SELANGOR CPO AND DEPUTY IGP ! STAY OUT OF POLITICS

Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) condemn the arrest, harassment, intimidation, humiliation and ill –treatment of JERIT cyclist and activist in Selangor. Both the JERIT's 'Ride for Change' campaign was sabotaged and disrupted by the Rawang and Kajang police who had acted on orders with the sole intention of putting an end to the JERIT's nationwide campaign which is gaining momentum by the day.


The Police stooped so low today when they claimed that the children were exploited and were investigated under the Police Act for illegal procession and the Child Act for using children in their campaign. This is utter rubbish coming from the police force, which has long lost all its credibility.


All the young school children involved in the campaign have got parental consent and therefore the police action today is sheer intimidation and foul play.


The CPO of Selangor and the Deputy Inspector General of Police have been unscrupulous in their actions and statements. The have acted as cheap stooge to the ruling party rather than being neutral and professional in their work. That have clearly taken a bias political stand in trying to disrupt the JERIT campaign.


We call for the immediate release of all the cyclist, PSM National Deputy Chairperson M.Saraswathy, Treasurer A.Sivarajan and Central Committee Member and MP for Sungai Siput Dr. Jeyakumar immediately without any condition. We also call for the release of Rawang state assemblyperson Gan Pei Nie.


The police action in Kajang and Rawang today besides being unlawful is a sheer waste of public funds. The police instead of fighting crime, should be doing something more productive


If the police cannot be neutral, they might as well join politics


Released by



S.Arutchelvan
Secretary general

--
visit our website at
http://parti-sosialis.org

*Rawang 15th December,2008* JERIT CYCLIST DETAINED AT RAWANG POLICE STATION.

*JARINGAN RAKYAT TERTINDAS( JERIT)*

*Rawang 15th December,2008*
JERIT CYCLIST DETAINED AT RAWANG POLICE STATION.

A day that saw an incident free day of cycling took a turn at Rawang . We
arrived in Rawang at about 4.30pm. We were supposed to meet up with YB ADUN
Rawang, Gan Pei Nei at Rawang Jaya . She and her delegation planned to cycle
with the JERIT convoy from there to Rawang town.

But a roadblock greeted us at Rawang . As usual the police requested for
names and IC of all the cyclist and coordinator. We intervened and told the
police that it is not necessary to record names and addresses of all
cyclist as we have a list that we can give it to them. After much argument
we took back all the IC of the cyclist and gave the coordinators IC to
record . Myself ,Sugu, Saras,Rani ,Mohan gave our IC to be recorded . The
IC were returned after recording. But my IC changed hands to another
officer .

Soon the police received new directions. The bus was to held and myself
and the coordinators were asked to come to the balai . Eventhough we
managed to get the cyclist to continue to cycle , but they were stopped
again further ahead . As the cyclist met up YB Gan Pei Nei group , they
were stopped from cycling to town . After some negotiations by Gan Pei Nei
, the convoy proceeded into town . They cycled around Rawang town and
stopped at a coffee shop for a drink .

Myself ,Sugu and Saras made our way to the balai polis . At the balai ,
Saras immediately checked on the 7 junior cyclist in the bus that was brought
in to the balai . The police were already intimidating the children, asking
them questions. Some officers also asked the cyclist if Dr.Kumar had paid
them money to participate in the campaign.They harassed the cyclist who
were in the bus . Saras and Sugu intervened and chased out the officers from
the bus .

I met up with Gan Pei Nei who then arrived at the balai . We went over to
see the OCPD , Abdul Rahim . He was asking the same stupid questions
,whether did we get a permit to cycle. He said ,it does not matter if other
OCPD have allowed the cyclist , but we supposedly should have seeked his
permission in his district .OCPD instructed all the bicyclist to be
brought to the balai . We objected and said that we have given all the
names and there was no need to have any statements taken .

Later the OCPD instructed statements to be taken from all the 7 cyclist
that were already in the bus. He said that he wanted to verify if there
were under aged children being abused . I followed them. Informed the
officers that they cannot take statement, and we will not give statement .
The cyclist will only give their details only .

Soon all the cyclist were already brought in the balai . Dr.Kumar arrived
shortly . I and Dr.Kumar met up with the OCPD . He still insisted that he
wanted to take statements from all the cyclist. We showed him that we have
consent letters from all the parents . We gave the police a copy . After
much negotiations ,we agreed poiice to record details of all the cyclist
accompanied by us . As this was going on , I was taken by the OCPD to his
room . He explained that he still considered that the event was a
procession . He confirmed that I will be charged under Section 27 of the
police Act' illegal assembly'. Kumar also had his statements taken later
.

At this moment , we were quite sure that all will be released after
giving the details to the police . This was when matters took a turn ,
when the Selangor CPO arrived , Dato Khalid .

Immediately the CPO ,OCPD and other officers went for taklimat. About an
hour later the CPO arrogantly came down and announced that all 50 cyclist
and all the 15 coordinators will be arrested . We were gathered at the
parking lot. They put a yellow tape around us .All those below 18 years old
were separated from the seniors .

By this time a crowd of supporters were already swelling outside the balai
. A candle light vigil began . Makkal Sakti slogans and songs were sung .
There were also PKR , DAP and PAS members .

The police made arrangements for the welfare officers to take the junior
cyclist away .They would be then handed 'safely' to their parents.

The police went all out to harass us . Edmund Bon , lawyer informed us that
the police were going to expel the permit and the driving licences of
all the lorry drivers and bas driver. JPJ officials also arrived.
They examined
the bus , lorry , looking for something to issue summon on .The driving
licences and road tax of the lorry and bus were taken away .

As protest outside gathered momentum , a complete battalion of FRU ,Water
cannon arrived . The crowd outside carried on chanting and demanding for our
release. As they were about to use the water cannon, the rain poured
heavily. The police did not use the water cannon .

As rain kept pouring heavily , the car park where all of us who were
being detained began flooding . All of us were standing cold in a river of
water . We demanded to be shifted out of the parking lot . As usual the
police buat tak tahu . Tempers flared . I moved to rip of the yellow
police tape and walk out of the parking lot . The rest followed. A fight
pursued between us and the police as they were trying to push us back
into the parking lot and we were moving out . The officers couldn't stop
us . The Light Strike Force rushed in . They pushed us back with their
shield and batons .

The CPO looked and couldn't do anything . Immediately the police brought
all the cyclist below 18 years of age into a dry place at the balai
meeting room upstairs .

As this was happening , we were also amazed at the 300 0ver crowd outside
that stood in the heavy rain and did not budge . FRU cordoned the
police station
entrance . The welfare officers couldn't find a place to take the
junior cyclist
, thus they stayed at the meeting room . The junior cyclist told
the police
they refuse being brought away by the welfare officers and they rather
remain arrested with the others

At about 2 am , I and Kumar were given the bail sheets . Soon the rest
were being taken details and issued bail sheets . Some comrades spent the
nite with the junior cyclist at the balai meeting room .

At about 3.30 am all walked out of the balai polis Rawang . It was a
eventful nite .

Sivarajan .

--
Community Development Centre (CDC)
No.72B, Taman Sri Langat
Jalan Reko, Kajang, Selangor
Tel/Fax: 03-87370766

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

_


.

__,_._,___

POLICE GIVES MISLEADING STATEMENT: STOP ALL HARRASMENT NOW!

Press Statement 15/12/2008

POLICE GIVES MISLEADING STATEMENT:

STOP ALL HARRASMENT NOW!

Today the Deputy IGP Tan Sri Ismail Omar had urged to public not to participate in the JERIT's campaign claiming that it is an unregistered organization, and we do not have permits and if the public takes part it is a criminal offence.

1. Deputy IGP: WHO IS THE MASTERMIND BEHIND THE JERIT CAMPAIGN? The main question in yesterday's papers ( 14/12/2008)

· JERIT or JARINGAN RAKYAT TERTINDAS is in existence since year 2002. It is a network of four coalition Factory Workers Coalitions (GPKK), Plantation Workers Coalition( JSML), Student and Youth Coalition( GAMP), Urban Settlers Coalition( GPBP) and NGOs. Since 2002 we have been involved in various community issues. Political parties and other NGO support our campaigns and our work. To date , 47 organisations , MPs and State Assemblymen endorse our Bicycle campaign

· JERIT has been an active coalition and has been quoted many times in newspapers and electronic media, has an active website and have been invited to speak in many programmes even govement programmes, so it is suprising that the police have only now discovered JERIT

2. JERIT is an illegal organization ?

· JERIT is a registered organization just like SUARAM, Tenaganita and most NGOs who are not registered under the Society Act but another act. Thus, JERIT is also registered under a different act. Furthermore, JERIT is a coalition of different coalitions such as the students coalition, factory workers coalition, plantation workers coalition and also NGOS. Coalitions like JERIT, BERSIH or Gabungan Mansuhkan ISA need not be registered as it's a coalition of different organizations

3. Is JERIT using underage children for the campaign ?

The organizers took all necessary precaution as there is participation of school children. Among the steps taken are :

i. Briefing to their parents

ii. Getting consent from their parents

iii. Checking on the participants health status

iv. We have also barred any children below the age of 12 to participate in this campaign

v. After the police warning, we have once again advised the cyclist and their parents. ,almost all of them have decided to continue to participate in the campaign

vi. The organizers could be found guilty if children are participating without their free will under the Child Protection Bill

vii. All participants have been insured

viii. Many organizations also feel that the participation of the youths is good as they are doing something worthwhile for the nation during their school holidays.

ix. Furthermore, SUHAKAM and BAR Council have endorsed this campaign. JERIT feels that SUHAKAM and BAR Council have more credibility and their endorsement carries more weight compared to the police's statement.

4. Is the campaign exploited by political parties for their own interest ?

· On the issue of this campaign is used by certain political parties for their interest, we would like to reiterate here that this campaign is to highlight the aspiration for the people. In the early part of this campaign, we sent letter to all political parties, asking for endorsement for this campaign. Only Pakatan Rakyat parties, and Parti Socialist Malaysia endorsed this campaign. Many NGOs and MTUC also endorsed this campaign. So what is the problem if the endorsing groups participate and support the campaign?

· For your information, political parties as a whole cannot be members of the coalition. Nevertheless, individuals from political parties can be members of JERIT.

· Some founder and active members of JERIT are also members of PSM

· But all decisions of JERIT are made independently by the National Exco , National Congress and National Secretariat of JERIT. No political parties can interfere or intervene in decision made by JERIT

5. On the issue of JERIT activists being detained under the Printing and Publications Act

· Currently police have recorded statement from our members in Kulim, Segamat , and Semenyih. Police have informed us that they will refer the matter to the DPP whether to charge us or not. We have meanwhile obtained the advice of Malaysian Bar Council and SUHAKAM and we intend to challenge this in court. We believe the freedom to disseminate information is a human right . The police action is curtailing this principle.

6. Is the campaign ILLEGAL and taking part in it is a criminal offence ?

· Despite the intimidation by the police through the media and other means yet the campaign has received tremendous support from the general public who have signed petitions , who have taken leaflets to be distributed , and support the cyclists by preparing food for them, accommodation and also welcoming them. This campaign has been endorses by 47 groups and MPs and State Assemblymen including the MTUC, ALIRAN, SUARAM, FOMCA.

· JERIT's memorandum have been received the State Government's in Kedah, Penang, Perak, Negeri Sembilan and Johor.

· So far 3 Chief Ministers , YAB Tan Sri Khalid , MB Selangor, YAB Dato' Nizar , MB Perak and YAB Lim Guan Eng , CM of Penang have personally endorsed this campaign.

JERIT has been very responsible from day 1. We have notified the police and have given them our contact numbers. We have also faxed our letters to all state CPOs. The least the police could have done is communicated with us. Meanwhile currently the local district police in some of the districts have been sympathetic and have not resorted into harassment. They also claim that they are doing this under instruction.

Statement released by JERIT Secretariat

For more information , please call : Kohila 0192275982

再益致马国首相公开信 吁废内安法令

原文：http://www.epochtimes.com/gb/8/10/3/n2284153.htm

因不满马来西亚政府日前援引《1960年内部安全法令》进行逮捕行动而辞去首相署部长一职的再益依布拉欣。

再益致马国首相公开信 吁废内安法令 该法案是为处理共产主义威胁而非消除异议


【大纪元10月3日讯】（大纪元记者杨晓慧综合报导）因不满马来西亚政府日前援引《1960年内部安全法令》进行逮捕行动而辞去首相署部长一职的再益依布拉欣，于9月30日发表一封至首相阿都拉的公开信，并表明马国第一任首相东姑阿都拉曼曾明确指出，制订该法案是要处理共产主义的威胁，而不是被用来消除异议，同时敦促目前仍是首相的阿都拉，能一劳永逸的废除《内安法令》，凭此举在马来西亚历史留下青史。

《内安法令》只对付共产主义威胁

再益在他的公开信中提到早期政府在1960年制订《内安法令》，是抱以非常谨慎的态度。马国第一任首相东姑阿都拉曼曾明确指出，制订该法案是要处理共产主义的威胁。他引述东姑阿都拉曼当时说过的话“我和我的内阁同僚们向庄严的国会及国家承诺，《内部安全法令》赋予政府的巨大权力绝不会被用来扼杀合法的反对派和消除合法的异议”

他指出，马国第三任首相胡先翁也曾重申这一立场，指制订《内安法令》的目的不是为了用来镇压合法的政治反对派及民主活动。

他表示，三个星期前所发生的事件，促使他反思政府援引《内安法令》的方式。这反思不幸让他有此结论，就是政府不止一次的令这个国家的人民失望，一再违背第一任首相，东姑阿都拉曼所作的庄严承诺。这是因为政府及有关法令错误的赋予内政部长，让他凭个人认为适当的任何理由来扣留任何人。这种主观的审核权已经被滥用来谋取某些政治利益。

历史是伟大的教师，在这次的事件上更是意味深长。人们即使草率的检验使用《内安法令》的方式，几乎从一开始就会发现，如今其原本用意已成为政治牺牲品。

多个滥用《内安法令》例子

再益在信中列举多项以往政府援引内安法令来打压异议份子的事故，其中他表示遗憾的是东姑阿都拉曼也背弃了自己的诺言。在他领导下的政府于1965年开创了一个先例，扣留了布哈努丁希尔米（Burhanuddin Helmi），他是一名地位崇高的马来知识份子、一名曾任回教党领导人的民族主义者。他被关押至1969年逝世为止。

再益表示，布哈努丁希尔米只是个政治反对派，但他竟被联想成涉及武装叛乱或共产主义活动。这场扣留是种畸变，允许政治践踏法治的令人遗憾的时刻。

他也列举发生于1987年茅草行动的可怕影响，其幽灵仍然困扰着政府和人民。当时共有超过一百人因威胁国家安全的说法而被扣留，而直到今日还有许多疑问未得到解答。政府从来没有清楚的向马国人民说明为何他们会被扣留，为何他们从没有被控上法院？那些被扣留者包括现今还活跃于国会的资深在野党国会议员。当时唯一肯定的是，巫统面临领导危机的时刻。巧合的是，最近一连串动用《内安法令》的逮捕行动，也是碰上巫统再次浮现领导危机时刻。

再益也列举了最近扣留陈云清、郭素沁及拉惹柏特拉的理由也有许多不足之处。首先，扣留扣留陈云清是为了保护其安全的解说是可笑的。郭素沁则被指挑起宗教情绪是毫无根据的，她获释后说明了这点。

至于著名的政府批评者拉惹柏特拉，再益认为，其尖锐的言辞不足以对国家安全构成威胁。如果政府认为他的作品侮辱回教、回教徒或先知，那就应以《刑事法典》提控他，而不是以《内安法令》扣留他。

再益在信中直言，他所提及的例子强烈显示政府是不民主的。从过去的25多年来，政府任意逮捕政敌、公民社会及消费者权益工作者、作家、商人、学生及新闻工作者，而他们的罪名，如果可以这么说的话，就是批评政府。他实在不理解为何这些人被视为国家安全的威胁。其事实是，政府已强硬的使用《内安法令》来打压合法异议。

国人已有智慧分辨真正威胁

再益表示他相信这个国家的人民已经成熟和拥有足够的智慧来分辨何者是“真正”威胁国家，而何者只是威胁某者的政治利益。其实马国人民已经知道，《内安法令》经被用来对付政治反对派，尤其是当领导层面对执政党内部或外来的挑战之际。

人民要求国家恢复为法制社会

再益在信中提醒首相说，这一届的全国大选结果清楚表明，人民要求国家能够恢复成为一个法治社会，因此他才被委任为负责法律事务和司法改革的部长。

在其担任部长半年期间，他曾试图推动改革，其中优先推动恢复宪法在1988年修改前，所具有的司法审核权。另外，他还设法采取步骤，协助司法机关重拾它曾享誉的独立性与权能。不幸的是，一些人把这些努力看作是不受欢迎的，因为独立的司法机关意味着行政机关将会缺乏“影响力”。

无论如何，让每个人享有独立司法及公平审讯的机会是没有错的。这是符合普世的人权准则， 也符合联邦宗教的教义。未经制衡而能任意扣留人的权力，是极之压迫的。他举例道，即使在一个永远处于战争的以色列国家，扣留权也不会只掌握在一个人手中，而拘留令也必须得到法官认可。

他也提醒道，对于一个正努力在全球舞台上寻找自己位置的社会，继续使用《内安法令》并不是好现象，而且对于国家永续发展起到关键作用的民主，也不是个好兆头。

再益最后敦促目前仍是首相的阿都拉，能一劳永逸的废除《内安法令》，凭此举在马来西亚历史留下青史。

新闻背景

再益依布拉欣（Zaid Ibrahim）是在今年3月8日大选后出任首相署部长，负责掌管法律事务。他是因不满政府在9月12日援引《1960年内部安全法令》扣留三人，而在逮捕事件发生三天后（15日）于下午二时致函向首相阿都拉巴达威请辞。

他于辞职的前一天（14日）在吉兰丹州首府哥打巴鲁召开记者会时曾表示，《内安法令》应该用来对付特殊分子，如恐怖份子、共产党人士，因此他反对警方援引《内安法令》扣留新闻从业员、从政者及部落客。(http://www.dajiyuan.com)
美东时间: 2008-10-02 19:47:58 PM 【万年历】
本文网址：http://www.epochtimes.com/gb/8/10/3/n2284153.htm

Masih ada yang sanggup Menyokong ISA?

Saya rasa terpanggil untuk menulis dan menyelar sekerasnya tindakan beberapa individu dan pertubuhan yang secara terang-terangan menyokong ISA. Sebagai rakyat biasa saya hanya fikirkan menteri, kerajaan dan polis sahaja yang akan mempertahankan ISA, malah kini PEWARIS secara terbuka pula dengan lantangnya berusaha mengiklankan slogan ‘Kekalkan ISA’ dan ‘Yes To ISA’.

ISA adalah suatu akta kejam dan zalim menurut kacamata manusia yang berakal. Hujah Dato Ma’mor Osman iaitu jurucakap kepada PEWARIS ( Permuafakatan Melayu) bahawa ISA adalah suatu akta yang menjaga keselamatan adalah hujah tanpa bukti yang praktikal. Malah beliau mengatakan bahawa dalam tempoh 60 hari tahanan tanpa bicara (soal-siasat) mangsa masih boleh memberi alibi bahawa pertuduhan terhadap mereka tidak benar. Hujah saya pula, adakah semua mangsa tahanan ISA memiliki pengetahuan undang-undang seperti Raja Petra yang berjaya membuktikan Herbes Corpusnya? Adakah semua mampu membayar wang yuran guaman? Malah melalui majority maklumbalas mangsa, mereka menyatakan dalam tempoh 60 hari, mereka langsung tidak mengetahui pertuduhan tepat terhadap mereka. Bagaimana mereka mampu menyatakan alibi yang sahih? Hujah dangkal dato ma’mor lagi adalah, mereka yang takutkan ISA hanyalah si pesalah. Hujah saya lagi, barang sesiapa yang takutkan hudud dan undang-undang Islam, mereka juga si pesalah. Adakah beliau sanggup menerima undang-undang Islam?

PEWARIS mewakili entity dan etnik melayu yang menyokong ISA. Dengan songkok yang dipakaikan kepada belia dan remaja untuk berdemostrasi di hadapan dewan BAR Council 1 disember lalu, mereka telah menampilkan bahawa masih ada anak melayu yang jahil tentang akta zalim ini. Akta ini tidak menangkap mat rempit, perogol bersiri atau pengedar dadah, tetapi akta ini menjadi ancaman kepada yang menegakkan kebenaran. Sedarkah PEWARIS bahawa anak bangsa mereka sendiri iaitu melayu yang paling ramai ditahan di dalam akta ISA ini sejak merdeka. Sungguh simplistik apabila Dato’ Ma’mor berterus terang mengapikan peperangan antara kaum yang bakal dimenangai kaum cina hanya disebabkan PAS telah lama bersama DAP dan PKR menentang ISA. PEWARIS perlu sedar tanpa DAP juga, PAS telah lama menentang ISA. ISA ditentang bukan atas dasar bangsa, tetapi kerana ia mencarik nilai kemanusiaan.

Alangkah malang apabila Dato’ Ma’mor yang juga Setiausaha agong Persatuan Pengguna Islam (PPIM) menyokong ISA atas dasar keselamatan. Seluruh pejuang ‘pengguna’ sedunia menentang apa sahaja akta yang menjadi alat mengekang kebebasan asasi dan fitrah kemanusiaan. Isu ISA adalah isu kepenggunaan! Apatahlagi Kepenggunaan cara Islam seperti mana yang PPIM bawakan. Telah ramai rakyat malaysia sedar tentang produk halal haram melalui kempen PPIM. Kini suara PPIM pula yang mencederakan kepercayaan pengguna Islam negara ini.

Jika benar ada perwakilan PEKIDA dalam Dewan Bar Council yang turut bersama PEWARIS cuba memboikot perjuangan anti ISA, ia amat menyedihkan lagi. PEKIDA yang sinonim dengan ajakan amar ma’ruf nahi mungkar kini bersama menyokong ISA yang jelas besar mungkarnya di bumi Malaysia ini.

Saya amat tertarik dengan kata-kata semangat Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz berkenaan usaha variasi menentang ISA. Kata beliau” jangan senyap dalam menentang hal bercanggah dengan syarak. Buatlah apa sahaja. Hantar surat ke, tulis lagu ke, sajak, kartun dan sebagainya. Yang penting kita kena lawan benda (Akta ISA) yang salah”. Ya, GMI pulau Pinang saban minggu melakukan pelbagai aktiviti menonjolkan simbol anti ISA. Malah seluruh pejuang Islam juga tanpa mengira apa NGO dan Parti politik yang berkesedaran.

Muhammad Nuruddin Bashah
SU Penerangan PAS Pulau Pinang
http://landskapsiasah.blogspot.com
http://munawwarah.blogdrive.com

jihadin82@yahoo.com

Tindakan Polis Pulau Pinang yang Memalukan Sambutan Pengisytiharan Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sedunia ke-60

13/10/08
Tindakan Polis Pulau Pinang yang Memalukan Sambutan Pengisytiharan Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sedunia ke-60
Sementara Hari Hak Asasi disambut di serata dunia sempena pengisytiharan Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sedunia yang menjelang tahun ke-60, tindakan pihak polis di Pulau Pinang yang masih menggunakan akta menahan tanpa bicara amat memalukan negara kita.
Pada 12/10/08, Timbalan Ketua Polis Pulau Pinang Datuk Salleh Mat Rasid berkata, dalam kes kecurian mikrocip yang berlaku pada 2006, polis tidak mempunyai bukti yang mencukupi untuk mendakwa mereka di mahkamah, tetapi mempunyai alasan untuk menahan mereka selama dua tahun di Simpang Renggam dengan menggunakan Ordinan Darurat. Suaram Penang berasa amat tidak berpuas hati dengan kenyataan tersebut.
Suaram menyeru pihak polis Pulau Pinang mengumumkan sama ada lapan orang yang terbabit masih ditahan atau tidak, dan mengumumkan senarai nama tahanan dalam tempoh dua minggu. Jika lapan orang tersebut masih ditahan, Suaram menyeru polis membebaskan mereka dengan serta-merta atau mendakwa mereka di mahkamah dengan segara.
Menurut artikel 11(1) dalam Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sedunia, seseorang yang dituduh malakukan kes jenayah haruslah dianggap tidak bersalah sebelum dibuktikan bersalah melalui perbicaraan terbuka di mana ia mempunyai semua jaminan yang diperlukan bagi pembelaan tersebut. Maka, kenyataan Salleh yang berbunyi “tidak ada bukti untuk mendakwa, tetapi ada alasan untuk menahan” mencerminkan bahawa Malaysia ialah negara yang tidak memberi perlindungan hak asasi manusia. Seseorang yang belum dibuktikan bersalah di mahkamah seharusnya dianggap tidak bersalah, namun pihak polis telah menggunakan alasan bahawa tidak mempunyai bukti yang cukup untuk mendakwa mereka tetapi sebaliknya menahan mereka. Tindakan ini telah melanggar artikel 11(1) dalam Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sedunia.
Di Malaysia, terdapat beberapa akta yang memberi kuasa kepada polis untuk menahan tanpa bicara, antaranya termasuk Akta Keselamatan dalam Negeri, Ordinan Darurat dan Akta Dadah Berbahaya. Artikel 10 dalam Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sedunia menyatakan, semua orang mempunyai hak yang sama untuk menuntut agar dibicara secara adil dan terbuka dalam mahkamah yang bebas dan tidak memihak, untuk menentukan hak dan kewajipannya atau membicarakan sebarang dakwaan yang ditujukan kepadanya.
Segala tindakan menahan tanpa bicara adalah melanggar hak asasi manusia, Suaram ingin memuji Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang, Lim Guan Eng dalam menyatakan pendiriannya yang tidak menyokong tindakan menahan tanpa bicara atas mempertahankan hak asasi manusia.

Penang Police’s Shameful Disregard for Humanity on the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights! (english)

Penang Police’s Shameful Disregard for Humanity on the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights!

As people over the world celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Penang Police has shown the world yet again why Malaysia remains in the backwaters of human rights practices.

Yesterday, Penang state deputy police chief Salleh Mat Rasid conceded that there was no sufficient evidence to charge 8 suspects of the RM48 million chip heist at Intel's plant in 2006 in court but still claimed police have proof that they are criminals.

This statement is both shocking and baffling because suspects are NOT criminals until they are proven guilty in a court of law, how can such a high ranking officer belittle judicial process? Hence, as there can be no acceptable reason for the police to arbitrarily detain them under the Emergency Ordinance at the Simpang Rengam Rehabilitation Centre for two years which can be renewed indefinitely, Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) Penang strongly condemns Salleh’s comment.

SUARAM Penang now urges the Penang police to announce whether the reported eight suspects are still under detention without trial and publish the list of detainees at the soonest. We demand that the police either charge these persons in court or release them immediately. No human being should be denied his legitimate freedom just because the police have been inefficient in their investigations.

According to Article 11 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), anyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.

In Malaysia, unfortunately, there are several acts that allowed detention without trial such as the infamous Internal Security Act 1960, Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 (EPOCPO) and Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985.
Article 10 of the UDHR states very clearly that everyone has the right to effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. The Malaysian government’s continual retention of such draconian laws is proof that it is insincere in recognising basic human rights. Sadly, past experience has taught us such laws have been used not for security purposes but for the purpose of protecting political power.

Any detention without trial is a serious violation of human rights, SUARAM Penang would like to commend Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng statement that his government does not support detention without trial.

Penang Police’s Shameful Disregard for Humanity on the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights! (Mandarin)

13/10/08
槟城警方在世界人权宣言60周年让国人蒙羞！
在世界各地庆祝世界人权宣言地六十周年之际，槟城警方却对于无审讯扣留的恶法再次发出让国人蒙羞的声明！
槟州副总警长沙烈昨日在记者会汇报2006年晶片失窃案的进展时透露，警方虽未掌握足够证据将嫌犯提控上庭，却又足够理由未审讯扣留他们在新邦令金扣留营长达两年，槟城人民之声对槟副总警长沙烈的言论表达强烈的不满。
人民之声促请槟城警方在两周内公布这8人是否还被扣留，以及公布被扣留者的名单。倘若这8个人仍被扣留，人名之声呼吁警方立即释放这8个人或者是将他们立刻提控上庭！
根据世界人权宣言第11条（1），凡受刑事控告者，在未经获得辩护上所需的一切保证之公开审判，而依法 证实有罪以前，有权被视为无罪。在世界人權宣言被擬定的60周年之際，沙烈給予“沒有證據提控，卻有理由扣留”的答復，强烈反映大马是没有人权保障的国家！一个人在法庭还没下判之前都是清白的，但是警方却以没有足够证据提控他们而肆意扣留他们两年是触犯了世界人权宣言第11条（1）！
在马来西亚，数项法令赋予了警方为所欲为的权力，其中就包括了恶名昭彰的《内安法令》、《紧急法令》和《危险毒品法令》。世界人权宣言第10条清楚的表明，人人完全平等地有权由一个独立而无偏倚的法庭进行公正的和公开的审讯，以确定他的权利和义务，并判定对他提出的任何形式提控。但是，至今大马政府仍保留了这些恶法，而过去的经历也顯示，政府保留这些恶法不过是保护自己的权力。
任何未经审讯的扣留都是侵犯人权的行为，人民之声赞扬林首长在捍衛人权的立场上清楚地表达不支持无审讯扣留的行为。

Bar: Rights record 'still unacceptable'

Bar: Rights record 'still unacceptable'

Hafiz Yatim | Dec 10, 08 2:44pm

As the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is observed worldwide today, Bar Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan has noted that citizens' access to human rights is still at "an unacceptable level" in Malaysia. MCPX Asked at a press conference last night to compare the country's standards of human rights between this year and the last, she outlined key areas where improvements are urgently required. As an immediate case in point, she cited ongoing action against participants of Jerit's 'Ride for Change' campaign, which has been targeted by police since two teams simultaneously left Johor Baru and Alor Setar respectively last week, on a 16-day bicycle ride to Kuala Lumpur. Said Ambiga: "The police are not being fully utilised for crime prevention when they are asked to stop and arrest (the campaigners) throughout the country. "The Bar Council finds this to be unacceptable as crimes are increasing every day, and yet the authorities are using the police (against) youth who are exercising their civil rights." The campaigners are scheduled to hand over a memorandum to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim in Parliament on Dec 18, seeking attention to the wage structure, affordable housing, price controls, and to prevent the privatisation of water supply and medical and education services. At different stages of their journey to date, police have stepped in to set roadblocks and arrest participants, while arsonists have burnt some of the bicycles. Ambiga said the government could have improved its human rights record, especially with the country being one of the 47 members of the UN Human Rights Council. She reiterated calls for repeal of outdated and rights-unfriendly legislation like the Internal Security Act (ISA), Official Secrets Act, Police Act, Printing Presses and Publications Act, Sedition Act, Emergency Ordinance and Drug Rehabilitation Act. "These have been in place for more than 20 years and should have been amended or repealed to suit current needs. For example, the ISA is being implemented badly...to curb civil liberties of the people and politicians." Ambiga pointed to arrests under the ISA, including the detention of five Hindu Rights Action Force leaders last December, as well that of a blogger, opposition politician and a journalist this year. She further called for an end to capital and corporal punishment, urging politicians to watch such punishment being meted out as well as to see for themselves the conditions at the Kamunting detention camp and immigration detention camps to realise the extent of inhumanity involved. Bar Council Human Rights committee chairperson Edmund Bon (left), who was also at the press conference held at the Bar Council premises, also expressed concern for the welfare of the Orang Asli and the indigenous people in Sabah and Sarawak. 'Unjust Act' Earlier, Parti Keadilan Rakyat vice-president Dr Syed Husin Ali officiated at the opening of the Bar Council's inaugural debate competition at Kolej Damansara Utama, in conjunction with World Human Rights Day. In his speech, he noted that Malaysia is a member of the Human Rights Council but has not ratified the international convenants on civil and political rights, as well as on economic, social and cultural rights. "It is no surprise, therefore that (the government) often rides roughshod over some human rights issues," he said. Syed Husin, a former ISA detainee, said the draconian security law had enabled arbitrary arrests and detentions over the years. "Those arrested can be detained for an indefinite period without being taken to court (and are held) mostly on false allegations. I was detained for six years and some people I know had been detained for 15 years," he said. "It is an unjust Act which can and has often been used to cripple political parties and politicians regarded by the ruling parties as enemies. It is also against Islam and other great religions. Some 150 students and lawyers are participating in the four-day contest, on the theme 'UDHR@60 and all is not right'.

OUR CAMPAIGN VEHICLES ARRESTED

December 9, 2008

It was the most tiring day so far for me and most people will not believe that I slept as early as 12.30 after midnight. That was the reason why i could not pen down our experience yesterday December 9, 2008. Let me recall as I sit in a cybercafe near the historical forts and heritage building in historical Melaka.

Yesterday morning, I was rudely woken up by Ngo at 4am who said that someone threw a stone at out Pajero car. Yes, half a brick smashed into out front window and at our bas parked outside teh shop house we were sleeping in. We had two activist sleeping in the Pajero at that time. They saw a familiar silver Proton waja car but the number plate was covered with a white masking
tape. We were baffled because the night before, the police were all around us and monitoring us 24 hours. Then suddenly this incident happens and the police was not around. I am sure you understand what was running in our head at that moment. We took a conscious decision not to lodge a police report because we were quite sure that this latest incident is yet another act to
give the police excuse to call off our nation wide campaign. We will not fall into that trap.

The incident strengthened our view that we are pedaling in the right direction.

The cyclist after unable the cycle a whole day because of rain were very determined to cycle. They cycled around Labis team aided by 4 youths whom we just met the day before and cycled towards Segamat. Half way through, we took the bus and lorry and headed towards Segamat. A few kilometers before Segamat town, a massive road block led by the OCPD Majid himself greeted us. It is interesting to note that all JERIT roadblocks are either manned by the OCPD or his Deputy. Here the Traffic chief summoned our van for having a banner saying that we did not get a permit to put a banner on our vehicle. Then a heated argument resulted in our van, trooper and lorry carrying cycle being taken to the IPD Segamat while the bus is released. The traffic chief said that he has no more issue but it is the other department. All this police "stories" ...we are getting used to it.

So we took the opportunity to hold a press conference at the Police station. Spoke to the OCPD Majid and a DAP lawyer Pang came to assist us. But the police as usual were so confused as before :

The OCPD told us
1)This is not an sizable offence. We are investigating under the Printting and Presses Act as they feel our rubber stamp with our address is not sufficient. Yet the day earlier Kluang police say everything is on order. Then they said it will take around 20 minutes

2) Then they said that statement must be recorded but since we said we will talk in court , they said it will only take 10 minutes each

3) Then they said they have to search and need some exhibit

4) Then they said, 2 of our people will be released on police bail

5) Are the 2 arrested? The OCPD said no while the Crime Chief said Yes.

After this comedy and bad PR performance by the police, which took all in not half an hour but more than 3 hours.

The cycling team then left to GEMAS , the border town between Negeri Sembilan dan Johor. We reached GEMAS once again by a roadblock led by the Deputy OCPD Isa. Another big argument erupted, another stand-off .Meanwhile police had also threatened our caterer. So we were angry and hungry. When we reached at our Rest House in GEMAS. a few SB were happily taking photos. We chased them out of the areas.

But we had many visitors...local people in GEMAS who wanted to help us distribute leflet, assist us and just be with us. It was the kind of solidarity and good heart which is keeping us going. Many heard this others. many wanted to be JERIT members.

It was a whole day of fighting and arguing with the police. The police have been saying that they are there to protect us but they are there only to harass and frustrate us. That night , we went to the GEMAS police station and told them to protect our bicycles. We then parked our bicycled in the lorry inside the police station. At least if something happen to our bicycle, we know who to blame.

So bye bye to Johor and thank you for the memories. Tomorrow we move to Melaka.

Arul

Unbelievable answer from Home Minister!

MALAYSIA TODAY INTERVIEWS THE HOME MINISTER

Malaysia Today
Tuesday, 09 December 2008 17:31

Today, Malaysia Today interviews the Home Minister to get his take on a range of issues that have been the bone of contention with most Malaysians. This article is of course just a satire and any similarities with persons still alive, already dead, or about to die is purely coincidental.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malaysia Today: YB, thank you for agreeing to an interview with Malaysia Today's No Holds Barred column.

Yang Berhormat: Thank you for inviting me. It is very seldom that the alternative media would interview a member of the Cabinet so that we can set the record straight and correct the lies and wrong perception about the government, which are spread by the alternative media. Normally, the alternative media just reports rumours without obtaining the government's side of the story. I congratulate the alternative media for becoming more mature in giving the government space to inform the public of the truth.

But before we start, I would like to offer my condolence to the Indian government on the recent tragedy in Mumbai. I thank God that Malaysia does not suffer such acts of terrorism, primarily because we have the Internal Security Act, which allows us to detain terrorist before they can cause any harm to society. This shows that the Internal Security Act has been very successful in maintaining law and order and in safeguarding the security of this country.

MT: Since you have brought up the matter of the ISA, YB, can we start by talking about that?

YB: Sure.

MT: The people criticise the ISA and…….

YB: Which people? The alternative media always talks about 'the people'. But which people are you talking about?

MT: Well, I suppose the civil society movements and human rights movements.

YB: These people are in the minority. The majority of the people voted for the government. So this means the majority support the ISA. If not they would not have voted for the government. It is the majority that counts, not the minority. We can't make laws or abolish laws just for the sake of the minority. We must do what the majority wants. The ISA is to prevent terrorism. If, in 2001, the US also had the ISA, their Twin Towers would still be standing. Malaysia's Twin Towers is still standing because of the ISA.

MT: But the ISA is not used against terrorists. The government has always said that Malaysia does not have any terrorists. The ISA is used to deny the people freedom of speech.

YB: There is still freedom of speech in Malaysia. Who says that there is no freedom of speech?

MT: It is not freedom of speech which does not exist in Malaysia. It is freedom after speech.

YB: That is different. Then you can't say that there is no freedom of speech in Malaysia. There is freedom of speech. Of course, if you say the wrong things, then you run the risk of being detained under the ISA. Berani cakap, berani tanggunglah!

MT: Okay, then what would you regard as 'saying the wrong things'?

YB: Well, like inciting the people to hate the government or saying something that may start racial problems.

MT: But we already have so many other laws like the Sedition Act, Criminal Defamation, PPPA, and so on, to charge those who may have broken the law. Why the need to detain them under the ISA? Just charge them in court.

YB: That would not be so easy. We will need evidence to charge them in court. Without evidence how to charge them?

MT: But how do you know all those people who the government has detained under the ISA have committed a crime? Is it not possible they are all innocent?

YB: No, we have evidence. That is why we detained them.

MT: But if you have evidence then why not use this evidence to charge them?

YB: I already said there is not enough evidence to charge them.

MT: But there is enough evidence to detain them?

YB: Yes. The evidence is enough to detain them, only not enough to charge them.

MT: But when you sign the Detention Order you must first see all the evidence. Is this not so?

YB: That is true. Only when I am satisfied there is enough evidence will I sign the Detention Order.

MT: But you still feel that the evidence, though sufficient to detain them, is not sufficient enough to charge them.

YB: That is correct. But the detainee still has a chance to appear before the Advisory Board within three months to argue his case. If the Advisory Board is of the opinion that the detainee is innocent then he will be released. So we are quite fair.

MT: Have many people been released through the recommendations of the Advisory Board so far?

YB: Well, not many…..maybe none so far. But this only means we were not wrong in detaining them. If not, surely the Advisory Board would have recommended their release.

MT: But there have been reports that, from time to time, the Advisory Board has recommended the release of some detainees. However, the Home Minister has always overruled their recommendations.

YB: Yes, that is true. This is because the Advisory Board was mistaken and we did not agree with their recommendations. So we overruled them.

MT: This would mean the Advisory Board is a lame duck and has no power. It is the Home Minister who has the final say. Would this not be so?

YB: That is not true. The Advisory Board does have power.

MT: Power to do what?

YB: Power to recommend the release of the detainee.

MT: But the Minister does not follow their recommendation and overrules them. The Minister has the final say.

YB: But this does not mean the Advisory Board does not have power.

MT: If you say so YB. Okay, can we now talk about the Umno party elections and the numerous complaints about corruption in the party?

YB: What corruption are you talking about? There is no corruption in Umno.

MT: But the mainstream media has been reporting the many complaints of money politics.

YB: That is money politics, not corruption.

MT: Is there a difference?

YB: Of course there is. Corruption is when you pay to get something. Money politics is not corruption.

MT: What would you call money politics then?

YB: Money politics is……..well, money politics.

MT: And that is not corruption?

YB: Of course not.

MT: Okay, whatever. Now, on the matter of race relations, don't you think that Malaysia is very dangerously being pushed to the brink of racial problems?

YB: That is why we have so many times said that the opposition is stirring the sentiments of the many races.

MT: But it is not the opposition that is doing this.

YB: Then who?

MT: Umno.

YB: Umno is a responsible party. We do not play the race card. It is the opposition that is doing this.

MT: In what way is the opposition doing this?

YB: They are asking for the government to abolish Ketuanan Melayu and the NEP. This makes the Malays angry and may cause the Malays to mengamuk. The opposition should stop all this nonsense before the peace and harmony of this country is compromised.

MT: But is it not time we treat all Malaysians equal and no longer treat one race as having more privileges than others?

YB: Aiyah, how can! That is the kind of talk that makes the Malays angry. It is dangerous to suggest such things. We must maintain the harmony between the many races and not say things like that.

MT: But what gives one race the right to have more privileges than others?

YB: That was the agreement when we gained Merdeka in 1957. How can we go back on what was agreed?

MT: What agreement?

YB: The Social Contract that was agreed by the Malays, Chinese and Indians.

MT: Many say that the Social Contract does not exist. Have you ever seen it? Can Malaysians see a copy?

YB: It was not a written contract. It was a verbal contract.

MT: When was it made and under want circumstances was it made?

YB: It was agreed upon when Umno, MCA and MIC jointly negotiated for Merdeka from the British.

MT: And what were the terms of the contract?

YB: That Malay would be the National Language and Islam the official religion plus the Malays would be accorded special rights and privileges such as certain quotas in the civil service and in educational institutions.

MT: But has this not since been amended many times in breach of the original Social Contract?

YB: No! In what way has it changed? Everything still remains the same.

MT: The government imposes new rules such as companies must be 100% Bumiputera before they can get import permits or APs and 30% of houses built must be sold to Bumiputeras according to the land area and so on. This was not part of the so-called Social Contract agreed by Umno, MCA and MIC before Merdeka. They are new rules made up as we went along.

YB: True. But the non-Malays accepted them.

MT: How do you know they accepted them?

YB: Because they continued to vote for the government. If they did not agree then they would not have voted for the government.

MT: But they did not vote for the government. 49% of the Malays and more than 80% of the Chinese and Indians did not vote for the government in the last general election. This means they do not agree with the government policies.

YB: But we still won more than 60% of the Parliament seats.

MT: That is only because of Gerrymandering. Malay majority seats like Putrajaya, where the voters are 98% Malay, have only 5,000 voters while seats that are 80% or more non-Malay have 120,000 voters or more. That is why the government still won and not because the majority voted for it.

YB: That is beside the point. We still can't deny the fact that we won 140 seats and the opposition won only 82 seats.

MT: Yes, but if the votes were evenly divided between constituencies with a variation of plus-minus 20% the government would have fallen by now. It is only through Gerrymandering that the government managed to hold on to power.

YB: That is your opinion. It does not mean it is true.

MT: Thank you, YB, for the interview. I am sure you have helped enlighten Malaysians with your view of things.

YB: Thank you. I hope I have managed to rebut the opposition lies and propaganda and I look forward to similar sessions in future where the government can be given an opportunity to set the record straight.

Malaysia's Internal Security Act and Suppression of Political Dissent

Malaysia's Internal Security Act and Suppression of Political Dissent
A Human Rights Watch Backgrounder

Key Sections Background on Use of the ISA Recent ISA Arrests Restrictions on the Press and Academic Freedoms Related Material Malaysia: End Political Arrests HRW Press Release, May 13, 2002 Malaysia: End Political Arrests HRW Press Release, April 30, 2002 Malaysia: Release Political Detainees HRW Press Release, April 12, 2002

Since the September 11 attacks in the United States, Prime Minister Mahathir has justified use of the Internal Security Act (ISA) on counter-terrorism grounds. The September attacks also prompted a major shift in U.S. policy regarding political repression in Malaysia. In July 2001, Foreign Minister Syed Hamid met with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in Washington, D.C. just weeks after Anwar Ibrahim's wife, Wan Azizah, met with senior State Department officials. State Department officials reportedly told the foreign minister that a meeting between President Bush and Prime Minister Mahathir could take place only if there were progress on Anwar's case and in the treatment of political dissidents. But when Mahathir and Bush met at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Shanghai last October, Bush made no public comment on Malaysia's human rights record or the detention of political dissidents. The White House subsequently agreed to Mahathir's visit this week, from May 13-15, to thank him for Malaysia's efforts against terrorism.

But the draconian and anachronistic ISA has long been and continues to be used as a tool to stifle peaceful political dissent. Political activists in the past have been detained under the ISA for more than a decade without trial. President Bush must make it clear that the fight against terrorism does not justify the wholesale use of the ISA to suppress dissent, to violate internationally guaranteed rights to due process and freedom from arbitrary detention, and to undermine the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly. Those suspected of involvement in violent acts including acts of terrorism should be charged and brought to trial under Malaysia's criminal laws.

Malaysia's Internal Security Act (ISA) is a preventive detention law originally enacted in the early 1960s during a national state of emergency as a temporary measure to fight a communist rebellion. Under Section 73 (1) of the ISA, police may detain any person for up to 60 days, without warrant or trial and without access to legal counsel, on suspicion that "he has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof." After 60 days, the Minister of Home Affairs can then extend the period of detention without trial for up to two years, without submitting any evidence for review by the courts, by issuing a detention order, which is renewable indefinitely.

The law has repeatedly been criticized by Malaysian human rights groups, the Malaysian Bar Council, the Malaysian Human Rights Commission, and international human rights groups, which called for its repeal. The ISA's provisions violate fundamental international human rights standards, including prohibitions on arbitrary detention and guarantees of the right to due process and the right to a prompt and impartial trial.

The U.S. State Department's Country Report on Human Rights Practices issued on March 4, 2002, was highly critical of Malaysia's continued use of the ISA and noted that last year, "police increased their use of the ISA to arrest and detain many persons, including members of the political opposition, without charge or trial�.In the latter half of the year, the Government stepped up its pro-ISA rhetoric."

Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed has vigorously defended the use of the ISA, saying it has been useful in fighting insurgent groups threatening national security. In November 2000, the ruling coalition suffered a by-election defeat in Mahathir's home district in Kedah state and the government faced increasingly vocal opposition protests. Not for the first time, it used the ISA against its political opponents. Among those targeted under the ISA were minority Shi'a Muslims, supporters of jailed former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, and youth leaders in the opposition Pan Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS, Partai Islam Se-Malaysia), although individuals linked to specific violent acts were also among those detained.

Background on Use of the ISA

The Act provides for arbitrary arrest and detention without trial for an indefinite period based on mere suspicion that one "may be likely" to commit an act deemed dangerous to national security. A detainee is, therefore, presumed guilty without trial. It further allows a detainee to be held under solitary confinement for 60 days without legal counsel.

When the Act was first adopted, it did allow for judicial review, but since then, the ISA has been amended over 20 times, and this provision has been removed. Absolute power is given to the Minister of Home Affairs to arbitrarily detain anyone, without reference to the courts.

In addition to provisions for arrest, the ISA allows for restrictions on freedom of assembly, association, and expression, freedom of movement, residence and employment. It also allows for the closing of schools and educational institutions if they are used as a meeting place for an unlawful organization or for any other reason are deemed detrimental to the interests of Malaysia or the public.

Over the years, the Malaysian government has consistently used the Act for its own political purposes to detain thousands of citizens, including political opposition leaders, academicians, trade unionists, religious, social, environmental, and women's rights activists. The ISA was used to arrest political opponents of Mahathir in a major crackdown in 1987-88, as well as politicians in Sabah, east Malaysia, in 1990, whose party was considered a major rival to the ruling party, UMNO. In November 1997, ten people were arrested under the ISA for allegedly spreading Shiite teachings deemed detrimental to national security; Muslims in Malaysia are Sunnis. The ISA was used in 1998 to arrest Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and six of his political supporters. Anwar was the primary leader of opposition to Mahathir, and is currently serving a 15-year sentence following convictions in 1999 and 2000 in politically motivated trials for sodomy and corruption and abuse of power.

Former ISA detainees have testified to being subjected to severe physical and psychological torture, including allegations of physical assault, forced nudity, sleep deprivation, around-the-clock interrogation, death threats, threats of bodily harm to family members, including threats of rape and bodily harm to their children. Detainees are often kept in solitary confinement in tiny, dark cells. Prolonged torture and deprivation have led to some to sign state-manufactured "confessions" under severe duress. During the first trial of former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, police admitted to the courts that the process of 'extracting confessions' under duress was standard practice. Currently, there are 105 ISA detainees being held in Kamunting prison camp.

Recent ISA Arrests

In April 2001, prior to a planned a demonstration marking the second anniversary of the sentencing of prisoner of conscience Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian police detained nine opposition activists and a human rights defender under the ISA:

• Chua Tian Chiang, Vice President, Parti Keadilan Nasional (PKN - National Justice
• Party, known as Keadilan);
• Mohd Ezam Mohd Noor, National Youth Chief, PKN;
• Haji Saari Sungip, PKN activist;
• Hishamuddin Rais, media columnist and social activist;
• Raja Petra Kamaruddin, Director of Free Anwar Campaign;
• N. Gobala Krishnan, Secretary General, PKN Youth;
• Abdul Ghani Harun, PKN Youth Central Committee member;
• Dr Badrul Amin Baharom, PKN Youth leader;
• Lokman Nor Adam, Executive Secretary, PKN Youth Wing;
• Badaruddin Ismail, human rights defender.

Five of the activists belonged to the opposition PKN party, headed by Anwar's wife, Wan Azizah. The detainees were apparently also planning to submit a memorandum to the Malaysian Commission on Human Rights regarding Anwar's trial. Dr Badrul Amin Baharom and Lokman Nor Adam, leading members of the PKN, were arrested on April 20, 2001. Dr. Badrul Amin Baharom was released on November 2, but tight restrictions were placed on his movements and he was prohibited from speaking publicly. He broke the restrictions and was rearrested on January 31, 2002. On 26 April 26, 2001 Malaysian police arrested human rights defender Badaruddin Ismail, who is a member of the secretariat of a leading human rights organization, Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram, Voice of the Malaysian People). He had been assisting families of detainees and monitoring the National Human Rights Commission enquiry into police brutality. No reason for his arrest has been given.

On May 30, in an unusual and courageous ruling, Judge Hishamuddin Yunus ordered the release of two ISA detainees on a writ of habeas corpus (an order that a prisoner to be brought before a court to determine whether his detention is lawful), and suggested that the parliament should review and either scrap or amend the ISA to reduce its potential for abuse.

In July 2001, the authorities detained two student activists, Khairul Anuar Ahmad Zainuddin and Mohamad Fuad Mohamad Ikhwan, under the ISA, the former for twenty-three days and the latter for ten days. Also in July, the government banned all political rallies stating that they would undermine the country's security. When the Pan Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS), an opposition party making inroads since the 1999 general election, subsequently planned a series of meetings to protest the policy, police refused to grant permits and dispersed those who attempted to attend.

On August 2-4, police detained another ten people under the ISA, all of whom were affiliated with or supporters of PAS, including four prominent youth leaders. The authorities said the ten belonged to a group (known by the initials KMM) that planned to overthrow the government, sometimes labeling the group the Malaysian Militant Group and sometimes the Malaysian Mujahedin Group.

One of those detained, Nik Adli Nik Aziz, was the son of a leading PAS official. The authorities alleged he had received military training in Afghanistan and had learned bomb making from Muslim rebels in the Philippines, but he denied this and PAS leaders emphasized that they used only peaceful, democratic means in their struggle against the ruling coalition. As of May, most of them were still detained under two-year detention orders.

The police have claimed that the opposition PKN party activists were planning violent street demonstrations to overthrow the government although no evidence supporting this accusation has ever been presented before the courts. Many non-governmental organizations believe the real reason for the arrests is to suppress legitimate peaceful dissent against the arrest and sentencing of Anwar Ibrahim. The Malaysian Human Rights Commission has repeatedly said that detention without trial under the Internal Security Act violates fundamental human rights, and if the detainees were not charged and tried in an open court they should be immediately released.

Following their initial detention, the families of five of the detainees--Mohammad Ezam Mohd Noor, Haji Saari Sungip, Raja Petra Kamaruddin, Dr Badrul Amin Baharom and Lokman Nor Adam--expressed concern that while the detainees did not show signs of physical assault, they were unwilling to speak of their interrogation, and returned repeatedly to the subject of the safety of their families. To date, two of the detainees have been freed pending their Federal Court case (Gobala Krishnan Abdul Ghani Harun) and six (the "ISA Six") remain under two-year detention order in Kamunting Detention Center in Northern Perak state: Badrul Amin, Chua Tian Chang, Hishamuddin Rais, Lokman Adam, Mohd Ezam Mohd Nor, and Saari Sungib.

On April 10, 2002, the six ISA detainees observed the one-year anniversary of their detention by beginning a hunger strike to protest their detention. The strike was suspended on April 21, 2002. The detainees are allowed weekly family visits.

Restrictions on the press and academic freedoms

In addition to the ISA detentions, the Mahathir government has suppressed peaceful political opposition by restricting media and academic freedoms.

Throughout 2001, Malaysia's ruling National Front coalition, led by Prime Minister Mahathir, sought to broaden already tight controls on the press through what the US-based Committee for the Protection of Journalists called "coercion, ownership changes, verbal bullying, and backroom personnel moves." The Printing Presses and Publications Act presently requires all publications to obtain an annual press license to operate, which can be withdrawn without judicial review. A special office in the Home Affairs Ministry censors all foreign publications and has repeatedly delayed publications deemed critical of the government. For example, in March 2001, censors delayed release of both Far Eastern Economic Review and Asiaweek editions chronicling the growing opposition to Mahathir and signs of political unrest.

The government asserts control through its ownership of virtually all major media, either through the ruling National Front parties or Mahathir's allies. In May, the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), a senior partner in the ruling National Front coalition, bought out and dismissed the senior editorial staff of the two major Chinese-language dailies, Nanyang Press and Nanyang Siang Pau, effectively bringing the nation's most independent papers under government control. The takeover left only one independent Chinese daily, Sin Chew Jit Po.

The Internet, which the government had pledged to spare from censorship, has also begun to come under government pressure. The government stepped up pressure on the online news daily Malaysiakini.com after it was alleged that the site had received start-up funding from a foundation controlled by U.S. businessman George Soros, whom Mahathir has branded an enemy of his country's financial system and responsible for the 1997 financial crisis. Although Malaysiakini denied the report, Mahathir told the nation that "loyal Malaysians" should stop reading Malaysiakini and barred Malaysiakini reporters from attending government press conferences on the grounds that "their credibility is doubtful." On May 23, the deputy home affairs minister told parliament that the government was monitoring "every article" published by malaysiakini.com to ensure that its writings did not upset public order. Throughout the year, other government officials threatened that the site would be prosecuted if its reporting "endangered national security." In May 2001, the prime minister's office announced that laws were being prepared to require online journalists to observe the same severe restrictions that impede the rest of the media.

Civil servants are required to take an oath of loyalty to king, country and government. Academics and undergraduate students are also now required to take the pledge. The pledge, Akujanji (I Pledge), is an oath of good conduct and requires signatories to heed all existing and future government directives and orders. An explanatory note in a circular on the pledge reads: "An officer who goes against or criticizes a government policy will undermine the integrity and stability of the civil service as a whole."

The pledge is clearly intended to contain political activity among civil servants, academics and students. In October 2001, sixty-one university lecturers alleged to be engaged in anti-government activities were warned, transferred or fired. Civil servants are reportedly divided over the government's September 1998 arrest of former Deputy Premier Anwar Ibrahim, which sparked the reform movement. Last year, soon after Anwar's arrest, 10 reform activists and two student activists were detained under the ISA. The government has alleged that university student associations are controlled by the PAS. Mahathir has publicly admitted that the aim of the pledge is to check "poisoning of the minds" of students so they "stick to the original purpose of entering universities to gain knowledge and not to indulge in anti-government activities."

Over 200 Asian Legislators urge UN Sec - Gen to travel to Myanmar (Burma)，secure release of all Political Prisoners