ISA: 'I Say Abolish!'

ISA: 'I Say Abolish!'

Kua Kia Soong
Oct 27, 09
11:19am

On this 22nd anniversary of Operation Lalang and with the Barisan Nasional government at its most defensive over the continued use of this indefensible suppression apparatus - the Internal Security Act - we would do well to ensure there is no compromise on the call by civil society for its total abolition.

Whenever the BN government has run out of justifications for its continued use of the ISA, it has sounded out its intentions to "review" this vile piece of legislation.

Thus, after the Communist Party of Malaya had signed the peace treaty with the Malaysian government in 1989, the then Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Ghafar Baba announced the intention for "ISA to be reviewed" (The Star, 1.12.89).

Again in 1996, after the concerted campaign by SUARAM society, the BN government announced that "the ISA would be amended to reduce the mandatory term of two years to maybe six months." (The Sun, 16.2.96)

In the current session of Parliament, we understand the government is attempting to introduce a bill to amend the ISA instead of abolishing it altogether in view of the indefensible record of the ISA since its enactment in 1960.

This law has been a too convenient a tool for the Barisan Nasional and its predecessor, the Alliance to put away opposition leaders and other dissidents, allowing the Special Branch to torture detainees with impunity all these years.

Incongruent with society

Anything short of abolition to outlaw detention without trial will not be congruent with "a society at peace with itself", those fluffy words in "Wawasan 2020". We base our case on the following:

1. There is no emergency situation

Although we know that none of the four Emergencies declared since Independence has been annulled, the fact remains that ever since the end of The Emergency in 1960, we have not faced any emergency situation "threatening the life of the nation".

The only crisis faced by the BN Government seems to be the possibility of losing control of the federal government after the severe drenching by the rakyat during the political tsunami of 2008.

It is perhaps the biggest scandal of post-Independence Malaysia that we have allowed one of the most draconian legislations in the world to be used for nearly fifty years during peace time.

It is ironic that the butcher of the Emergency, Gerald Templar had suggested the Emergency regulations be annually renewable or they should lapse automatically.

And even during the worst days of Apartheid, Nelson Mandela was allowed due process of the law; there was judicial review in South Africa all that time.

Then again, during the troubles in Northern Ireland in the seventies, the British government's detention of IRA suspects for seven days was ruled unlawful by the European Court of Human Rights.

Here we have had to endure the ISA that allows sixty days of solitary confinement when the detainee is at the mercy of the Special Branch with a renewable two-year detention orders.

An ISA detainee just released had been detained for eight years. Another released in 1987 had been detained for 16 years!

2. No justification for interim measure of review

In a moment of political gaucherie, Suhakam in its 2003 "Review of the Internal Security Act" suggested interim recommendations "in light of the possibility that the enactment of such a comprehensive legislation will take time..."

Interim measures needed

We know that the Attorney General's office works in mysterious ways; they can be quicksilver swift when it comes to laws the government wants to introduce quickly, yet painstakingly slow when it comes to legislation that does not fit their agenda.

For now, we do not expect the government to reinvent the wheel.

There exists in many countries today comprehensive legislation to deal with terrorism - the US, UK, Spain, Turkey.

All the government needs to look out for are the bits in their legislations that do not meet international human rights standards.

We are gratified, for example, to read the reformed former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir's recent denunciation of US treatment of their detainees.

The government can take the cue from Dr Mahathir and improve on any new comprehensive anti-terrorism legislation.

Suhakam has suggested various interim measures including reducing the two-year mandatory detention orders to three months.

We believe such amendments will only serve to prolong the injustice of detention without trial and simply allow the BN government to use the ISA in its new form.

3. Anti-Terrorism Laws in US and UK

Since September 11th 2001, the BN government has tried to justify the continued use of the ISA by pointing to anti-terrorism laws in the West, especially the US and the UK.

First of all, we should note that while these countries have experienced cases of terrorist bombings, Malaysia has not suffered any such incidents.

Still, these countries have not declared emergencies in the aftermath of the bombings.

Secondly, the US Patriot Act is only targeted at non-citizens. While it also introduced measures that erode the civil liberties of US citizens, detention without trial would certainly not be accepted by US voters.

'Not charged in open court'

In the UK, the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Subversion Act of 2001 was also targeted only at foreigners.

After it was rendered unlawful by the European Court of Human Rights, the UK Government replaced it with the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.

Under this law, suspects are placed under "control orders" (more like house arrest) rather than detention orders.

And while ISA detainees are held for up to sixty days in solitary confinement, the limit on holding is 28 days in the UK, 2 days in the US, 5 days in Spain and 7 ½ days in Turkey.

4. ISA is punitive, not preventive

It speaks volumes that Noordin Mat Top the Malaysian who was alleged to be responsible for the Bali bombing and killed recently by the Indonesian authorities had never been arrested under the ISA.

At the same time, out of the 10,000 plus Malaysians who have been detained under the ISA since 1960, how many have been subsequently charged in an open court of law? We don't recall any.

This simple fact shows that the ISA has been used all along as a convenient yet insidious suppression apparatus of the BN government.

As a former ISA detainee and having undergone harrowing sessions with the Special Branch, it was clear that our detention under Operation Lalang was purely punitive and a deterrent to further involvement in social and political activism.

It could not have been preventive and I could not have been "rehabilitated" after 445 days of detention for the simple reason that I have spoken up and written more than I did twenty years ago.

Licence to torture

The whole notion of ISA detention being "rehabilitation" of the detainee is complete fantasy. You either come out of Kamunting Detention Camp broken or you come out more together, more determined to put an end to injustice and exploitation.

5. Ratify the Convention Against Torture

The current Parliament should instead be looking at the question of abuse of powers by the police and other enforcement officers especially after the demise of Teoh Beng Hock.

Suaram's 2007 Human Rights Report documents two cases of deaths during interrogation by the MAAC.

So Teoh's case is by no means unusual.

When so many cases of torture of ISA detainees by the police have been exposed and the latter still gets away with impunity, we can say the ISA gives the police a licence to torture.

The prime minister should prove his credibility as a reformer by implementing the most important of the recommendations by the Royal Commission on the Police, namely establishing the Independent Police Complaints Misconduct Committee.

More than that, his government should ratify the Convention against Torture to ensure that there is accountability and transparency in Malaysian law enforcement.

Without doubt, the ISA has been the most loathed law in Malaysia for nearly fifty years. The government would be misjudging the peoples' patience by amending it to another form.

"I Say Abolish" the ISA simply because detention without trial diminishes the rights of all citizens by giving the state powers that cannot be reviewed by the courts and corrupting standards central to the administration of justice.

KUA KIA SOONG is the director of human rights movement Suaram. He was detained under ISA in 1987 and wrote about his experience in '445 Days Behind the Wire'.

Security Tight for ASEAN Summit

Security Tight for ASEAN Summit

2009-10-23 11:1522

E-MAIL THIS

20,000 security personnel are in full force as ASEAN meetings commence in Thailand’s Hua Hin.

The ASEAN secretary general says they are not expecting any disruptions.

[Surin Pitwuwan, ASEAN Secretary General]:
“I have been demonstrated the activities that the security apparatus have put up, with all units from the police to the army to the navy to the air force. They have integrated their activities very very well, very impressive. I don't think there is any concern.”

Checkpoints are set up along the main road leading to the summit venue to ensure there is no disruption during the meeting.

Army bomb squads and sniff dogs have been conducting regular checks around the venue.

Navy vessels patrolled the Hua Hin coast and army helicopters circled above the town.

An internal security act has been imposed to allow soldiers to restrict protesters from gathering near the summit venues through Tuesday.

Thailand has tightened security and is not taking any chances. At the ASEAN summit in Pattaya back in April, hundreds of anti-government protesters broke through security barriers. The meeting ended abruptly and some leaders fled by helicopter.

Trade ties, regional security, disaster relief and human rights will dominate the talks of ASEAN leaders this week.

Rakyat digadai ! Keuntungan diutamakan !

KENYATAAN AKHBAR : 27 OKTOBER 2009

Belanjawan 2010

Rakyat digadai ! Keuntungan diutamakan !

Parti Sosialis Malaysia amat kecewa dengan Belanjawan 2010 yang dibentangkan oleh YAB Perdana Menteri pada Jumaat 23hb Oktober 2009. Nampaknya Kerajaan BN masih belum belajar daripada krisis kewangan yang melanda dunia tahun ini. Krisis ekonomi sedunia dengan jelas membawa kita kepada tiga hakikat -

1. Sistem pasaran bebas tidak mampan kerana ianya di acu oleh ketamakan badan-badan korporat dan akan menyebabkan kegawatan ekonomi dan kesengsaraan rakyat awam dari masa ke semasa.

2. Ketamakan kaum korporat telah mengurangkan gaji pekerja di seluruh dunia dengan kaedah-kaedah seperti "outsourcing", "sistem kontrak", kegunaan pekerja migran dll. Ini telah mengecutkan permintaan kasar (aggregate demand) - suatu punca utama yang mencetuskan krisis ekonomi 2008.

3. Sistem pasaran bebas tidak boleh dipercayai untuk menjamin kesejahteraan rakyat jelata, ataupun menjaga alam sekitar dunia.

Malangnya, kerajaan kita langsung tidak ambilkira hakikat-hakikat ini dalam merancangkan Belanjawan 2010. Kerajaan meneruskan pendekatan sektor korporat antarabangsa dimana penjanaan terpenting adalah dalam perkembangan ekonomi Malaysia. Memang, slogan Perdana Menteri sedap didengar – “Rakyat didahulukan, pencapaian diutamakan”. Malangnya cakap tak serupa bikin. Wujudnya beberapa strategi utama dalam Belanjawan yang menjejaskan kepentingan rakyat awam. Menimbulkan persoalan Rakyat tergadai , Untung diutamakan

Kami menimbulkan 5 isu penting intisari belanjawan 2010 iaitu

I. Meningkatkan usaha untuk menarik lebih ramai pelabur asing untuk datang dan melakukan pelaburan di Malaysia. Satu antara usaha ini adalah untuk meliberalisasi ekonomi dan menghapuskan sekatan yang sedia ada berkaitan pelaburan asing.

II. Meneruskan dengan dasar penswastaan walaupun pengswastaan kemudahan awam membebankan rakyat.

III. Menggalakkan pelancongan kesihatan dengan memberi insentif mengurangkan cukai pada hospital-hospital swasta yang berjaya menarik lebih ramai lagi pesakit daripada negara lain ke Malaysia.

IV. Mengurangkan kadar cukai pendapatan untuk kumpulan yang terkaya di Malaysia.

V. Meneruskan dengan rancangan untuk melaksanakan suatu jenis cukai yang membebankan rakyat jelata ia-itu cukai “GST” – cukai terhadap segala barangan dan perkhidmatan yang dibeli oleh rakyat biasa.

Penglibatan kerajaan Malaysia dalam perebutan persaingan dengan Negara jiran untuk menarik pelabur asing ke negara ini telah dan sedang membawa beberapa kesan buruk kepada rakyat biasa kita. Pelabur asing mahu sesebuah negara di mana gaji adalah rendah, pekerja mudah dikendalikan, kesatuan pekerja lemah dan tidak berkesan dan undang-undang yang melindungi pekerja adalah hanya seperti melepaskan batuk di tangga.

Oleh kerana kerajaan Malaysia telah menjadikan pelaburan asing (FDI) suatu aspek utama dalam strategi pembangunan ekonomi Negara, kerajaan kita sanggup mewujudkan suasana seperti ini untuk menarik pelabur koporat asing.

Oleh ini terdapatlah di Malaysia gaji harian serendah RM 16 sehari, 3 juta pekerja migran yang sanggup berkerja dengan gaji yang murah rendah dan juga usaha-usaha yang berterusan untuk melemahkan lagi undang-undang yang melindungi pekerja daripada dimangsakan oleh majikan mereka.

Kaum pelabur tidak suka dicukai. Untuk menarik lebih banyak pelaburan asing ke Malaysia kerajaan kita telah menurunkan cukai terhadap korporat dari 40% pada 1988 dan telah menurun ke 26% pada masa ini. Dalam belanjawan ini, cukai terhadap individu yang kaya di Malaysia dikurangkan juga ke 26%. Pada takat ini, cukai terhadap korporat dan individu telah menyumbang RM 47 billion kepada pendapatan kerajaan pada tahun 2009. Bila cukai terhadap lapisan kaya dikurangkan, pendapatan kerajaan juga akan berkurangan. Oleh itu kerajaan terpaksa mengurangkan pembekalan kemudahan asas kepada rakyat ataupun akan memindahkan beban cukai ke atas rakyat biasa dengan melaksanakan cukai “GST”. Kedua-dua langkah ini tentu akan menyusahkan rakyat biasa – tetapi kita diberitahu rakyat didahulukan”!

Cadangan dalam belanjawan 2010 untuk mempergiatkan lagi pelancungan kesihatan adalah suatu bukti lagi bahawa kerajaan kita ini tidak mempedulikan kebajikan rakyat biasa. Memang jelas kepada semua pemerhati bahawa masalah utama di Hospital Awam di Malaysia adalah kekurangan doktor pakar . Terlalu ramai doctor pakar telah berhijrah ke sektor swasta kerana pendapatan di Hospital Swasta jauh lebih lumayan. Perkembangan perniagaan hospital swasta yang akan dijanakan oleh pendatangan lebih ramai pesakit asing ke Malaysia akan mempercepatkan lagi penghijarahan doktor pakar ke sektor swasta. Inikah ertinya “Rakyat didahulukan”?

Adakah Perdana Menteri tidak menyedari kontradiksi antara slogan manis beliau dan cadangan-cadangan spesifik yang terkandung dalam belanjawan 2010? Ataupun adakah cogan kata manis itu hanya untuk memesong rakyat jelata sambil beliau bertungkus lumus membantu pihak korporat, lapisan kaya dan para kroni BN?

Dikeluarkan Oleh

Dr. Jeyakumar

Ahli Jawatankuasa Pusat PSM

Ahli Parlimen Sungai Siput

Tel : 019-5616807

Southeast Asia, iincluding Myanmar, to launch human rights watchdog at annual summit

By Denis D. Gray, Ap

October 19th, 2009

Southeast Asia to have rights monitor

BANGKOK — Southeast Asian nations unveil a landmark human rights watchdog this week, but critics charge that it will be both toothless and include in its membership one of the world’s worst human rights offenders — military-ruled Myanmar.

Myanmar is sure to prove a burden again as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations holds its annual summit, undermining the bloc’s international standing and efforts to forge free trade areas with the United States and Europe.

“While ASEAN may try to move ahead, Burma remains the elephant in the room. It absolutely undermines the spirit of what ASEAN could ever do,” says Debbie Stothard, an activist with the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma, as the country is also known.

The new body, the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, is unlikely to set free Myanmar’s 2,000 political prisoners, including democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, or curb other violations: It cannot punish member nations, and focuses on promotion rather than protection of human rights.

ASEAN leaders realize it’s just a start but say the commission can be given more teeth later.

And while members of the 10-nation bloc have recently escalated their criticism of Myanmar, the ASEAN summit will again act by consensus, avoid confrontations and maintain that the group’s engagement approach to Myanmar works better than the West’s sanctions and threats.

The three-day conference, which begins Friday, will also include talks with leaders of China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand. Preliminary meetings begin Wednesday.

On the agenda are discussions on how to achieve a European Union-style community by 2015, cooperation on education, food security and bio-energy development and the signing of an ASEAN Declaration on Climate Change.

The Thai government has thrown a security cordon around the summit venue, a beach resort 200 kilometers (120 miles) south of Bangkok, to prevent anti-government demonstrations.

Government spokesman Supachai Jaisamuth said Tuesday that about 18,000 policemen and soldiers would be deployed during the summit.

In April, protesters stormed an Asian summit in the seaside city of Pattaya, shutting down the meeting and forcing the evacuation of several leaders by helicopter and boat.

This time around, security forces have been empowered to impose curfews and restrict freedom of movement around Cha-Am resort and Bangkok.

Myanmar, which joined the 42-year-old bloc in 1997 despite international outrage, comes to the summit having recently released some political prisoners and allowed Suu Kyi to meet with Western diplomats and a government minister.

In a sharp break with former policy of shunning Myanmar, the U.S. government has announced it would engage the junta in direct, high-level talks while continuing its longtime economic sanctions.

But the ruling generals have also arrested more dissidents in recent weeks, and made it clear that nobody will dictate their course, not even its staunchest ally China, with which relations have soured since August when the junta launched an offensive against ethnic minorities along the Chinese border.

“Some powerful nations are resorting to various ways to pressure and influence our nation under various pretexts. However, the (military) government does not get frightened whenever intimidated,” said junta leader Senior Gen. Than Shwe last week.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last month urged ASEAN to take a tougher line with Myanmar. But in the end, ASEAN leaders are only likely to prod their fellow member to accelerate its so-called “road to democracy,” which includes elections in 2010.

“It is obvious that ASEAN is incapable of making any positive political change in the country. I don’t have any high hopes,” said Nyan Win, spokesman for Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party in Yangon, Myanmar.

ASEAN consists of Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

1 MALAYSIA – BEYOND THE HYPE

1 MALAYSIA – BEYOND THE HYPE
by Kua Kia Soong, Director of SUARAM, 20 October 2009
The defensive stance of Najib at the recent UMNO general assembly was not lost on most observers. He started off by saying, “We are not racist…” Since the launch of “1Malaysia”, the prime minister has asked for suggestions on how we can attain this elusive objective – what I call Malaysia’s “Year Zero” target.
Towards Year Zero
I often say that we in Malaysia have not even reached “Year Zero” for real nation building to begin. We have to first reach Year Zero when race-based political parties no longer exist in this fair land of ours before we can develop as a nation. Successive Barisan Nasional governments have dreamed up one caper after another to justify their racialist rule and the latest “1Malaysia” is yet another hollow hype.
Everyone can see that the race-based political parties in the Barisan Nasional are the biggest anachronism in a country that claims to aspire to be “1Malaysia”. Where else in the enlightened world community do you find political parties that discriminate against other “races” such as we find in UMNO, MCA and MIC? The floundering of these race-based parties since March 8^th 2008 is an indication that the hour of their extinction is nigh…
Can a Chinese Malaysian join UMNO? No! Can a Malay Malaysian join MCA? No! Can a non-Indian join MIC? No! Is this not racial discrimination?
But can a Malay Malaysian enroll in a Chinese-language school? Yes! Can a Chinese Malaysian enroll in a Tamil school? Yes! And there are more than 60,000 non-Chinese in Chinese primary schools of Malaysia today. The Chinese primary school at Fraser’s Hill is almost all Indian! There is no racial discrimination in these schools.
Do you remember the UMNO Minister of Higher Education who told the UMNO general assembly a few years back that as long as he was the minister, he would not allow a single Non-Bumiputra to be admitted to UiTM? That’s blatant racial discrimination in 21^st century Malaysia. Has this policy changed at UiTM with 1Malaysia?
Ratify the Convention against Racial Discrimination (CERD)
A simple test of whether or not the latest “1Malaysia” slogan is just another BN caper is for the Government to ratify the International Convention against all forms of Racial Discrimination. For a country that has chaired the UN Human Rights Commission and now espouses a “1Malaysia” slogan, there should be no problem for the government to take this first step on the path to non-racial redemption.
Racism and racial discrimination have been part of Malaysian political, economic, social and cultural realities ever since colonial times. Today, race has been so deeply institutionalised that it is a key factor determining benefits from government development policies, bids for business contracts, education policy, social policy, cultural policy, entry into educational institutions, discounts for purchasing houses and other official policies. Practically every aspect of Malaysian life is permeated by the so-called “Bumiputra policy” based on Malay-centrism. This is unabashedly spelled out by political leaders in the daily mass media in Malaysia.
Racism is an integral part of the Malaysian socio-political system. The ruling coalition is still dominated by racially-defined component parties, the United Malays National Organisation, the Malaysian Chinese Association and the Malaysian Indian Congress. These parties compete for electoral support from their respective “racial” constituencies by pandering to “racial” interests. Invariably, their racist inclinations are exposed at their respective party congresses.
Some opportunistic Opposition parties likewise pander to their constituencies using racialist propaganda to win electoral support and they have also contributed to the vicious circle of racial politics which has characterised Malaysian politics all these years.
UMNO, the ruling party continues to insist that “Malay Unity” and even “Malay Dominance” are essential for National Unity. “Malay dominance” is invariably used interchangeably with “Malay Privileges”, which these ruling Malay elite justify in the Malaysian Federal Constitution.
Would the UMNO leaders continue to use such racist concepts such as “Malay dominance” once we have ratified the CERD? Maybe that explains why Malaysia has up to now not yet ratified this basic international convention.
Consequently, we have witnessed the periodic controversies over the alleged “challenges to Malay Special Privileges” every time sections of Malaysian society call for non-racist solutions to Malaysian problems.
Class Interests in Affirmative Action
The ruling party UMNO prides itself on the supposedly “successful” affirmative action in favour of ‘bumiputras’. This has been the cornerstone of development plans since the New Economic Policy which started in 1971.
Consequently, while this populist “bumiputra” policy has been applied to the benefit of “bumiputras” as a whole, the new Malay ruling elite is strategically placed to reap the full benefits of this racially-based policy. Totally committed to capitalism and to privatisation, this policy has ensured that the Non-Malay local and foreign elite have also gained from the New Economic Policy since 1971. This class cohesion among the Malaysian ruling elite underpins the racialist politics which has characterised Malaysian society since Independence.
Non-discriminatory basis of the Constitution
It is time for Malaysians to reaffirm the non-discriminatory basis of the Federal Constitution and to uphold human rights principles which are strictly anti-racist.

Article 8 (1) of the Malaysian Constitution clearly spells out the principle of equality of all Malaysians while Article 12 (1) allows no discrimination against any citizens on the grounds of religion, race, descent or place of birth.

Article 153 on the special position of Malays was inspired by the affirmative action provisions of the Indian Constitution to protect the minority under-privileged class of harijans. Ours is fundamentally different from those provisions because the ethnic group in whose favour the discrimination operates in Malaysia happens to be the one in political control, the Malays.

At the time of Independence in 1957, four matters in relation to which the special position of Malays were recognised and safeguarded were: land; admission to public services; issuing of permits or licences for operation of certain businesses; scholarships, bursaries or other forms of aid for educational purposes.

The Federal Constitution certainly does not adhere to any notion of “Ketuanan Melayu” (Malay Dominance), which is a totally racist concept.

When the Constitutional (Reid) Commission was considering whether such a provision should be included in the 1957 Constitution, it made the following comments:

“Our recommendations are made on the footing that the Malays should be assured that the present position will continue for a substantial period, but that in due course the present preferences should be reduced and should ultimately cease so that there should be no discrimination between races or communities.” (Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission 1957, Govt Press, para 165, p.72)

The UMNO leaders have often tried to accuse critics of the New Economic Policy of being against Malay special privileges. In fact, they are ignoring the fact that these racially discriminatory policies did not exist in pre-1971 Malaysian society even though Malay special privileges were in existence between 1957 and 1971.

Affirmative Action Must be Transparent and Accountable

After the Tunku was deposed in 1971, the new Malay ruling elite felt that adequate opportunities had not been made available to them, especially in education and that there should be a larger proportion of Malays in the various sectors. Thus, in 1971 and under Emergency conditions, Article 153 was duly amended to introduce the quota system for Malays in institutions of higher learning. Clause (8A) specifically provided for the reservation of places for Bumiputeras in any University, College and other educational institutions.

Nevertheless, the quota system was not intended to be the totally non-transparent and non-accountable and unfair system we know it today:

Firstly, Article (8A) makes it clear that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong can only order a reservation of a proportion of such places for the Malays. It would therefore mean that the quota system is applicable only on a faculty basis and more importantly every faculty or institution should reserve places for students of every race. No faculty or institution under this provision could cater for the Malays alone to the exclusion of the other races. The existence of institutions such as UiTM and other junior colleges which have been practicing blatant racial exclusion is actually a wild aberration from Article 8A.

Visu Sinnadurai (“Rights in respect of education under the Malaysian Constitution” in Trindade & Lee edited ‘The Constituion of Malaysia’) has observed:

“Years after the implementation of this racial quota system, there was no trace of any such order being made by His Majesty nor was there evidence of any such order having been gazetted. Such a directive would thus seem to have been made by the officials of the Ministry of Education.”

Thus, it is not clear whether the quota system is made applicable on an institutional basis or on the basis of the total number of places available in a particular course of study of all the universities in the country. To apply the quota system on the total number of places available in any particular university will again be a wrong interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution.

Article 153 (8A) does not authorise the administrators of any university to refuse admission to any student of a particular race. It only allows a proportion of the places to be reserved for Malay students. On such reasoning, the constitutionality of institutions like UiTM, the Asasi Sains in the University of Malaya or Kursus Sains Matriculasi Sidang Akademik of the Universiti Sains Malaysia which cater only for Bumiputra students is doubtful.

From the above, it is clear that the question of the constitutionality of the quota system as it has been practised since 1971 especially in totally Bumiputera institutions has never been tested.

Affirmative Action Not a Carte Blanche for Racial Discrimination

We know what the original intentions of the “Malay Special Privileges” provision in the Merdeka Constitution were, but to maintain that it is a carte blanche for all manner of racial discrimination as we have witnessed since 1971 is a violation of the spirit of the Malaysian Constitution.

International law sets major limits on affirmative action measures. Notably, affirmative action policies must be carefully controlled and not be permitted to undermine the principle of non-discrimination itself nor violate human rights. Holding the equality principle uppermost, the raison detre and reasonableness for differential treatment must be proven.

Another important criterion to ensure successful affirmative action and synonymous with international law is that such special measures should be introduced for a limited duration as was suggested by the Reid Commission in its Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission in 1957.

A consequence of the so-called affirmative action policies up to now is that for the poor of all ethnic communities, including the indigenous peoples in Malaysia, these objectives of wealth redistribution for their benefit have not been met. Worse, the poorest community remains the Orang Asli of Peninsula Malaysia, the Original People of Malaysia who are not even considered “Bumiputra” under the Federal Constitution.

Just 10 years after the NEP was implemented, the 1980 Census showed that more than 80 per cent of al government executive officers were Malay; Malays held 75 per cent of the publicly-funded tertiary education places; and 96 per cent of FELDA settlers were Malay. By 1990, it was widely held by observers that the wealth restructuring policy objective was very much on target if nominee companies listed under “other Malaysians” were analysed. It is also well-known that many of these nominee companies have been formed by the bumiputra elite.

Elite Cohesion in the Barisan Nasional

All the same, these figures showing ownership of equity capital, however distorted, also reveal that the rich Non-Malay elite have done quite well under the NEP. This perhaps accounts for the elite cohesion which has held the Barisan Nasional coalition together for so long. The evidence further shows that the NEP’s “wealth restructuring” has mainly resulted in increased wealth concentration and greater intra-ethnic inequality.

By the mid-Eighties, it was found that the top 40 shareholders in the country owned 63 per cent of the total number of shares in public companies; the top 4.4 per cent of investors in the Amanah Saham Nasional had savings amounting to more than 70 per cent of ASN’s total investments.

By 1990, the realities of the racially discriminatory quota system in education were as follows: An average of 90 per cent of loans for polytechnic certificate courses, 90 per cent of scholarships for Diploma of Education courses, 90 per cent of scholarships/loans for degree courses taken in the country, almost all scholarships/loans for degree courses taken overseas were given to Bumiputeras. Regarding the enrolment of students in residential schools throughout the Eighties, 95 per cent of these were Bumiputera. The enrolment in MARA’s Lower Science College, Maktab Sains MARA was almost 100 per cent Bumiputera throughout the Eighties.

Racial discrimination in the realm of culture is seen not only in education policy but also in the discrimination against Non-Malay cultures and religions in the National Cultural Policy. Non-Muslims face obstacles in their freedom to build places of worship and access to burial grounds, among other complaints.

Policy Proposals for 1Malaysia

Racism and racial discrimination have dominated Malaysian society for far too long. Now that the Malay ruling elite has clearly gained control of the Malaysian economy, it is high time for a new consensus based on non-racial factors such as class, sector or need to justify affirmative action.

It is time for all Malaysians who hunger for peace and freedom to outlaw racism and racial discrimination from Malaysian society once and for all and to build real unity based on adherence to human rights, equality and the interests of the Malaysian masses.

These proposals which I submitted to the World Conference against Racism and Racial Discrimination in Durban, 2001 are still applicable today, an indication that we have not yet reached “Year Zero”:

· Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Political Institutions

1. Political parties formed on the basis of “race” to further the interests of their respective “races” should be outlawed as such practices are inconsistent with international conventions against racism and racial discrimination;

2. Ratify all the international covenants and UN Conventions that have not been ratified by the Malaysian Government to ensure that all legislations in the country abide by international human rights standards;

3. Enact a Race Relations Act and institute an Equal Opportunities Commission to combat racism, racialism, and racial discrimination in all Malaysian institutions;

4. Delineation of constituencies must be based on the principle of “one person, one vote” and there should not be wide discrepancies between the number of voters in different constituencies;

5. Reintroduce elected local government so that problems of housing, health, schools, public order, etc. can be solved in non-racial ways;

6. Ensure that there is no racial discrimination in the Civil and Armed Services and every ethnic community has equal chance of promotion;

7. Establish an Independent Broadcasting Authority which is fair to all ethnic communities in Malaysia;

· Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Economic development

8. Full transparency and accountability to ensure that contracts and shares are not dispensed on a racial basis through nepotism, cronyism or corruption;

9. No bailing out of failed private businesses under the guise of affirmative action;

10. Reduce income disparity between the rich and poor regardless of race, religion, gender, disability or political affiliation;

11. Develop small and medium industries, the backbone of national industrialization without racial discrimination;

12. Support all sectors including pig farmers during times of crisis;

13. Distribute land equally to farmers of all ethnic communities;

14. Replace the racially-based quota system with a means-tested sliding scale mechanism to award deserving entrepreneurs;

Ø Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Social Development

15. Modernise the 450 or so New Villages in the country which have existed for more than 50 years, in which many of our small and medium industries are located and where basic infrastructure is inadequate;

16. Improve the living conditions (eg. a guaranteed minimum monthly wage) and basic amenities such as housing, education and health facilities of plantation workers;

17. Ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and members of their families;

18. Set up an Equal Opportunities Employment Commission to address all forms of discrimination in the workplace;

19. Gazette all communal lands of the Orang Asli and other indigenous peoples so that they can control their own land resources and choose their own way of life;

20. Enact laws to confirm the rights of urban settlers and obligations of developers to provide fair compensation and alternative housing to urban settlers;

21. Cater to the special needs of women, children, senior citizens and the disabled;

22. Provide more recreational facilities for the youth regardless of race to allow them to develop positive and healthy lifestyles and to encourage tolerance and awareness of cultural diversity and equality;

23. Establish a housing development authority to direct construction of low and medium-cost public housing for the needy irrespective of race;

24. Poverty eradication programmes to benefit the poor of all ethnicity;

Ø Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Education

25. Special assistance based on NEED by under-privileged sectors and CLASS and NOT on race;

26. Institute a means-tested sliding scale of education grants and loans for all who qualify to enter tertiary institutions regardless of race, religion or gender;

27. Recognise educational certificates, diplomas or degrees based on strictly academic grounds and to be dealt with by the National Accreditation Board and not politicised;

28. Build more schools using the mother tongue of Malaysian minorities as long as there is a demand for them in any catchment of these ethnic communities and provide financial allocations to these fairly;

29. Establish a long-term solution to the crisis of teacher shortage in the Chinese and Tamil schools;

30. Amend the Education Act 1996 to reflect the national education policy as originally stated in the Education Ordinance 1957 ensuring the use, teaching and development of the mother tongue of all Malaysian ethnic communities;

31. Make available compulsory Pupils’ Own language (POL) classes within the normal school curriculum as long as there are five pupils of any ethnic community in any school;

Ø Non-Racial Solutions to Malaysian Cultural Policy

32. Promote knowledge, respect and sensitivity among Malaysians on cultures, religions and ethnicity;

33. Gazette all places of prayer and worship for all ethnic communities in their areas of domicile free from any encumbrances or arbitrary restrictions;

34. Include all works by Malaysians regardless of the language in which they are written in national artistic and literary awards and scholarships;

35. All ethnic Malaysian cultures to be fairly represented in official cultural bodies and the media.

Malaysian police shoot dead armed Thai woman

Asia-Pacific News

Oct 14, 2009, 10:00 GMT

Kuala Lumpur - Malaysian police shot and killed a Thai woman believed to be part of a criminal gang wanted for armed robberies, kidnappings and arms smuggling in the northern state of Penang, police said Wednesday.
Police had cornered the suspect following a high-speed car chase late Tuesday, when the 34-year-old woman began firing at officers, state police chief Ayub Yaakob said.
'When she was asked to surrender she shot at police and police returned fire and shot her dead,' Ayub was quoted as saying the official Bernama news agency.
He said police found a pistol and several rounds of ammunition in the suspect's car, adding that the woman was believed to be linked to the gang's leader.
'Investigation also revealed that the gang travelled frequently to the neighbouring country and were believed to bring in arms. They are a dangerous gang and would do anything as they had firearms,' Ayub said.
He said police were tracking down four other gang members.

Myanmar: Burmese migrants struggle in Malaysia

Friday, October 16, 2009

By IRIN

In the tourist city of Penang in northern Malaysia, the Buddhist temple has become the locus of social and economic support for migrants from Myanmar.

"l was a contractor at home, but left Burma [Myanmar] 19 years ago, arriving in Malaysia after crossing from Thailand," said Aung Tin, a foreman on the construction site of a new pagoda.

Penang is one of Malaysia's main economic and industrial centres, and the Burmese Buddhist temple provides social and religious support for the Burmese community.

At the construction site, all 14 staff supervised by Aung Tin - who would only talk to IRIN using a pseudonym - are Burmese migrants.

"I left as soon as I could after the 1990 elections," said Aung Tin. "The economic situation in the country was bad for years before then, and I had not been able to generate enough work. When I saw that the army was going to keep things the same, it became clear that I could not make a living,"

In 1990, Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) won the last election held in Myanmar, but the military rulers overturned the result, and have run the country since.

Aung Tin left behind a wife and two sons, whom he has not seen since. His boys are now grown up, and like their father, want to leave their home country.

When Cyclone Nargis devastated Myanmar in 2008, his family's home was one of more than three million destroyed. "All my money was sent home to help repair my house," he said.

Employment magnet

Myanmar is one of the most impoverished countries in the region, and ranks 138 out of 182 countries surveyed in the UN Development Programme's (UNDP) 2009 Human Development Report.

Limited employment prospects encourage many to look for opportunities in neighbouring countries. Thailand is the main destination for Burmese workers, but Malaysia is also favoured, along with Bangladesh and India, according to a 2008 UN report on migration in East and Southeast Asia.

Accurate figures of how many Burmese are leaving Myanmar are difficult to obtain because much of the movement is irregular, say civil society groups.

Malaysia is heavily dependent on foreign labour for its construction and plantation industries, and is a magnet for migrant workers in the region. According to government statistics, there were 92,020 registered Burmese workers in 2006, comprising 5 percent of the total registered workers.

Rights groups, however, say there are also thousands of unregistered Burmese in the country; the Kuala Lumpur-based Burma Workers' Rights Protection Committee estimates there are about 500,000 registered and unregistered migrants from Myanmar in Malaysia.

And as of May 2009, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) said it had registered 50,000 people of concern from Myanmar, including refugees and asylum-seekers.

Under threat

Aung Tin's story is similar to those of many migrant workers in Malaysia. He had a work permit originally but has veered back and forth between legal and illegal status since.

Many Burmese find work at construction sites, factories and food outlets, according to Malaysian rights groups. If they were recruited or brought in to work at factories, they are often provided with accommodation. But while some employers provide proper living facilities, others force their workers to live in overcrowded and cramped conditions.

Rights groups say many Burmese migrants as well as refugees do not carry legal documents, and face arrest, detention and deportation by the Malaysian authorities.

Deportees, both migrant workers and refugees, are then vulnerable to human traffickers at the Malaysia-Thailand border, who demand huge sums of money to help them get back into Malaysia, they say.

"Another problem that the Burmese face is extortion from the police," said Temme Lee, refugee coordinator for Malaysian rights group Suaram.

"Due to their lack of proper documentation, Burmese are often stopped by police. The police threaten to arrest them and demand money from them," she told IRIN.

Despite his perilous and often haphazard situation, Aung Tin is one of the better-off migrants. He earns 50 Malaysian ringgit (US$14.80) per day as foreman at the construction project.

"The monks look after us here, and try to give us work," he said.

sr/ey/mw

We say it again: Support for Porr project wrong

We say it again: Support for Porr project wrong

SM Mohamed Idris
Oct 12, 09
5:42pm

We refer to the letter Porr: Penang gov't still listening.

Cheong Yin Fan, press secretary to the Penang chief minister, protests too much when she chides CAP for criticising the CM Lim Guan Eng for his stance on the Penang Outer Ring Road (Porr) project and advises CAP to 'rely on facts and not hearsay, substantiated reports and not superficial conclusions'.

It is an incontrovertible fact that Lim has all along supported the Porr project. When the project was shelved in 2008 by the federal government, Lim protested strongly against this decision and mounted a campaign to revive the project.

When on March 3 this year, the then prime minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi replied in parliament in response to a question by Lim that, of the three projects in Penang shelved by the federal government (the monorail, Porr and the Mengkuang Dam), only the last was being revived, a disappointed Lim issued a press release stating that 'As chief minister, I feel the failure of the federal government to implement the ring road will bring difficulty to the people by letting traffic congestion become worse, especially as the Second Penang Bridge is to be built by mid-2012.'

When the project was recently revived by the federal government, he again expressed support for the project. According to a report in The Edge Financial Daily (Sept 9): 'Asked if the state government was in favour of the project, Lim said the state government welcomed any project which would help reduce traffic congestion and generate economic growth and revenue for the state'.

It is this same report which highlighted Lim's views on public consultation on this project. Asked whether the state government would consult the public on Porr, the report quotes Lim as saying that 'public consultation had already been held, and there were differing views. We do not want to have a closed mind on such projects. Let us have our discussion with the federal government first,' he added.

If after all this strong expression of commitment to this project and single-minded pursuit of it by Lim, Cheong is now trying to persuade us that the Penang state government has yet to decide whether to proceed with Porr and that Lim has reaffirmed that public consultation would still continue (notwithstanding the report to the contrary), she has a lot of persuading to do. Especially the claim that the state government does not 'have a closed mind on such projects.'

Let us be clear here of the real issue. The issue is not the terms imposed by the federal government for the project, but the project itself, which will result in more motorised traffic being brought on to the island.

We reiterate that Penang does not need the Porr or another road project that is going to compromise sustainable transport options. There must be a comprehensive and rational transport strategy for Penang. The thrust must be on reducing private vehicles on the island instead of encouraging the same.

We believe that our vision for a sustainable transport system can be realised if there is political will to do so.

The writer is president, Consumers Association of Penang.

UN Report Speaks Up for Migrant Workers

---

By SIMON ROUGHNEEN

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

---

At the global launch of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) 2009 Human Development Report in Bangkok on Monday, Thailand's Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the report's findings provide “guidance for policymakers around the world.”

The UNDP report calls on countries to focus on the economic benefits that migration can bring to a host country and recommends that recipient countries allow more unskilled workers to move more freely, based on transparent procedures, with access to education and health services, and with reduced transaction costs.

Thailand hosts an estimated 2 to 3 million Burmese economic migrants. The push and pull factors determining Burmese migration to Thailand are stark.

Discussing migration issues in Southeast Asia, the report said, “Someone born in Thailand can expect to live seven more years, to have almost three times as many years of education, and save almost eight times as much as someone born in Myanmar [Burma].”

Thailand has provided a better life for Burmese fleeing a dormant, state-dominated and resource-driven economy at home. Seventy percent of Burmese are thought to be subsistence farmers and many families rely on remittances sent home by migrants to survive.

Burmese emigrants remitted an estimated US $125million in 2007, according to the UNDP report.

Often Burmese migrants in Thailand take jobs that Thais do not want. However, as outlined in a paper by Bryant Yuan Fu Yang in the Spring 2009 edition of the Thailand Law Journal, some Thais see Burmese as taking away jobs from locals.

“Since Burmese migrants, especially the undocumented ones, are willing to work for very low wages and in unsafe environments, many view them as driving down working conditions,” said Bryant Yuan Fu Yang.

However, the Thai economy has grown strongly since 1997, at least until the onset of the global economic crisis in September 2008, and it is widely-accepted that the influx of cheap Burmese labor enabled many Thai businesses to keep costs down and retain competitiveness in an increasingly global market.

This fits in with the overall findings discussed by UNDP. “Migration brings significant benefits across the board, which could be further enhanced by better policies at home and abroad,” according to the lead author of the report, Jeni Klugman.

However, it appears that Thailand's policies do not yet match up to the recommendations in the UNDP report. In his speech on Monday, PM Abhisit acknowledged that migration “brings with it risks in terms of human smuggling and trafficking.”

A recent US State Department report on human trafficking named Malaysia as one of 17 countries of concern and though the report commended Thailand for its efforts to curb trafficking, it mentioned media reports that alleged that Burmese migrants in Malaysia are trafficked into Thailand.

To prevent this, and to regularize the situation for Burmese migrants in Thailand, many of whom work illegally, the PM said, “We realize that the most effective way to protect these migrants is to legalize their status and bring them into the formal labor market.”

One of the mechanisms being put in place is the nationality verification process for Burmese migrants in Thailand, which is based on an agreement signed by the Royal Thai Government and the Burmese junta in 2004. Implementation was delayed as the junta insisted that verification take place in Burma—requiring all Burmese migrants to cross the border to register for the process.

Both sides agreed to allow verification to take place in border towns in Burma, and all Burmese migrants in Thailand must complete the process by February 2010 or face deportation.

Migrant advocacy groups are lobbying against the process, which they see as unwieldy, and potentially compromising the security of migrants from ethnic minorities, and their families living in Burma. Many migrants do not want to return to Burma for fear of questioning or detention by Burmese officials, say rights advocates.

According to a joint press release issued by the the State Enterprise Workers Relations Confederation (SERC), the Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF) and the Thai Labour Solidarity Committee (TLSC), Thai authorities have not informed Burmese migrants or NGOs in sufficient detail about the process.

Andy Hall directs the Migrant Justice Programme at HRDF. He told The Irrawaddy that “the nationality verification process goes against everything being recommended in the UNDP report.”

According to the release, “Migrants can submit biographical information to brokers to get called to verify their nationality in Burma and obtain a passport within months, or instead submit information formally to employment offices and receive a slower response.

Formal government costs are low (600 to 2,100 baht/US $17 to $60) but broker fees are unregulated and high (starting around 7,500 baht/US $200). RTG officials often ‘recommend’ private brokers to speed up the process.”

Migrant advocates also fear that traffickers will exploit the nationality verification process, undermining the positive steps taken by Thailand to curb human trafficking.

East Timor Falls in UN Development Rankings
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

DILI, East Timor — Tiny East Timor reached a new low in the UN's annual measurement of human development, falling even further down the list of 182 countries measured for overall quality of life.

The desperately poor Southeast Asian nation of 1.1 million people fell to 162 on the list, compared to 150 in the 2007/2008 Human Development Index. It came in at 140 in 2005, the first year it was included.

The UN Development Program began tracking the index in 1990, weighing average life expectancy, income and literacy.

East Timor, which broke from Indonesia in 1999, has one of the highest rates of foreign assistance in the world at more than $8,000 per person. Roughly $8.7 billion has been spent by the United Nations, foreign donors and the Australian military over the past decade.

The 2009 Human Development Index ranking is based on data from 2007, a year after East Timor descended into chaos as police and army forces battled in the streets of the capital, Dili. About 15 percent of the population ended up in camps and the government was forced from power.

East Timor ranked 122 out of 135 countries for the income component. Overall, it fared better than just 19 African countries and Afghanistan. It came below Pakistan, Sudan and Congo.

Norway topped the list, above the United States at 13, while Niger was ranked last.

'Migrant workers treated poorly'

'Migrant workers treated poorly'

Wed, Oct 07, 2009 The New Straits Times

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - Malaysia may be exceptionally accommodating to foreigners but it appears this does not extend to migrant workers. According to the United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Report 2009, Malaysia fared poorly in its treatment of migrant workers. United Nations Malaysia resident coordinator Kamal Malhotra said it was clear that immediate action was needed to reverse the international perception of Malaysia's policy towards such workers. "There will be serious repercussions for both migrants and Malaysian society as a whole if the situation is left unchecked," Malhotra said at the launch yesterday of the report which was entitled "Overcoming barriers: Human mobility and development". He said the findings of the report should be of special concern to policymakers. The report included the results of a survey carried out in 46 countries with regards to attitudes towards migrants. He said the report indicated that migrant labour was perceived as a threat to local employment and that this became exaggerated in times of economic uncertainty. "As such, we strongly urge more education on the role played by migrants as well as their rights by the relevant government bodies, civil society groups and the mass media," added Malhotra, who is also the UNDP resident representative for Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei Darussalam. Report director Jeni Klugman, who presented the report, said recommendations to the government included ensuring basic human rights of migrant workers, such as protection against arbitrary arrests. THE NEW STRAITS TIMES

Corruption is corruption!

Corruption is corruption!

Wednesday, 07 October 2009 18:11

Corruption is corruption, Mr Prime Minister. There are no two ways about it. You cannot minimise the crime by camouflaging the offence under some other label. Neither can you make it disappear by simply declaring “that the offence committed by Isa was not an offence under the law”. It is not true that Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad only breached party ethics. That would be a lie. He was found guilty of indulging in money politics to secure his victory in the Umno party elections for the post of Vice-President in 1994. He won the post with the highest number of votes. In fact, he wasn’t satisfied with the number of votes he garnered. He then quipped that he expected to win his position with an even higher majority! Following his victory, complaints were lodged with the Umno Disciplinary Board accusing Isa of having resorted to money to secure his victory. The Disciplinary Board instituted an investigation to probe into the allegations of money politics. It called up witnesses to collect evidence and establish proof of the allegation. Isa was given ample opportunity to defend himself. After what must be deemed as a very thorough and fair investigation, the Disciplinary Board found him guilty. He was stripped of his position and suspended for six years, a two-term period. On appeal, his sentence was drastically reduced to three years, a 50 per cent reduction. Isa was such a powerful force within Umno with wide ranging influence. It would have been very difficult to find such a personality guilty but the evidence surely must have been overwhelming that the Board had no other alternative except to convict him. Eminent people sat on the Disciplinary Board among whom were Tan Sri Zaki Azmi, the present Chief Justice, and Tengku Ahmad Rithaudeen, a one time long-serving cabinet minister and lawyer. So the verdict has total credibility and substance to quash any question of impropriety in their decision. For the PM to claim that the offence was merely a technical one and that it was not an offence under the law is preposterous. Money politics is a criminal offence, it is an act of corruption, and if the PM has any other notion, then this matter should be referred to the MACC to seek their professional opinion! It is rather disappointing that the MACC did not move in to investigate Isa for corruption. If an Opposition person was embroiled in similar circumstances, there would be no doubt as to how the MACC would have acted. Umno did Isa a favour by not referring Isa’s money politics to the MACC. If that was done then, today Umno will not have this shameful episode of offering a corrupt politician as its candidate at the Bagan Pinang by-election. P Ramakrishnan President 7 October 2009

Sunday October 4, 2009

Manoharan now a free man

SHAH ALAM: Former Internal Security Act (ISA) detainee and Hindraf lawyer M. Manoharan is completely free of the restrictions placed on his release.

Selangor police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar said he was informed by the Home Ministry that all the conditions for Manoharan’s release have been withdrawn.

No action would be taken against Manoharan when he returned (from Tanzania), DCP Khalid told reporters after officiating at a crime prevention programme at Universiti Teknologi Mara here yesterday.

He was asked to comment on the status of Manoharan, who is also Kota Alam Shah assemblyman.

When contacted, Manoharan’s wife S. Pushpaneela said her husband received a letter from the Home Minister on the day of his departure for Tanzania last Wednesday, saying he was free from the restriction order.

Thailand to impose Internal Security Act to ensure ASEAN Summit security

15:36, October 02, 2009

Increases the bookmark

twitter	facebook
digg	Google
Windowslive	Delicious
buzz	friendfeed
Linkedin	diigo
reddit	stumbleupon

Thailand's government announced Friday a plan to enforce the Internal Security Act (ISA) during the forthcoming 15th ASEAN Summit and related meetings.

On Friday morning, the government led by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and involved security authorities held a meeting to discuss about security steps to be applied to ensure law and order at the 15th ASEAN Summit's venues, Thai News Agency reported.

In mid-April this year, the ASEAN Summit and related meetings in central resort town Pattaya were canceled due to violent protests by thousands of members of the Thai anti-government United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD).

Thailand, which is the 2009 chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), will also host the 15th ASEAN Summit and related meetings during Oct. 23-25 in central beach resort town Cha-am and Hua Hin.

However, the ISA law will be imposed from Oct. 12 ahead of the start of the ASEAN Summit as it will be enforced until Oct. 27,army chief General Anupong Paochinda said after the meeting.

The ISA law will be imposed in nine sub-districts of Cha-am, while four other sub-districts in Hua Hin will be also under the ISA law's imposition, General Anupong said.

A combined security force will be deployed to ensure law and order there, General Anupong said.

Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, in charges of security affairs, said the government will not let anything to disturb the ASEAN Summit and related meetings as it happened in the past.

Also, Suthep said the government will impose the ISA law in capital Bangkok, if new rallies by the UDD protestors show a sign of chaos.

From Sept. 18 to 22, the ISA law had been enforced by the government at Dusit district in the center of capital Bangkok in a bid to ensure law and order during a mass anti-government rally by the UDD group on Sept. 19.

Hence, Suthep said the government can impose the ISA law again in Dusit.

The Thai-government plans to explain about the ISA law's enforcement at the ASEAN Summit and related meetings' venues on a state-run television on Friday.