuzar Maung’s colleagues who entered the house on July 5 said there were no signs of robbery…’

Enforced Disappearance, Kidnapping or other crimes?

This may be a case of ENFORCED DISSAPEARANCE, whereby it the disappearance was done by agents of the State (like the police,etc) or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State. HRW, in their statement, said that the driver of the car that was used told the security guards that they were police. The perpetrators could also be ‘agents’ of Myanmar, acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence Malaysia.

Alternatively, it could be kidnapping or abduction by criminals.

Hence, MADPET is of concern that the Malaysian police is only taking this case as a missing persons case. "The investigation has been opened under the Missing Persons' KEP," he [Selangor police chief Comm Datuk Hussein Omar Khan] said when contacted on Monday (July 17) – Star/17/7/2023.

Based on the allegations in the HRW Statement, it is more than a missing persons case, but may include kidnapping and even the crime of impersonating the police.

As it involves refugees from Myanmar, it’s of not just of national but international concern. Investigation must also proof that Malaysia is not involved directly or indirectly, and there has been no violation of the principle of non-refoulement. The 5 must be found speedily.

Enforced Disappearance - Raymond Koh, Amri Che Mat, Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Sitepu still missing

MADPET notes sadly that Malaysia to date has still not managed to find Pastor Raymond Koh, Amri Che Mat, Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Sitepu, all victims of enforced disappearance according to the findings of SUHAKAM(Malaysian Human Rights Commission).

In the case of Pastor Raymond Koh and  Amri Che Mat, SUHAKAM(Malaysian Human Rights Commission) after an inquiry concluded was an enforced disappearance and that the police were behind it. ‘…Commissioner Datuk Mah Weng Kwai[a former Judge] said its decision was based on the findings of its panel that had been looking into Koh’s abduction, which took place on February 13, 2017. “The direct and circumstantial evidence in Pastor Raymond Koh’s case proves, on a balance of probabilities, that he was abducted by State agents namely, the Special Branch, Bukit Aman, Kuala Lumpur…’ (Malay Mail, 3/4/2019)

In the case of the enforced disappearance of Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Sitepu, last seen in November 2016, SUHAKAM after the inquiry ‘said it did not find evidence that the that the pastor and his wife were abducted by “agents of the state”. Suhakam commissioner Mohd Hishamudin Yunus[a former Judge], who chaired the inquiry, said their disappearance was carried out by “a person or more than a person unknown with acquiescence of the authorities”.“Their involuntary disappearance breached the laws of Malaysia,” …“However, (although) we did not find evidence that they were abducted by agents of the state, yet the authorities failed to investigate the case ‘diligently and seriously’ (and) had hampered the progress (of the investigation),” (FMT, 15/4/2022).

All 4 remains missing to date.

Official Secrets Act – Hiding of Truth? Abolish it in favour of Transparency.

Following SUHAKAM’s finding of enforced disappearance of Pastor Koh and Amri Che Mat, sadly the government’s response was not to commence investigation and prosecution, but to set up a task force to investigate SUHAKAM’s conclusions. It was given six months to complete its report. Then the Task Force report was classified secret under the Official Secrets Act, and remains classified to date. Why? What is the government hiding?

On 9/5/2023, Justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, ordered that the report - which was classified under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972 - should be released to Amri’s wife and her lawyer, prohibiting them from disclosing the report to any members of the public.  

Why was the government wanting to keep it secret? "A general assertion that the report, if disclosed, would allow criminals and enemies of the state to take advantage of the police operation is insufficient," he[Justice Wan Ahmad Farid] said in the online proceedings here on Tuesday (May 9)…’ (Star, 9/5/2023)

MADPET notes sadly, that the State has now appealed this High Court Order, and have also obtained an order staying the release of the report pending the disposal of appeal. (FMT, 7/6/2023)

MADPET calls for a speedy, comprehensive and transparent investigation into the possible enforced disappearance of Thuzar Maung, Saw Than Tin Win, Poeh Khing Maung, Aung Myint Maung and Thukha Maung. There should be ‘no secrets’ or use of the OSA to hide the revelation of truth or to protect agents of the State, or the State itself.

MADPET calls for disclosure on the stage of investigation in the enforced disappearance Pastor Raymond Koh, Amri Che Mat, Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Sitepu, Will there be any prosecution? Are there other facts of the case that are being kept secret using the OSA  for reasons like to not  ‘allow criminals and enemies of the state to take advantage of the police operation..’?

MADPET calls for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s Pakatan Harapan-led government that promised reforms, to immediately repeal the Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972 and end the government culture of ‘secrecy’ in favour of transparency and accountability.

 

Charles Hector

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

 

Malaysia: Myanmar Refugee Activist Abducted

Urgently Locate, Ensure Safety of Thuzar Maung, Family Members

he Myanmar refugee activist Thuzar Maung with her husband, Saw Than Tin Win, who were abducted along with her three children from their home in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on July 4, 2023. © 2023 private

(Bangkok) – The Malaysian government should immediately prioritize a thorough and transparent investigation into the abduction of the Myanmar refugee activist Thuzar Maung and her family, Human Rights Watch said today.

On July 4, 2023, unidentified men abducted Thuzar Maung, 46; her husband, Saw Than Tin Win, 43; her daughter, Poeh Khing Maung, 16; and sons Aung Myint Maung, 21, and Thukha Maung, 17, from their residence in Ampang Jaya, Kuala Lumpur, based on reports from witnesses and CCTV footage. Thuzar Maung, also spelled Thu Zar Moung, is an outspoken supporter of Myanmar’s pro-democracy movement.

“We fear that Thuzar Maung and her family were abducted in a planned operation and are at grave risk,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Malaysian government should urgently act to locate the family and ensure their safety.”

At about 4:30 p.m. on July 4, a car entered the gated community where the family lives. The driver told the security guards they were police. Two hours later, Thuzar Maung was on the phone with a friend, who heard her yell to her husband that unknown men were entering the house, before being disconnected. At about 7:10 p.m., the same car and the two cars owned by Thuzar Maung’s family were seen leaving the compound. Thuzar Maung’s phone and the phones of her husband and children appear to have been immediately turned off, as no calls have gone through since.

CCTV footage at the guard booth captured the license plate of the “police” car, which Malaysian police have since identified as fake. The footage also captured a black-gloved hand of the driver of one of Thuzar Maung’s cars holding out the gate card to exit the compound. Vehicle logs show that the same car had entered the gated community on June 19. Thuzar Maung’s colleagues who entered the house on July 5 said there were no signs of robbery.

Thuzar Maung is a long-time advocate for democracy in Myanmar and refugee and migrant rights in Malaysia. She serves as chair of the Myanmar Muslim Refugee Community and Myanmar Migrant Workers Committee and has worked closely with Myanmar’s opposition National Unity Government. She has over 93,000 followers on Facebook, where she posts criticism of abuses by Myanmar’s junta, which took power after a February 1, 2021 military coup. Her friends and colleagues expressed concern that she was targeted for her activism. The police in Kuala Lumpur have opened an investigation into the case.

Thuzar Maung fled Myanmar for Malaysia in 2015 to escape growing violence against Muslims. All five family members are recognized by the United Nations Refugee Agency as refugees in Malaysia.

“Foreign governments should press Malaysian authorities to quickly uncover the location of this family,” Pearson said. “Myanmar activists are apparently at risk even when they criticize the military junta from a country where they have sought asylum.” - Human Rights Watch



Cops investigating alleged abduction of Myanmar activist and family
 
By FARIK ZOLKEPLI Nation

Monday, 17 Jul 2023 6:19 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR: The police have opened a Missing Persons' Police Inquiry Paper (KEP) over the alleged abduction of a Myanmar activist and her family in Ampang Jaya.

Selangor police chief Comm Datuk Hussein Omar Khan said the police have received a report on the matter.

"The investigation has been opened under the Missing Persons' KEP," he said when contacted on Monday (July 17).

The Human Rights Watch (HRW) had called on the Malaysian government to investigate the abduction of Myanmar refugee activist Thuzar Maung and her family.

The HRW claimed that on July 4, unidentified men abducted Thuzar Maung, 46; her husband, Saw Than Tin Win, 43; her daughter, Poeh Khing Maung, 16; and sons Aung Myint Maung, 21; and Thukha Maung, 17; from their residence in Ampang Jaya based on reports from witnesses and CCTV footage. - Star, 17/7/2023

Special Branch behind pastor Raymond Koh’s disappearance, says Suhakam

Susanna Liew and Norhayati Mohd Arifin attend the announcement of Suhakam’s public inquiry findings into the disappearances of pastor Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat in Kuala Lumpur April 3, 2019. — Picture by Hari Anggara

By By Ida Nadirah Ibrahim

Wednesday, 03 Apr 2019 1:32 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, April 3 — After an extensive public inquiry, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) announced today that the Special Branch, the special police intelligence team from Bukit Aman, was involved in the abduction of pastor Raymond Koh, similar to that of activist Amri Che Mat.

Commissioner Datuk Mah Weng Kwai said its decision was based on the findings of its panel that had been looking into Koh’s abduction, which took place on February 13, 2017.

"The direct and circumstantial evidence in Pastor Raymond Koh’s case proves, on a balance of probabilities, that he was abducted by State agents namely, the Special Branch, Bukit Aman, Kuala Lumpur.

“The Panel further finds that there is no evidence to support the contention, as suggested by Counsel on behalf of Pastor Raymond Koh’s family and Counsel for the Bar Council, Pastor Raymond Koh was abducted by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorisation, support or acquiescence of the State,” Mah said.

Mah said the conclusion was reached based on testimony from Amri’s wife, Norhayati Mohd Ariffin, who said she was told by Special Branch officer Mohd Shamzaini Mohd Daud that the enforced disappearances of both Koh and Amri were carried out by Bukit Aman’s Special Branch.

Suhakam commissioner, Datuk Mah Weng Kwai, announces the findings of Suhakam’s public inquiry into the disappearances of pastor Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat in Kuala Lumpur April 3, 2019. — Picture by Hari Anggara

He said the conclusion also drew from the police’s refusal to acknowledge this and reclassify Koh’s case from abduction to enforced disappearance.

Based on the findings, the inquiry panel made several recommendations including the formation of a special task force to re-investigate Koh’s disappearance, the separation of powers between the police and religious authorities, and reforming the police’s standard operating procedures (SOP).

“Every effort must be made to track down the abductors of pastor Raymond Koh in a thorough police investigation,” said Mah, adding that an experienced investigating officer should be appointed for the case.

He added that the families must be given closure.

Inquiries into the disappearances of Koh, Amri, and two others missing — pastor Joshua Hilmi and his wife, Ruth Hilmi — were held under the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act.

The inquiry on Koh’s case took place over 21 days and heard 16 witnesses, and ended last December 8.

Koh, whose real name is Keng Joo Koh, 64, was last seen by his wife Susanna Liew Sow Yoke in February 2017 in Petaling Jaya less than three months after Amri’s abduction.

Joshua and Ruth have also been missing since 2016. - Malay Mail, 3/4/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No evidence couple abducted by ‘state agents’, says Suhakam inquiry

Public hearing confirms, however, that pastor Joshua Hilmy and his wife Ruth Sitepu are ‘victims of enforced disappearance’.

Ho Kit Yen - 15 Apr 2022, 11:34am

 

The Suhakam inquiry into the disappearance of pastor Hilmy Joshua Hilmy and his wife Ruth Sitepu says the authorities failed to investigate the case ‘diligently and seriously’. (Facebook pic)

KUALA LUMPUR: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia’s (Suhakam) public inquiry into missing couple Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Sitepu has held that they are victims of enforced disappearance.

However, it said it did not find evidence that the pastor and his wife were abducted by “agents of the state”.

Suhakam commissioner Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, who chaired the inquiry, said their disappearance was carried out by “a person or more than a person unknown with acquiescence of the authorities”.

“Their involuntary disappearance breached the laws of Malaysia,” the former judge said when delivering the inquiry’s decision today.

“However, (although) we did not find evidence that they were abducted by agents of the state, yet the authorities failed to investigate the case ‘diligently and seriously’ (and) had hampered the progress (of the investigation),” he said.

Joshua, a Malay who converted to Christianity, and his Indonesian wife Ruth were last seen on Nov 30, 2016 at their Petaling Jaya home.

Hishamudin pointed out that police had failed to prioritise missing persons’ cases like Joshua and Ruth’s, and did not look into the couple’s case thoroughly.

“The IO (investigating officer) testified that Joshua had been investigated for sedition for insulting Prophet Muhammad on Facebook in 2014. Groups such as Perkasa had lodged reports against him.

“We note that there were no efforts by the IO to revisit the Facebook post, which we find strange as the police should have investigated it to find any leads that might be useful in the couple’s disappearance.

“Even though some pertinent information was found during the early stage, it was not taken seriously by police and no danger alert was triggered.

“We are of the view that the lack of interest and seriousness by police in appreciating the severity of the case, treating it as a normal missing persons case, reflects the failure of the police to prioritise the case,” he said.

Hishamudin also criticised the police’s lack of speed in commencing the investigation.

“The couple’s friend Peter Pormannan lodged a report at the Klang police station in March 2017 after he couldn’t find them.

“The IO only recorded Peter’s statement one month later. As a responsible IO, it is crucial for him to act immediately at the early stage to gather as much information as possible,” he said.

The panel also found that police tried to “suppress” Joshua and Ruth’s case from the Indonesian embassy.

“According to Ruth’s brother Imam Sitepu’s testimony, he said the IO told him not to report Ruth’s disappearance to the embassy.

“We are of the view that the IO tried to suppress this case from the knowledge of other agencies and the public,” Hishamudin added.

He also said police never updated Ruth’s family on the status of the investigation, as required under the Criminal Procedure Code.

“Although Iman did not make a specific request, it is incumbent on the police to inform the family of the progress,” Hishamudin said.

Fellow commissioners Jerald Joseph and Madeline Berma assisted Hishamudin in the inquiry, which was held from Feb 10, 2020 to Jan 22 this year. A total of 26 witnesses assisted the inquiry. - FMT, 15/4/2022

High Court orders limited disclosure of task force report into Amri's disappearance to his wife
 
By NURBAITI HAMDAN Nation
Tuesday, 09 May 2023 2:18 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here has ordered the government to make a limited disclosure on a special task force report relating to the disappearance of activist Amri Che Mat, whom his family claimed to have been abducted.

Justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, in his decision, said that the report - which was classified under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972 - should be released by first respondent Mohd Russaini Idrus exclusively to Norhayati Mohd Ariffin, who is Amri's wife.

Mohd Russaini, who is the Police Force Commission secretary, is the secretary to the task force that investigated Amri's disappearance.

Justice Wan Ahmad Farid, who was delivering his decision in a judicial review application filed by Norhayati, said that he found the first respondent's explanation in his affidavit-in-reply in the judicial review as "not watertight".

"A general assertion that the report, if disclosed, would allow criminals and enemies of the state to take advantage of the police operation is insufficient," he said in the online proceedings here on Tuesday (May 9).

However, the court prohibited Norhayati from disclosing the report to any members of the public except for her lawyers in a main suit she filed in November 2019 against 21 parties including the government and the police over the alleged failure to effectively investigate her husband's alleged abduction.

The same order also applies to the applicant's lawyers.

The court did not make any order as to costs.

Norhayati was represented by lawyer Surendra Ananth while Senior Federal Counsels Shamsul Bolhassan and Ahmad Hanir Hambaly appeared for the respondents during the proceedings.

Norhayati had first filed the main civil suit in November 2019 over her husband's disappearance and sought the discovery of the task report to be disclosed for the purpose of legal action.

The defendants in the suit, however, objected to the discovery application on the grounds that the task report was classified under the OSA.

Norhayati then filed for leave for judicial review of the matter and she was granted leave on July 19, 2022.

At the same time, she withdrew the discovery application in her main suit.

When contacted, Surendra confirmed that the main suit against the 21 parties has been fixed for case management on May 19.

"The suit is also fixed for trial between June 19 and 22," he said.

Amri was allegedly abducted in Perlis close to midnight on Nov 24, 2016.

The vehicle he used was subsequently found in an abandoned construction site at Bukit Chabang, Perlis, at around 12.30am the next day. - Star, 9/5/2023

Govt appeals against order to release report on activist’s disappearance

The government has also obtained an order staying the release of the report pending the disposal of appeal.

Ho Kit Yen - 07 Jun 2023, 11:25am

The High Court had ordered the government to release the report on missing Amri Che Mat to his wife, Norhayati Ariffin, for the purpose of her civil suit.

KUALA LUMPUR: The government has filed an appeal to overturn a court order compelling it to release a classified report on the disappearance of activist Amri Che Mat to his wife.

Lawyer Larissa Ann Louis, appearing for Norhayati Ariffin, said the appeal was filed last week.  She said the government has also obtained an order staying the release of the report pending the disposal of appeal.

Last month, the High Court ordered the government to disclose the report prepared by a special task force to Norhayati within one month from May 9.

The court had, however, said Norhayati could only use the report for the purpose of her civil suit, and that she and her legal team were prohibited from disclosing it to third parties.

Amri, the founder of the NGO Perlis Hope, went missing in 2016, which led to a public inquiry into his disappearance by Suhakam between 2017 and 2019.

In 2021, the human rights commission concluded that Amri was a victim of an enforced disappearance carried out by the state, specifically by the police’s special branch.

In response, the home ministry established a task force to investigate Suhakam’s conclusions. It was given six months to complete its report.

Neither the ministry nor the task force has released the report despite repeated calls to do so by various parties, including Suhakam and other NGOs.

In December 2021, Norhayati filed a suit in the High Court seeking an order that the government declassify its report on her husband’s disappearance.

In the application to initiate a judicial review, she sought to set aside several provisions in the Official Secrets Act under which the report had been classified.

She also wanted the court to declare as unconstitutional the government’s decision to classify a report by the special task force on the disappearance of Amri and Pastor Raymond Koh as secret. - FMT, 7/6/2023