HUMAN RIGHTS RESOURCE CENTER MALAYSIA

Article from DAP Rocket – CM Lim shares his experiences under the draconian ISA

hrforall — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:14:59 +0000

by CM Lim Guan Eng on Monday, September 20, 2010 at 5:49pm

ISA: 50 Years of Oppression

Chief Minister of Penang and DAP Secretary General Lim Guan Eng was the first to be arrested during the infamous Operation Lalang clampdown, and he was the last of the 1987 batch to be released. Here, he shares his experiences under the draconian ISA.

What are your thoughts on the ISA, which has now been in place for five decades?

It is definitely a very draconian legislation. When you look at it theoretically, you don’t get the real gist of it until it actually happens. When one considers the oppression, suppression and repression which the ISA and other related laws encourage, it simply goes against basic human rights and human decency. If you look at the extent of the law itself, it becomes real when it happens to an actual person.

Firstly, you are denied your basic human rights, your dignity and humanity; love doesn’t exist in there. You are denied the basic love of your family, compassion and you become just a digit, no longer a person with a name and identity. In short, you are denied freedom.

We are all creatures created by God meant to roam around freely. We are born free and should die free. When laws impose limitations on our freedom and choices, life becomes unnatural. Even if one were simply locked up in his bedroom without newspapers or some connection to the outside world, it is already stressful. Just imagine a detention cell where they don’t allow you to know the time of day as the lights are kept on 24/7 and the only human contact is your IO (investigating officer). It gets to the point where although it is perverse and you may have hated him in the beginning, you do look forward to seeing him because at least it breaks the monotony of the days.

By allowing one person absolute power to decide another human being’s future, I think we are going against nature. As they say, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So this is where torture and abuse, whether mental or physical, happens. They will stop at nothing just to break you down so that you will toe the line. Again, this is unnatural because you are forcing somebody against their will.

Even though the physical imprisonment of ISA may not happen to all Malaysians, but we are all still victims because of the fear it creates. The greatest freedom is perhaps freedom from fear because otherwise, you are unable to fulfil your true potential.

This law encourages people to lie and punishes people who speak the truth. It also impedes the administration of real justice and democracy. As long as the ISA exists, opposition to injustice as dictated by all religions will not prevail. Look around the world at all developed countries; they are democracies because that is the way to success. The ISA is a stumbling block towards Malaysia’s progress.

Please tell us about the process of your arrest and detention.

I had just been elected as a Member of Parliament for about ten months (after the 1986 general election) when the police summoned me to the Jalan Bandar police station in Kuala Lumpur. Upon recording the affidavit, I lodged a police report, criticising the government’s actions. After that, the officer asked me to sit and wait for another official. I waited but it took some time for him to come over. I had to rush back to Parliament as it was in session. So I said it was all right, and requested that the official call me again later. But the police refused to let me go. I began to wonder if something had gone wrong.

He told me to sit down and then showed me a document, saying, “You are thus informed you are now under the ISA detention order.” I could not believe it.

I asked him if there was any mistake. As a 26-year old, was I posing a threat to national security? But we knew there was certainly a hidden political agenda as there was a fierce political ruckus raging in UMNO. With all the internal fighting raging in their party, the leaders needed a scapegoat. I became the first detainee and the last ever to be released.

What were the conditions like in there?

During interrogations, it was a case of them refusing to believe my answers while I refused to cooperate with him. It was ridiculous because they even asked, “What is your name?” I replied that if they didn’t know who I was, they may have got the wrong person and should release me immediately.

They were failing miserably in their efforts to grill me and got fed up, hence they retaliated by putting me into a blue cell, a completely blue room. There was only a ventilator as the fan did not work. But it was a big fan with large blades, and in the middle of the fan was a hook. I asked them what the hook was for and they told me it was for hanging up those who were uncooperative. Thankfully I never found out if that was actually true! But they kept trying to intimidate me.

They stopped me from sleeping. I was seated on a wooden chair and light was casting on my face, just like in a movie. I still didn’t answer any of their questions. Instead I confronted them. I was young then, and hot-headed. I told them that whatever I said would not be correctly recorded anyway, so they might as well write down whatever they wanted.

The officer was getting so upset that I defied his orders, and he then refused to let me sleep for 48 hours. After being interrogated for 48 hours, I was completely exhausted. I tried to sleep but they were yelling at me. Afterwards I fell sick with a high fever. They were scared and sent me to the cell. So I stayed there for three days. They called a doctor to examine me and I was given some medicine.

When they questioned me again later, they were not so strict anymore, urging me to provide them with some information, saying it was their duty. Their attitude did become milder and it was good to be treated a bit gently. We knew the law, so they dared not do silly things. I refused to answer and stated “unwilling to answer” on their charge sheet. After it was finished, the report was sent to the Home Affairs Ministry.

There were five charges against me, including defending the rights of a primary Chinese School and criticising the inept teachers being sent to the school as well as censuring the MCA Cooperative Society’s syndicate, which was a big issue at that time. Due to the shenanigans going on in the cooperative, many people lost their hard-earned savings amounting to RM 1.4 billion. The fifth charge was because I had voiced my concerns about those living in poverty and held a demonstration. But these charges were clearly political witch-hunting because the police had not arrested or questioned us at the time of the incidents.

After 60 days in prison alone, you were sent to the Kamunting detention centre. What happened then?

I was detained, and my father rushed to the police station to see me, but they arrested him too. In short, they had lured him over, and it was a big blow to him. They hoped he would give up and surrender.

But then, after seeing this stubborn guy who was not giving up, they tried to upset him, asking me to appear on TV and write a confession letter to admit my “mistake” so I told him, “If I were an actor, I would have already had a career on TV. But I’m no Chow Yuen Fatt, so do not invite me on TV.” They wanted me to write a letter of confession, admit my mistake, and support Mahathir. I said to him, no need for me to support Mahathir, as he had so many supporters. Therefore, we were accused of being too contentious and sent to Kamunting.

Was life at the Kamunting centre more bearable?

Up to that point in my life, I had never experienced anything as trying as my imprisonment. I was struggling to endure the detention. You can experiment for yourself – lock yourself in a room, all day long with no escape. No newspaper, without your handset, leaving your phone outside. You have food and a place to sleep but…

You may not be able to bear it even for half a day. Imagine if you were in detention camp, not for half a day, or one whole day but days and weeks and months. In the beginning, we weren’t even given a mattress; we just slept on the cold cement floor. It affected my back after a while.

Once, I awoke in the middle of the night to find ants using my stomach as a bridge to carry a dead cockroach. But due to my back problems, it took me a while to be able to move, by which time the ants had already crossed over with their catch.

The food, of course, was terrible. The rice had small stones in it and the vegetables had sand. The meat given would be a small piece of fish or chicken and often it was just salted fish. Since my release, I avoid salted fish.

The cell itself was a small room with a toilet outside. It’s difficult without a built-in toilet, as you have to ask the police to open the door for you. You need to shout, and wait patiently for them. Sometimes they wouldn’t show up.

As for a bed, it is basically the concrete that you lay on. There was barely anything there, no newspaper or any information from outside. You’d dream about it. You read news from the old newspapers they used to wrap up your meals in. Initially we did that but they found us out soon enough.

So then we prayed hard that the newspapers would be a Chinese, English or Malay daily. But if there was a Tamil or a Jawi script paper, we couldn’t understand it and could only look at the pictures.

Discovering a Chinese, English or Malay daily was exciting and we would keep these papers. I read them over a hundred times, the same papers, I would read from left to right, upside down, reading it over and over, and would flip through again when I was bored.

When they found this out, they stopped wrapping the food in old papers, using plastic instead. Then life was boring as usual. In these times, we had to stare at the wall and watch mosquitoes or ants walking around.

Did you think about your date of release?

You might think of it initially, but you forget it as time passes. Thinking of it is like torturing yourself because there is no time limitation for the ISA. The detention order could be for 16 months or for 18 years. One person was in detention for over 18 years.

By reading books about Nelson Mandela detained for 26 years, you’d be so grateful! Console yourself that he was jailed for 26 years. By comparison, two years is minor!

My father and I were the last detainees freed. There were only two of us left inside that section. That site could house 600 prisoners, but there was only the two of us there, such a waste of public funds. We were both released last, on 19 April 1989. We were the first to be detained, and the last to be released. No doubt, this had to do with Mahathir’s personal feelings.

If you’re locked up, it’s not as difficult as your son being jailed, too. That must have been really torturous. So I salute my father for enduring this l. I knew very well that should I be released one day, I’d be even more motivated to fight as they had blatantly defied the law. They were casually violating laws, and I had to prove them wrong.

I was sure to come back, and struggle harder to fight them.

What was it like for your family to endure your detention period?

For a person, it depends on the strength of your convictions and commitments to the cause that led to your imprisonment. Are you really committed to the cause that led to the loss of your liberty? This is really tested at these moments. Either you emerge stronger or you come out broken, and it is, of course, hardest on the family.

Children, in particular, will not understand the situation so it is very difficult for them. But it can also help to strengthen family bonds after you endure such a traumatising experience. Of course, there are also families which end up breaking apart due to the detention so there are two sides to the coin.

It is hard for families to ever really share the experiences of what the detained person is going through. But if you have commitment and abiding faith that is unshaken, then you will emerge stronger than before and more determined to change the structures. It may seem like an impossible task but Malaysians should persevere in demanding the repeal of such laws.

In light of the 50th anniversary of the Act, what should and can Malaysians do about this law?

They should continue to oppose it and demand for its unconditional repeal through campaigns showing that this law is a stain on our common Malaysian identity. Whether we take an active approach such as becoming involved in politics or an inactive one such as being aware and voting, every Malaysian must stand up and be counted. We must oppose not just the ISA, but OSA (Official Secrets Act), the PPPA (Printing Presses and Publications Act) and the Sedition Act.

(used with permission from DAP Rocket)

Photo taken fm DAP Rocket magazine

UN elects rights violators to Human Rights Council

hrforall — Fri, 14 May 2010 06:10:09 +0000

By EDITH M. LEDERER (AP) – 11 hours ago

UNITED NATIONS — Seven countries accused of human rights violations, including Libya, Angola and Malaysia, won seats on the U.N. Human Rights Council in an uncontested election Thursday.

The U.N. General Assembly approved all 14 candidates for the 14 seats on the 47-member council by wide margins despite campaigns by human rights groups to deny countries with poor rights records the minimum number of votes needed.

All 14 countries easily topped the 97 votes required from the 192-member world body. Libya, which currently holds the presidency of the General Assembly, received the lowest number of votes — 155 — while Angola got 170 and Malaysia 179.

In addition to these three countries, human rights groups criticized the poor rights records of Thailand, Uganda, Mauritania and Qatar which also won seats.

The seven other countries that won seats were Maldives, Ecuador, Guatemala, Spain, Switzerland, Moldova and Poland.

Iran withdrew from the race on April 23 after facing strong global opposition for severe human rights abuses including the government’s crackdown on opposition supporters.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said it was “notable … that Iran’s bid fell short.”

Human rights groups and other non-governmental organizations also successfully opposed the election of Iran and Venezuela in 2006, Belarus in 2007, Sri Lanka in 2008, and Azerbaijan in 2009.

The 14 countries elected Thursday will serve three-year terms starting June 19 on the Geneva-based council, which was created in March 2006 to replace the U.N.’s widely discredited and highly politicized Human Rights Commission.

The council, however, has also been widely criticized for failing to change many of the commission’s practices, including putting much more emphasis on Israel than on any other country.

The United States voted against the council’s creation during the Bush administration but reversed its position and won a seat last year after President Barack Obama took office.

Rice cited “some progress” since the U.S. has been on the council, noting its approval of a “milestone” resolution on freedom of expression, its investigation of last year’s massacre and rapes in Guinea, and adoption of stronger resolutions condemning rights violations in Congo, Myanmar, Somalia and Sudan.

“We remain committed to strengthening and reforming this council,” Rice told reporters. “We hope that the new council’s composition for the most part will provide us with partners — not all but most — with whom we can work constructively.”

The NGO Coalition for an Effective Human Rights Council said the failure of U.N. regional groups to put forward competitive slates deprived the General Assembly of the opportunity to elect the most qualified countries.

“Those who want the council to improve have to commit themselves to competitive elections and be willing to compete themselves for a seat,” said Peggy Hicks, global advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, a coalition member.

“Without competitive elections,” she told AP, “we’ll continue to see states that don’t meet the qualifications set by the General Assembly getting seats like Libya, Angola and Malaysia.”

Under the resolution that established the council, members are expected to “uphold the highest standards” of human rights and “fully cooperate” with it.

Hillel Neuer, executive director of Geneva-based UN Watch, which heads a coalition of 37 human rights organizations that campaigned for the U.S. and European Union to defeat Libya’s candidacy, said that “by electing serial human rights violators, the U.N. violates its own criteria as well as common sense.”

“Choosing Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi to judge others on human rights is a joke,” Neuer said in a statement. “He’ll use the position not to promote human rights but to shield his record of abuse, and those of his allies.”

Malaysia: US should press Najib to scrap policy of racial discrimination

hrforall — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 06:13:57 +0000

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC STATEMENT

When Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak visits the United States this week, US government officials should press him to end Malaysia’s institutionalised system of discrimination against non-ethnic Malays.

As a first step, Malaysia should agree to ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), a UN treaty already ratified by 173 countries.

In Washington, the Malaysian prime minister is scheduled to meet with US President Barack Obama, administration officials and members of Congress.

The current insitutionalized system of discrimination originated with the 1970 “New Economic Plan”, which established wide-ranging policies in favour of Bumiputeras, or “sons of the soil”. This category encompasses ethnic Malays and certain groups of Indigenous people, who together comprise the majority of the country’s population.

In a 30 March speech unveiling a new economic plan, Prime Minister Najib himself acknowledged the need to reform these policies, stating: “For too long, the implementation of our affirmative action policies has not reached those who needed them the most.” He announced reforms to the policy favouring Bumiputeras over other ethnic groups, saying it would be market-friendly, merit-based, transparent and needs-based.

The UN Human Rights Committee has established that countries have the prerogative to take affirmative action against conditions that cause discrimination. However, it also said that this action is legitimate only “as long as such action is needed to correct discrimination in fact”.

But Malaysia’s current policies favouring Bumiputeras institutionalise racial discrimination across a number of key areas, including education and employment.

In education, for example, non-Malay students are banned from attending the state-owned University Teknologi Mara (UiTM), which has a student body of 120,000. In 2008 the government rejected a proposal to reverse this policy.

In employment, preferential quotas in the civil service privilege the Malay majority. For example, in early 2010, Malays accounted for 98.47% of civil service jobs in Johor state, according to its Chief Minister. Meanwhile, around 54% of the state’s population is Malay.

Issues of racial discrimination cannot be discussed publicly in Malaysia without running the risk of prosecution under criminal law. After it published a letter criticising Malay “special rights”, the website Malaysiakini was raided by police in 2003 and closed down temporarily under the Sedition Act.

In 2008 the group HINDRAF, advocating for equal rights for Malaysian Indians, was banned under the Societies Act. Five of its leaders were detained without charge for several months under the Internal Security Act, although they were all subsequently released.

As Malaysia is currently seeking a seat on the UN Human Rights Council, it should ratify CERD without delay, to demonstrate to UN members that it is serious about ending racial discrimination.

Suhakam commissioner selection process a sham

hrforall — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:16:19 +0000

John Liu
Mar 1, 10

While the ongoing new process of selecting members of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) marks a seemingly relative improvement in the commission’s compliance with international standards, Suaram expresses its concerns and disappointment over the current application of the new process.

Although the International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions (ICC) has given Suhakam an ‘A’ status in November 2009 after considering the amendments made to the enabling law of Suhakam in July 2009, the international body will nonetheless once again review Suhakam’s status in November 2010, in particular to assess whether the new selection process is applied in accordance with international standards.

In relation to this, Suaram regrets that the application of the new selection process has thus far been flawed since the beginning, with little or no regard paid to the principles of openness, transparency and inclusiveness.

Non-transparent appointment of selection committee members – The new selection process includes a five-member selection committee which will be consulted by the prime minister who will in turn advise the king on the selection of the commissioners.

Three persons from this five-member selection committee are to be representatives of civil society, as stated in the amended enabling law of Suhakam. However, in a letter from the Suhakam chairperson to Suaram dated Feb 4, 2010, it was revealed that the three members of civil society had already been appointed by the prime minister, without the knowledge and consultation of a majority of the civil society organisations working on human rights in Malaysia.

This realised civil society’s initial concerns over the possibility of the prime minister’s full discretion over these appointments when the new process was first introduced by the amendments to the enabling law of Suhakam last year. Until today, the names of the three civil society representatives have not been made public by the government.

Non-Inclusive nomination process – On Feb 12, the Prime Minister’s Department sent out invitations to several civil society organisations, including Suaram, to nominate candidates to be considered in the selection of new Suhakam commissioners for 2010-2013.

The deadline set for the nominations is today, March 1, 2010. Suaram responded to this invitation by urging the Prime Minister’s Department to open up the process to the public, including by putting up the nomination form on its website and making a public announcement of the opening of the nomination process, instead of just a inviting a selected few civil society organisations to nominate. This demand has yet to be met by the Prime Minister’s Department to date.

Suaram will not nominate – Based on the flaws in the current application of the selection process as stated above, Suaram has decided not to nominate any names in the selection process. Suaram is of the view that its involvement in the process under current circumstances would lend its legitimacy to the entire process, which, in reality, has been flawed from the very beginning.

Attempts to deflect criticisms by civil society? – Suaram also questions the sincerity of the government in making the selection process a democratic, inclusive, transparent and open one, as well as in strengthening Suhakam as a whole.

While it is clear that the new selection process is largely to fulfill the requirements for the government to maintain Suhakam as an ‘A’ status national human rights institution under the ICC’s accreditation, there is a possibility that this new process, which includes the participation of a selected number of civil society organisations, could be used to deflect criticisms by civil society towards Suhakam and the government for the failures of the commission. This because some members of the commission would be nominated by civil society.

Our demands – Nevertheless, Suaram remains committed in pushing for a truly open and transparent selection process as well as campaigning for the strengthening of Suhakam. Suaram thus reiterates some of the demands made in a letter by 29 civil society organisations to the government on Feb 24, 2010:

to make public the names of all members of the selection committee immediately;
to ensure a transparent, participatory and inclusive process, which includes making the names of candidates and their profiles public, as well as holding public interviews.
to ensure that the candidates selected are independent, impartial and professional with high integrity and recognised competence in the field of human rights. As it is imperative for Suhakam commissioners to have a solid understanding on human rights matters, the selection committee should select only those who have been involved in the protection and promotion of human rights in the country; and
to ensure that membership in the commission reflects a balanced representation of the genders. The candidates selected should represent different sectors, backgrounds, and thoughts of society to ensure pluralist representation.

Finally, Suaram stresses that it will only consider being part of such a process when – and only when – guarantees of inclusiveness, openness and transparency are firmly in place in the selection process.

The writer is coordinator, Suaram.

The Price I Paid for Malaysian ‘Justice’

hrforall — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 02:00:09 +0000

Tuesday, 02 February 2010 Super Admin

The last time Anwar Ibrahim was put on trial, I was tortured and forced to ‘confess’ to sodomy

By MUNAWAR A. ANEES, Wall Street Journal

Nearly 12 years ago, I was languishing in a local hospital as a prisoner of conscience. This loss of freedom was due solely to my long-standing personal and professional association with Anwar Ibrahim, then Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister of Malaysia. We were falsely implicated in a fabricated case of having committed a mutual act of sodomy.

Such an internment, when driven by ulterior motives, brings a brutal deprivation upon the victim. It acts like a double-edged sword. While one’s freedom of movement is taken away by tormentors, one’s conscience suffocates in a dungeon. A poignant grief sets in once there is awareness that both the body and the conscience have fallen victim to the act of tyranny. That is what distinguishes incarceration out of an actual crime from that emanating from the acts of those who prosecute and persecute innocent others. The tormented memory never fades.

My detention by the Malaysian Special Branch taught me how it feels to be forcibly separated from one’s wife and children. How it feels to be searched and seized, disallowed to make phone calls, handcuffed, blindfolded, stripped naked, driven in an animal cage, shaven bald, endlessly interrogated, humiliated, drugged, deprived of sleep, physically abused. What it’s like to be threatened, blackmailed, hectored by police lawyers, brutalized to make a totally false confession, hospitalized for a consequent heart ailment, and treated as a psychiatric patient with symptoms of Stockholm syndrome. Barely surviving on a meager diet of rancid rice and chicken along with 12 medicines a day, I spent nearly 126 days handcuffed round the clock to my hospital bed, under the watchful eyes of the prison guards.

These tragic events completely ruined me and my family. The financial, physical, psychological and social implications of this calamity reverberate even more than a decade after the horrific occurrence. Words fail to describe what my family and I have quietly endured for the last 10 years. In spite of that, our faith in the ultimate victory of justice and truth has not wavered.

For the last 12 years, I have sought nothing but justice. I have repeatedly approached the Malaysian judicial system—the High Court, the Court of Appeals and the Federal Court—in the hope that justice would be duly provided to me. Unfortunately, my latest request for a review at the Federal Court was dismissed. Why does the judicial system shudder at the prospect of hearing my demand for justice? Why am I denied my day in court?

I am innocent. I am innocent of any and all spurious charges brought against me. I committed no crime for which I was tortured and unjustly imprisoned. I want the Malaysian judicial system to wake up to the fact that gross injustice was committed against me. I want them to realize that the injustice is perpetuated the more I continue to be denied my day in the court. My innocence inspires me to persist and persevere in the path of justice, as it is one of the fundamental human rights enshrined in the Constitution of Malaysia. The judicial system in Malaysia must rise to the call of duty and serve justice without any further delay.

Mr. Anees is a writer based in Tucson, Ariz.

Rape victim receives 101 lashes for becoming pregnant

hrforall — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 07:50:09 +0000

A 16-year-old girl who was raped in Bangladesh has been given 101 lashes for conceiving during the assault.

By Dean Nelson, South Asia Editor
Published: 4:30PM GMT 25 Jan 2010

The girl’s father was also fined and warned the family would be branded outcasts from their village if he did not pay.

According to human rights activists, the girl, who was quickly married after the attack, was divorced weeks later after medical tests revealed she was pregnant.

The girl was raped by a 20-year-old villager in Brahmanbaria district in April last year.

Bangladesh’s Daily Star newspaper reported that she was so ashamed following the attack that she did not lodge a complaint.

Her rape emerged after her pregnancy test and Muslim elders in the village issued a fatwa insisting that the girl be kept in isolation until her family agreed to corporal punishment.

Her rapist was pardoned by the elders. She told the newspaper the rapist had “spoiled” her life.

“I want justice,” she said.

Suhakam: Admired overseas, ignored by government

hrforall — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:44:44 +0000

John Lee MI

DEC 1 — Amid this renewed scandal about the Biro Tata Negara’s propaganda programmes, tucked away is a little scrap of news: our human rights commission, Suhakam, is poised to retain its “A” grading from the United Nations.

We have one of the best human rights commissions in the world — the UN says so. Our human rights commission comprises men and women from every part of the establishment — if they don’t know what law and order is, nobody does. And they have always been unequivocal: our repressive laws, from the Internal Security Act to the Sedition Act, need to go.

The government is always dithering about our human rights, saying that we need to oppress our people because if not, our society will collapse. Beyond teaching public servants and scholars that the Chinese are the “Jews of Asia”, BTN also teaches them that the ISA is necessary to repress unruly minorities and protect the government of the day.

Law and order are apparently synonymous with tyranny in the Barisan Nasional government’s vocabulary.

Many people only know Suhakam as a “toothless tiger” — a statutory body with no power whatsoever to influence government policy.

That is unfortunately the case. The government has admitted as much; they have no intention of actually heeding Suhakam’s advice, or empowering Suhakam to change the way our government works.

And this is a mistake. Suhakam is no non-governmental organisation, no bunch of rabble-rousing activists. The first chair of Suhakam was Tun Musa Hitam, former Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister; the second and current chair is Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, former Attorney-General. Our human rights commissioners are doctors, professors, businessmen, civil servants and even royalty. It is hard to imagine any grouping of Malaysians which could be more pro-establishment, or more in favour of law and order.

And what is striking about Suhakam is how vehemently they have rejected the government’s insistence that its policies protect law and order. Suhakam has condemned virtually every law the government uses for the ostensible protection of the rule of law. The ISA, the Sedition Act, the Printing Presses & Publications Act, the Universities and University Colleges Act — I could go on and on, but all of these laws have been rejected by Suhakam.

Now, it is one thing if Pakatan Rakyat condemns government repression, or if NGOs condemn these oppressive laws. That is, after all, what we expect them to do, considering they suffer so much from the government’s tyranny.

But a former Deputy Prime Minister and a former Attorney-General — these are the people who we charged with enforcing these repressive laws; if anything, they’ve benefited from them the most.

It is truly remarkable that the most established of the establishment are unanimous in rejecting the government’s security laws. If a Home Minister and Attorney-General aren’t experts on national security and the rule of law, I don’t know who is.

These are men who have spent their whole working lives preserving public order in our country—and you mean to tell me they are wrong when they say things like the ISA and Sedition Act are unjust, and need to be abolished?

Let me say it again: our human rights commission is world-class; the UN itself says so. But our government—now, our government is an exemplar of third-world mentality.

Countries like Indonesia have moved on from dictatorship and repression; at rallies and demonstrations in Jakarta, the police protect demonstrators from attacks, instead of firing tear gas and water cannons at them. The government has no excuse for remaining stuck in this third-world attitude towards fundamental liberties — if even a former Home Minister and a former Attorney-General say our repressive laws are unjust, inhumane and unnecessary, how can you trot out the same tired justifications for treating Malaysians like irresponsible babies

Somali woman stoned to death for adultery

hrforall — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:22:32 +0000

MOGADISHU, Wednesday

(picture is from another stonning)

An unnamed woman was stoned to death at Eel-boon in Wajid district, 330 kilometres southwest of Mogadishu, on Wednesday.
She was sentenced by an Islamic court after she was found guilty of adultery.

The woman was taken to a square, her body half buried and then stoned.

A crowd was present as well as officials of al-Shabaab, an Islamist movement that opposes the Transitional Federal Government and controls a large territory in Southern and Central Somalia.

A young man, who was also caught in the same adulterous act, received 100 strokes of the cane.

According to Sheikh Ibrahim Sheikh Abdurahman, a judge of the Islamic court who sentenced the woman to death and the man to whipping said the cases differed.

“The woman was had been married before and under Sharia (Islamic law) she is to be stoned to death upon proof,” said Sheikh Abdurahman.

“The young man with no previous marriage experience is to receive 100 whips under the same law,” he added.

Last Friday, another Islamic court that falls under the control of al-Shabaab sentenced a young man to death by stoning in Marka town, 110 kilometres south of Mogadishu. He was found guilty of committing adultery following a case of alleged rape.

At a football stadium facing the Indian Ocean, the condemned man was taken to a corner of the playground, his body half buried in dirt before youngsters started hitting him with stones.

Before the execution, the clergymen who rule Marka town and surrounding areas announced that a woman who had also been sentenced for committing adultery was in custody, to be stoned.

The woman is said to be pregnant.

Al-Shabaab and Hizbu Islam, the Islamist groups that strongly oppose the TFG, generally enforce the severe punishments.

In 2008, a teenage girl was accused of adultery in Kismayu, 500 kilometres south of Mogadishu, sentenced by a court and stoned to death.

ISA: ‘A curse be upon the Special Branch!’

hrforall — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:41:45 +0000

[Translation to English by CPI]

Anatomy of an ISA operation

Arrested: Mat Sah Mohd Satray, a technician working with Dewan Bahasa Pustaka (DBP) was linked to Abu Bakar Bashir accused of heading the Jemaah Islamiyyah (JI). Mat Sah had made Abu Bakar’s acquaintance when he attended a course conducted by the latter, and his attendance at the course one made compulsory by DBP itself.

Tortured: April 2002, Mat Sah was interrogated throughout the day by three officers who took turns in the questioning session. Mat Sah, who was made to sit shivering under the air-conditioner, was not allowed to use the toilet and only provided with a mineral water bottle to ease himself.

The next day on April 18, 2002, the mainstream media published news that Kumpulan Militan Malaysia (KMM) was engaged in sabotage by attempting to blow up Port Klang. It was a period of mass unease following the 9/11 terrorist attack in the United States.

Detained: Mat Sah’s habeas corpus application was unsuccessful when the judge ruled that “the international community is now engaged in a war against terror”.

If, however, Mat Sah was really a terrorist, what ‘rebab’ programme is run in Kamunting? Inmates are given irrelevant training like how to make pickles, ferment soya bean and other such culinary skills.

Locked up: In a room without any lamp. Seven wasted years … held without evidence, without recourse to justice; without a view of the sky or the stars.

Released: Sept 15, 2009, “He (Mat Sah) was not set free. He was thrown out of the Kamunting camp and dumped on my doorstep,” is how his wife Norlaila Othman views it.

Provisos: He is required to remain within the police district of Ampang Jaya, Selangor; and not permitted to leave the area without written consent from the state Chief of Police. In other words, Mat Sah is only allowed to move around in Ampang.

Curfew: Mat Sah must report himself at the police station every Monday, and has to remain in his home between the hours of 9pm and 6am, unless obtaining permission from the police to break curfew.

Preventive order: He is not allowed to speak in public; is barred from joining societies and organizations; and banned from taking part in political events.

Merdeka Review interviews Mat Sah and Norlaila

“Kesian dia Mat Sah, even until the day he dies, people will say he is a ‘terrorist’. When in truth, Mat Sah is a good man who was oppressed and made a scapegoat,” lamented Norlaila who had been active in fighting for her husband’s release through the NGOs and Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI).

The authorities came increasingly under pressure following the ‘Abolish ISA’ demonstration on Aug 1 which catalyzed the release of five detainees before Hari Raya Aidilfitri this year. Mat Sah does not give any credence to the government’s statement that the detainees were released after having completed their ‘rehabilitation’.

After tens of thousands of people flooded the heart of Kuala Lumpur crying ‘ISA must go!’, Special Branch (SB) from Bukit Aman who previously used to make half yearly visits to Kamunting were suddenly briefing Mat Sah on a fortnightly basis.

From contact with his SP interrogators in the camp with where he was imprisoned, Mat Sah learnt of the public anger against ISA gaining momentum.

Mat Sah recalled how the SB officers looked harassed after the demonstration. One of the consequences arising from the demo was that Mat Sah – one of ISA’s longest-held detainee still in camp then – was taken to the Kuala Lumpur remand centre to be brainwashed. He was rained a variety of questions in addition to being subjected to propaganda on why the ISA should be retained.

Made to undergo polygraph test

On the night of Apr 17, 2002, Mat Sah was arrested under ISA. He was set upon by 12 policemen at his home and handcuffed while the house was ransacked. “When I asked to see his warrant of arrest, they said ‘no need warrant’ because they were ‘Grade A officers’,” said Norlaila.

Subsequently Mat Sah was labelled a member of ahli JI and KMM without trial. How strange then that “they never even mentioned the word ‘JI’ atau ‘KMM’ (during his arrest). They only said “‘we have our reasons to arrest you under ISA because you are a threat to national security”.

The experience of his first two years in custody is still clearly etched in Mat Sah’s memory.

“Mat Sah, we cannot release you. Malaysia has made a joint commitment with Asean and [a promise to] the United States to combat terrorism. If we let you go, what will they say?” – This was the reason given Mat Sah by Bukit Aman.

Detainees were required to take a ‘polygraph test’ to ascertain if they were lying to the authorities. “They gave me the test twice, once last year, and again this year. The last time they (the SB) said I failed. Yet this time, surprisingly I passed despite my replies being the same on both occasions.”

Mat Sah added, “I saw that they already harboured the intention of letting me go. Saying that (I passed the polygraph test) was merely their convenient excuse.”

‘Your wife needs to slow down a bit’

If the ostensible reason for releasing Mat Sah does not hold water, what about the reasons for extending his ISA detention order?

“Firstly, [they said I] did not obey the rules; secondly, my wife was too vocal…” Mat Sah explained to the journalists, stealing a glance at Norlaila. In fact, the authorities made an ‘example’ of Mat Sah to dissuade the families of other detainees from stepping forward to publicize the ISA issue.

Although they did not say so directly but Mat Sah got the message from their conversations with him that the SB was hinting his wife “should go slow” on her activism.

The journalists then asked if it ever crossed Mat Sah’s mind to advise his wife to ‘back off’. With disarming frankness Mat Sah replied, “I’m only repeating what the SB said…”, and this adroit sidestepping eliciting smiles from the journalists.

Norlaila who was seated at Mat Sah’s side was eager to re-enact their dialogue. In a soft voice, Norlaila said (she told her husband in Kamunting), “If you forbid me from campaigning (for your freedom), I will refuse to visit you here anymore-lah…”

The journalists laughed at the antics of the husband-and-wife pair. Nonetheless, it was with a sober realization that behind the light-heartedness of day, their painful past still lurked around the corner and haunted them.

Mat Sah resumed his story of what went through his mind when the SB wanted his wife to keep a low profile. He said one of his fellow inmates was Dr Abdullah Daud from Johor. Although Dr Abdullah’s his wife did nothing to agitate the authorities, his detention was similarly extended anyway.

Refused to sing Negaraku

In any case, it was not as if Norlaila was active right from the start. In fact, Mat Sah obeyed all the camp rules and regulations in the hope that he would be released after two years.

Nonetheless, Mat Sah could see that the Al-Ma’unah detainees who were ‘well-behaved’ (obeyed all the rules) were not set free, whereas the reformasi detainees who were ‘bad’ (did not co-operate with the camp authorities) were let go.

From then on, Mat Sah commenced his own programme of non-cooperation, refusing to sing Negaraku every morning at 7 o’clock. In the meantime, Norlaila began campaigning in the public – presenting her memorandum to Suhakam, giving talks and other activities.

Norlaila’s efforts failed to secure Mat Sah his release but instead earned him even more severe punishment.

On Feb 23, 2006, Norlaila decided to ambush the Prime Minister during an event organized by Felda, where she managed to hand over her memorandum to Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who replied with “Insya-Allah”.

In retaliation for her initiative which took the authorities by surprise, Mat Sah was put in solitary confinement for three years. This act was seen as a warning to other detainees so that their families would not follow in Norlaila’s footsteps …

‘The government has destroyed my husband!’

The ISA not only devastated their lives but its insidious effect has seeped into their very bones.

“I feel that he has been made stupid, not ‘rehabilitated’ throughout those seven years” said Norlaila point blank. “The isolation from human company, the rules enforced on him caused Mat Sah to regress mentally.”

When asked about Mat Sah’s personality seven years ago, Norlaila commented, “He was a very cheerful person … an affectionate father.

“We lost everything for seven years, including the job.”

Norlaila recalled how she had to fork out her own money to repair the ‘damage’ done to her husband who was ‘broken’ while being held in Kamunting. She bore the cost of his dental treatment and medical care (for his leg) while he was under detention, and at the same time spending money to buy her husband and his fellow detainees better food during her visits to Kamunting.

“He was not a criminal!”

Mat Sah became a changed man, and reacted with hesitancy to the world [after having spent seven years isolated under ISA’s so-called preventive detention].

Norlaila reflected, “Upon his release, he was like a newborn just emerged from a cave. He didn’t know anything … when we went out, so many things were alien to him; he kept asking a lot of questions …”

There was once when Norlaila took Mat Sah to the market. She was surprised to hear him shout ‘Ikan!’ and pointing to a fish on display at the stall. His behaviour perplexed Norlaila who turned the fish over to check what could be so extraordinary about it. As it turned out, [CPI editor’s note: possibly after seven years of anchovies on the menu], Mat Sah had forgotten that fish could be big in size.

At the supermarket, Mat Sah was careful in his step, fearful that other shoppers would collide into him. [After the long solitary confinement, he is yet to get used to people and crowds]. His ISA detention had resulted in Mat Sah’s world shrinking to a void. He has fallen out of step with technological advances and is overwhelmed by modern gadgets like mobiles and smart-tag, plus unfamiliar with the Internet.

The first day that he stepped into his home after spending seven years in bare cell, Mat Sah reacted as if the house was overly ‘cluttered’, when in fact the living room contained only the sofa and a few decorations, Norlaila remembered.

Growing up without a father

“Of course I’m very upset. And I will curse those officers … the wicked SBs who arrest people under ISA, who keep them locked up for years, who invent all kinds of excuses to prevent their release,” Norlaila told the journalists.

Unlike other ISA detainees who expressed gratitude to the government for their release, Norlaila has reminded Mat Sah only to ‘bersyukur’ to God, not to the government because it is this government that has caused his family so much grief.

For seven long years, Mat Sah’s only son Suhaib had missed his father. Even though Mat Sah has now returned to the embrace of one who for half his life grew up without a father figure, they are having a hard time making up for the lost years.

According to Norlaila, Mat Sah is unsure about how to interact his son, today a teenager. Similarly when Suhaib wants to talk to Mat Shah, he would look to his mother Norlaila for direction.

“For too long they have been apart…,” Norlaila admitted that the lapsed relationship between father and son is one that requires mending. Norlaila herself was confronted with a similar awkwardness. The first night that Mat Sah was released and returned home, she felt that it was a stranger who was in her bedroom.

Suhaib has been unnerved by how his father seems slow in his movements and thought processes. He once asked his mother, while giving his father a sidelong look and gesturing with a finger pointing to the head: “Is he okay up there?”

Majority of ISA victims were leftists

Unlike Wan Azizah Wan Ismail who was known as the ‘wife of the Deputy Prime Minister’ before her husband fell from power, Norlaila was only a secondary school teacher. When Anwar Ibrahim was brought down, his family had the support of the reformasi movement, and were the focus of international media attention. Anwar was seen as a prisoner of conscience.

Not so with Norlaila’s family. Even PAS – painted as having links with terrorists by the BN propaganda machine – was reluctant to extend a helping hand to Mat Sah’s family.

Nonetheless, Norlaila was not alone and she recalled the assistance given her by the reporters from Harakah, Malaysiakini and others. More importantly, when Norlaila was at her wits end, friends from GMI lent her their shoulder to cry on.

During the period of her struggle to free Mat Sah, she has been diligent in her research. Armed with her newly acquired knowledge, Norlaila has made it her mission to correct public misconception about ISA.

From her reading, Norlaila learned that the ISA dragnet included many of those categorized as ‘leftists’. These were people belonging to organizations that fought for the rights of labourers, factory workers, farmers and other marginalized communities.

Over the last seven years, Norlaila has tried her level best to free her husband and get the ISA abolished. “I have done all that I’ve had to do with civility. However when the government is ‘kurang ajar’ to us, then we have to continue to educate this government.”

Lim Hong Siang is editor of ‘Merdeka Review’, Malay edition. The interview above was conducted by Lim together with his colleague Chen Shaua Fui. This summary is edited and reformatted by CPI with permission from ‘Merdeka Review’ and can be read in its Malay version, ISA: ‘Saya akan sumpah SB-SB yang jahat!’

The full interview can be read in the Merdeka Review four-parter below:

Bhg I: Demo 1 Ogos yang bebaskan saya, Mat Sah
Bhg II: 13 Mei berulang tanpa ISA?
Bhg III: Kita masih dalam ISA, Norlaila
Bhg IV: Bila diuji dengan ISA… Berdosa kalau diam, Norlaila

Suhakam remains opposed to ISA

hrforall — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:30:58 +0000

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009 04:14:00

SIPAUN: Suhakam is clear. The ISA must go

THE Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) remains steadfast in its call for the repeal of the Internal Security Act (ISA).

Contacted yesterday, Suhakam vice-chairman Tan Sri Simon Sipaun said: “I had made it clear that Suhakam has not deviated from its original stand that the ISA be abolished.”

He explained that Suhakam’s stand was communicated to Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein during a meeting together with Bar Council representatives on Sept 15 to clarify the situation.

As such, Sipaun said, the minister must have misunderstood Suhakam’s stand if he had said the human rights group had agreed there was a need to retain the ISA, although it should be amended.

Sipaun explained that while a new legislation would take time to come into effect, Suhakam wants a review of the ISA to make it more human rights-friendly as an interim measure.

There was at no time in the meeting, Sipaun insisted, that he or Suhakam representatives had agreed that the ISA should be retained.

“The ISA is against human rights principles, where it is not right that a minister or police can arrest a person without trial or reason.”

He pointed out that, in a published recommendation to the government in 2003, Suhakam had called for the repeal of the ISA, so that it could be replaced by a more human rights-friendly legislation.

“No one should be deprived of individual liberty or the right to defend himself. People should be given the chance to be innocent until proven guilty. Suhakam is still very concerned over the abuses of the ISA.”

While visiting the detention camp in Kamunting, Siapun said, he met with a detainee who had been there for seven years.

“They should not be detained for such a long period. If there was evidence of crime, he should be sent to the court to be tried and not be kept in the detention camp.”