Charles Santiago

Source : NST

Charles Santiago says the Home Ministry’s credibility is at stake

STOP being in denial and investigate the sale of illegal immigrants at the Malaysia-Thailand border to human trafficking syndicates.

Aegile Fernandez says she received calls from illegal migrants

Datuk N. Siva Subramaniam says evidence is missing

Klang member of parliament Charles Santiago and non-governmental organisation Tenaganita, who made the call, urged the government to recognise the issue and set up an independent commission to investigate.

Santiago, who raised the issue in Parliament last year, says the Immigration Department must be transparent and reveal the process of deportation in the wake of accusations by the US Senate that Malaysian officials are involved in human trafficking of illegal immigrants, especially of Myanmar nationals, at the Malaysia-Thailand border.

He also criticised the Home Ministry’s response last year that a special committee formed to investigate the allegations had cleared Immigration officials of the accusations.

“The credibility of the Home Ministry’s committee is at stake now. They have failed. There is a need to set up an independent committee to investigate,” he says, adding that the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suha-kam) can be part of the committee or conduct the investigation.
Santiago says he has personally heard of the ordeal some Myanmar men went through when they were sold at the border and had to pay their traffickers to come back to Malaysia.

Tenaganita Anti-Trafficking in Persons coordinator Aegile Fernandez says the authorities must address the issue quickly.

“This is organised crime and we need an independent commission to investigate, not have co-workers investigate each other,” she says, adding that the United States had came to know of the issue while interviewing refugees who had resettled there.

She says Tenaganita also received calls from immigrants claiming to be at the border and asking for help to come up with the money to pay the traffickers.

“They usually asked bet-ween RM1,500 and RM2,500. In some cases, the traffickers asked the victims to deposit the money into a Malaysian bank account.”

Fernandez, who alleges that Immigration is behind the whole operation, adds: “Who else has access to the detainees at the detention camps and is directly involved in sending them back?”

She says the immigrants are usually taken by lorry to the Thai border at night where men are waiting to take them away.

She says they will be given handphones to call their families and friends to get money for their release. They are usually given a week to get the money, failing which, they will be sold as forced labour or prostitutes.

“We have a case of a woman who was repeatedly raped because her family took a week to send the money.”

Suhakam commissioner Datuk N. Siva Subramaniam says the body has received several such complaints in the past two years.

“The issue has even been raised at international forums but it is difficult to compile the evidence.”

He calls on the authorities to investigate and take action against those responsible.

Source : Malaysiakini

Jan 19, 09 6:29pm

Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar today acknowledged that many Burmese nationals have entered this country via the Malaysia-Thai border but denied that there is human trafficking.

Certain quarters had alleged that human trafficking activities involving Burmese nationals were going on in this country although they could not prove that they existed, he told reporters.

“Where did these foreigners get their information? They assume that they know more than we do. 

“If there is proof, action can be taken. Don’t make wild accusations,” he was quoted as saying by Bernama.

The minister said the authorities in this country must always cooperate with their counterparts in the neighbouring country to ensure that there is no incursion by foreigners into this country while illegal immigrants should be repatriated.

“We have to see how they enter the country. If there is a jetty at Bukit Batu Puteh (in Perlis), we can solve a lot of problems. Some people smuggle in goods while some smuggle in human beings,” he said.

Syed Hamid said a jetty was needed to enable the Malaysian security forces to carry out more effective patrols in Bukit Batu Puteh, a coastal area near the border.

‘Refugees for sale’

The United States Senate is currently probing a ‘refugees for sale’ scam in which Malaysian immigration officials have been implicated.

Last week, opposition MP Charles Santiago called on the government not to brush aside this allegation.

Previously, said Santiago, the home minister had responded in ‘typical fashion’ in Parliament on the matter by announcing the formation of a special committee to investigate the claims.

As predicted, it was “found” that immigration officials were not involved in trafficking of the Burmese or other refugees.

This came despite testimonials to the contrary from numerous migrant rights’ non-governmental organisations as well as the victims themselves.

“Either Syed Hamid is naive enough to buy the story dished out by the Immigration Department, which had set-up a special team to investigate its own officers or he is desperate to ensure Malaysia does not receive bad press worldwide,” Santiago told Malaysiakini.

Press Statement by Member of Parliament Klang Charles Santiago in Parliament on 18^th June 2009

The US State Department Annual ‘Trafficking in Persons Report 2009′, condemnation of Malaysia should not come as a surprise. In fact, the Malaysian authorities should have anticipated it coming.

The Malaysian government was put on notice a year ago on active trafficking in persons in the country by local NGOs, questions raised in parliament, political parties and two months ago by the Richard Lugar (the US Ranking Minority Member) report entitled ‘Trafficking and Extortion of Burmese Migrants in Malaysia and Southern Thailand’

a) Ministry of Home Affairs – Lies and Denial

On 3^rd May, 2008, an NTV 7 documentary entitled ‘Refugee for Sale’ exposed the selling and trafficking of Burmese refugees and migrants in detention camps in the Malaysia-Thai border. The report implicated Malaysian immigration officials as part of the network involved in human trafficking.

In July 2008, I asked a parliamentary question on this scandal and the Ministry of Home Affairs replied by saying that a special committee would be established to investigate the accusation and would get further information from NTV 7.

In October, 2008, I posited a second question on the outcome of the special committee’s investigation and was told that there was no basis to the accusations that immigration officials were working together with traffickers.

Was the NTV 7s producer contacted by the special committee? No. The producer was not contacted for further information and evidence. Thus what was the basis of saying that there was no basis to the accusation?

Clearly, the then Home Minister misled Parliament and Nation.

In fact, the Lugar report which outlined numerous instances of collaboration between immigration officials and traffickers was also met with the similar denial.

This complete shirking of responsibility in the face of convincing evidence reflects poorly on the integrity of Malaysian institutions. This is another feature of a failing state.

b) Trafficking of Malaysian Women and Children Locally and Abroad Highlighted in the TIP Report.

The report identifies Malaysia as a destination, transit and source of human slavery.

There are two sets of trafficked people: a) women and children for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation; and, b) men, women and children for the purpose of forced labor.

Malaysian women and girls especially from indigenous communities are trafficked within the country for labor and commercial sexual exploitation.

Furthermore, Malaysian Chinese women including indigenous women from rural areas are trafficked abroad to destinations such as Singapore, Hong Kong, France, and the UK for commercial and sexual exploitation.

The report states that local employment agencies including immigration authorities actively collaborate with human traffickers as in the Thai-Malaysia borders involving Burmese refugees and migrant workers in detention camps.

The report categorically notes that the Malaysian government does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.

Malaysia has been placed in Tier 3 which has ramifications for securing international loans from multilateral financial bodies and eliminates all opportunities for civil servants to take advantage of Fulbright Scholarships and other educational and cultural exchanges with the US.

Malaysia’s credibility on the international stage is at stake. If the Home Ministry fails to take decisive action, Malaysia bears the humiliation of being lumped with North Korea, Burma, Sudan and Zimbabwe in human trafficking

I call upon the newly minted Minister of Home Affairs to immediately set-up an independent task force including civil society organizations or a parliamentary select committee to address these troubling concerns.

Also, the government should actively implement the Anti-trafficking Law, ASEAN’s Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers and the immediate ratification of the UN 1967 Refugee Convention and the 2000 UN TIP (Trade in Persons) Protocol for the proper legal recognition of refugees within our borders – with a view to protect and promote the rights of migrants and refugees in the country and region.

The complicity of Malaysian authorities in human slavery should be an embarrassment to all Malaysians.

Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament Klang

Vice-Chairman of Selangor DAP

016-6267797

Source : RFA

2009-04-29

A Burmese man describes how he was forced to beat other illegal workers by a Malaysian trafficking gang to buy his own freedom.

RFA/Kyaw Min Htun

Ko Wunna, photo taken in Kedah, Malaysia, April 6, 2009.

Ko Wunna is a 28-year-old resident of Burma’s former capital, Rangoon, who was trafficked to Malaysia by gangs importing illegal workers in a constantly revolving racket in which, former participants say, the Malaysian police are also complicit.

Here, Ko Wunna speaks to RFA Burmese service reporter Kyaw Min Htun about his experiences over three months working for a trafficking gang in the region in and around northern Malaysia’s Kedah province, which borders Songkhla and Yala provinces in Thailand. He reveals that illegal migrants who don’t come under the aegis of one gang are vulnerable to worse exploitation by others.

The Malaysian government has recently pledged to investigate claims made by many other Burmese like Ko Wunna.

“I was arrested [by Malaysian immigration authorities] on Nov. 15, 2008 and was sentenced to jail for two months and one stroke of the lash. I was released on Jan. 2, 2009. After I was released from prison, the Thai human traffickers [to whom Ko Wunna says he was then sold by immigration authorities] told me to buy myself ‘back in’ [to work in Malaysia] from the border town of Changlun. But they wanted 2050 ringgit (U.S. $570) to buy myself back in. I couldn’t give them that much money. Those who could pay were able to leave [the trafficking gang].”

“Seven of us were left behind. We told them that we would work our way out. But they would not accept it. They said if we could not pay we would be sold to an Indonesian boat under a five-year plan. What we heard about this five-year plan was that if we were unable to work, they would kill us, beat us to death. We were afraid, so we escaped in the night. The traffickers and their Thai boss chased us. We fled into the forest.”

“In the morning we saw a tea shop and asked for help. The people in the tea shop asked what nationality we were. We told them we were from Burma. They said we should contact the police. We thought about it. The traffickers chasing us had iron rods and were closing in on us. They also had motorcycles and if we crossed the street they would have tried to hit us with their cars. And if we were caught by the Thais we knew we would be dead. So we decided it would be better to be arrested, so we surrendered to the police.”

Police ‘took money from traffickers’

“The police told us to wait while they telephoned their officer in charge. The police told us to sit and wait at the tea shop. While we were waiting the police officer arrived. But it seemed that the police officer and the traffickers had done business in the past, because one of the traffickers came along with the police officer. They told us to get into the car. The police officer himself drove the car while the trafficker sat next to him. They took us to the same place that we had been kept before.”

“After leaving us there, the police left, after receiving 2,000 ringgit from the traffickers. There were four traffickers. They kicked us with their boots. Later three more of them arrived with a gun and a metal chain. They hit us, but not on our faces where the injuries could be seen. They also used knuckle-dusters to hit us on our bodies.”

“After we were caught again, the price [to leave the gang] went up to 3,000 ringgit. They said that if we did not pay the 3,000, the Thai bosses would cut our legs off as an example to the others… I was concerned so I contacted my home, but they were also in a tight situation in terms of money. So I did not ask for help from them again.”

Ordered to beat new arrivals

“There was no way I could pay the money they asked for. So they told me to work for the payment. I agreed and did what they told me to do. After that they did not look after the new arrivals, they just kept them in that big house with just me looking after the new arrivals … The traffickers gave me a phone, a book, and a ball-point pen. I had to register their names, their destination, and the phone numbers the new arrivals were calling. Those who could pay the money were brought forward first.”

“The traffickers first showed me how to deal with the new arrivals. If they could pay 2,500 ringgit they were allowed to make the telephone call. If they could not pay, or if they said they would pay at the end of the month or later, I was told to hit them across their faces. Since they asked me to hit them, I had to do it.”

“It was not easy, as I myself had gone through the same fate in the past. But I had to hit them because if I did not do as I was told they would turn against me. So I had to hit them a bit in front of the trafficker. But after the traffickers had left, I would apologize to the new arrivals. I told them that I would have to hit them, kick them, and treat them roughly in front of the traffickers, but that I was not really like that. And I asked them to understand my situation. They understood, as all of us were Burmese.”

Original reporting in Burmese by Kyaw Min Htun. Burmese service director: Nancy Shwe. Translated by Soe Thinn. Edited for the Web in English by Luisetta Mudie.

Source : Malaysiakini

Press Statement by Member of Parliament Klang Charles Santiago in Klang on 24th April 2009

Richard Lugar the US Ranking Minority Member in a report entitled ‘Trafficking and Extortion of Burmese Migrants in Malaysia and Southern Thailand’ submitted to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 3^rd April, 2009 notes that Burmese migrants in Malaysia are victims of extortion and human trafficking in Malaysia and Southern Thailand.

The report suggests that Malaysian authorities are in cohorts with human traffickers in Southern Thailand:

“Burmese migrants are reportedly taken by Malaysian Government personnel from detention facilities to the Malaysia-Thailand border for deportation. Upon arrival at the Malaysia-Thailand border, human traffickers reportedly take possession of the migrants and issue ransom demands on an individual basis. Migrants state that freedom is possible only once money demands are met. Specific payment procedures are outlined, which reportedly include bank accounts in Kuala Lumpur to which money should be transferred. The committee was informed that on some occasions, the ”attendance” list reviewed by traffickers along the border was identical to the attendance list read prior to departure from the Malaysian detention facilities.

Migrants state that those unable to pay are turned over to human peddlers in Thailand, representing a variety of business interests ranging from fishing boats to brothels.

The committee has received numerous reports of sexual assaults against Burmese women by human traffickers along the border. One NGO official states that ”Most young women deported to the Thai border are sexually abused, even in front of their husbands, by the syndicates, since no one dares to intervene as they would be shot or stabbed to death in the jungle”

The Senate report further notes:

“Statements are continuing to come to the committee from Burmese and other migrants who were taken to the Thailand-Malaysia border and threatened with violence, or being handed over to human traffickers unless extortion demands were met. Details provided to the committee by Burmese refugees to the United States include names of persons to whom payments are allegedly made; payment locations in Malaysia and Thailand; bank account numbers to which extortion payments are deposited; locations along the Thailand-Malaysia border where migrants are reportedly taken by Malaysian officials; and the identification of persons allegedly involved in the trafficking of migrants and refugees”.

The report notes that Burmese refugees and migrants are whipped and tortured while in detention.

The Lugar report does not come as a shock even though it is upsetting.

Local television channel, NTV7, created an uproar in the country last year with their ‘Refugee for Sale’ documentary, outlining the plight of the Burmese who flee into Malaysia, fearing persecution from the military junta and end up being victims in lucrative sales deals between immigration officers and their clients at the Malaysia-Thailand border.

Those who cannot buy their freedom are sold off to the fishing boats or brothels. The US Senate report corroborates this fact.

It specifically states the nitty gritty details of the sales of helpless refugees, the need for affirmative action to stop these sales, the role of ASEAN and international communities in protecting refugees and the urgency for the ratification of the Refugees Convention, the 1967 Protocol on Refugees and include this issue in human rights dialogues within ASEAN member countries.

Instead of acting upon these recommendations, I am clear about the potential response from the Kuala Lumpur government – ministers would categorically deny the report, rubbishing it as an attempt to discredit the government.

Former Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar denied claims that thousands of illegal foreigners held at detention centers were ”being sold off” to human trafficking syndicates. ‘I take offence with the allegation because neither the Malaysian Government nor its officials make money by selling people.’

Or they would sing the same rhetoric of having carried out an investigation on the immigration officers and found them to be squeaky clean.

I have repeatedly raised this issue in Parliament and the reply from the then Home Minister was predictable: no truth in the trafficking allegation.

The Ministry’s committee to investigate the NTV 7 documentary alleging government officials involvement in trafficking did not even interview the producer as part of its investigation. So much for a thorough and credible investigation.

Let’s get this straight. The refugees are not coming to Malaysia seeking better economic opportunities. They simply have no choice. They run into Malaysia, leaving behind families and children, to stay alive.

Their woes do not stop once they get to Malaysia. Here they are hunted down like animals by RELA, a bully group consisting of citizens who turn ad-hoc policemen.

Their refugee cards issued by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees or UNHCR is useless as Malaysia does not recognise their refugee status. Therefore the refugees are trapped in a situation where they cannot work and are constantly under the threat of being arrested by immigration and RELA officers.

But the government is only interested in business transactions with the military junta. Malaysian state oil company, Petronas, does business amounting to millions of US dollars with Burma.

ASEAN, on the other hand, pretend they are limousine liberals while in reality, turn a blind eye to the gross violations of human rights by the military. Instead, the leaders shake hands and exchange diplomatic niceties with the Burmese army officers during ASEAN meetings.

The 10-member bloc’s non-interference policy further cushions the Burmese military from the need to be accountable to the killings and disappearances of hundreds of thousands of Rohingyas, Karens, Chins and other minority clans.

I call upon the newly minted Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Tun Hussein to open a new investigation on the matter and consider the 10 proposal of the Lugar report including implementation the country’s Anti-trafficking Law, ASEAN’s Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers and the immediate ratification of the UN 1967 Refugee Convention – with a view to protect and promote the rights of migrants and refugees in the country and region.

Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament, Klang

Vice Chairman of Selangor DAP

016-626 7797

Source : IPS

By JIM GOMEZ, Associated Press – 2 hours ago 

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (AP) — Southeast Asian leaders plan to adopt a human rights declaration aimed at fighting torture and illegal arrests in a region notorious for violations, despite criticism that the pact falls short of international standards.

Leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are scheduled to formally adopt the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration on Sunday during the group’s annual summit in Cambodia, according to diplomats and documents obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday.

ASEAN leaders would commit to promote and protect human rights, along with “democracy, rule of law and good governance” in a joint statement they would sign to launch the declaration. But provisions in the draft say rights could be limited for reasons of security, public order and morality, exceptions that were criticized by rights groups.

The bloc’s human rights commission, which drafted the declaration, would work for “the full realization of human dignity and the attainment of a higher quality of life for ASEAN peoples,” the leaders would pledge in their statement.

Founded in 1967 as an anti-communist bloc in the Cold War era, ASEAN has taken feeble steps to address human rights concerns in the vast region of 600 million people, adopting a charter in 2007 where it committed to uphold international law and human rights but retained a bedrock principle of not interfering in each other’s internal affairs — a loophole that critics say helps member states commit abuses without consequence. In 2009, the group unveiled a commission that was tasked to promote human rights but deprived of power to investigate violations or go after abusers.

ASEAN diplomats have called the declaration a milestone in the region despite its imperfections, saying it will help cement democratic reforms in countries such as Myanmar, which until recently has been widely condemned for its human rights record.

Philippine diplomat Rosario Manalo, a key proponent, says it is significant that the region’s less democratic governments have embraced the declaration, which could have been torpedoed by any ASEAN member. The 10-nation group decides by consensus, meaning that even one objection could block a majority decision.

“It’s not perfect but it’s a new benchmark for ASEAN,” Manalo said.

However, more than 60 international rights group urged ASEAN leaders to postpone the adoption of the declaration and have it redrafted to correct flaws, including the removal of provisions that could limit rights in the name of “national security” or “public morality.”

Phil Robertson of New York-based Human Rights Watch said the declaration “as written, does not meet international human rights standards and may, we fear, be used by ASEAN governments to justify violating rights.”

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay earlier expressed concerns that the nonbinding declaration was drafted without adequate public consultations.

A final draft of the proposed declaration obtained by AP says “human rights and fundamental freedoms” could be limited “to meet the just requirements of national security, public order, public health, public safety, public morality.”

It adds that the “realization of human rights must be considered in the regional and national context bearing in mind different political, economic, legal, social, cultural, historical and religious backgrounds.”

Some of the groups welcomed the declaration’s opposition to rights violations such as human trafficking. It outlines many of the civil and political rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including prohibition of torture, arbitrary arrest and child labor.

The ASEAN summit comes as the group has been set back by a rift over how to handle territorial disputes in the South China Sea involving four of its members and China.

The long-simmering disputes are expected to be in the spotlight during the ASEAN meetings. President Barack Obama is to attend an East Asian Summit at the end of the meetings next week.

Associated Press writer Sopheng Cheang contributed to this report.

Phil Robertson

Deputy Director, Asia Division

Thai mobile: +66-85-060-8406

US mobile: +1-917-378-4097

Email: RobertP@hrw.org

Skype: philrobertsonjr

Twitter: @Reaproy

Human Rights Watch (HRW)

350 Fifth Avenue, 34^th Floor

New York, NY 10118-3299

www.hrw.org/en/asia

Source: Human Rights Watch

Despite government promises of reform and relaxation of controls in some areas, human rights in Malaysia remain tightly constrained.

On September 15, 2011, Prime Minister Seri Najib Tun Razak announced the government’s intention to repeal the Internal Security Act (ISA), revoke three emergency proclamations that underpin many of Malaysia’s most repressive laws, and review the Restricted Residence Act. In the same speech, however, he committed to introducing two new laws under article 149 (“Special Laws against Subversion”) of the Federal Constitution, which allows parliament to enact sweeping security provisions that deny basic freedoms.

On July 9, police in Kuala Lumpur, the capital, broke up a peaceful rally organized by Bersih 2.0, the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections, arresting nearly 1,700 demonstrators demanding electoral reforms. Police fired teargas at close range at protesters in an underground tunnel, injuring several, and into the Tung Shin and Chinese Maternity hospital courtyard.

Detention without Charge or Trial

The ISA permits indefinite detention without charge or trial of any person that officials deem a threat to national security or public order. While use of the ISA has declined over the years, government figures released in connection with Najib’s speech said 37 people were in ISA detention. The government continues to detain thousands under the Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention) Ordinance (EO) and the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act. However, in October parliament repealed the Restricted Residence Act and 125 people previously confined under the act were released.

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention singled out the EO for criticism in its February 2011 report, noting the law permits indefinite detention “without the need to sustain evidence or probe penal responsibility.”

Malaysian authorities arbitrarily applied the ISA in October 2010 against immigration officers allegedly involved in human trafficking despite the availability of Malaysia’s Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act, but abruptly released all but one of the accused in August 2011. The last detainee was released on November 10. On July 2, police used the EO to detain six leaders of the Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) on the bogus charge that they were responsible for planning the Bersih rally and, until their July 29 release, subjected them to lengthy interrogations, isolation, and blindfolding.

Freedom of Expression, Assembly, and Association

Rights of expression, peaceful public assembly, and association —guaranteed in Malaysia’s Constitution—continued to be violated in 2011. On May 21 Bersih announced a July 9 “Walk for Democracy” to call for reform of the electoral system. In mid-June the police announced that no police permit, required by section 27 of the Police Act, would be issued for the march. Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar threatened that “stern action” would be taken against anyone involved in an “illegal rally.”

Throughout June police mounted repeated shows of force, arresting activists distributing leaflets, wearing yellow Bersih shirts, or coordinating gatherings to promote the rally. On June 29 a plainclothes police unit without a warrant raided Bersih’s secretariat, confiscating Bersih materials and detaining some of those present for questioning; on July 1 the Home Ministry declared Bersih an illegal organization under the Societies Act. On the day before the march police obtained a court order prohibiting 91 rally leaders from entering downtown Kuala Lumpur. Although the thousands who eluded police blockades were peaceful and well-disciplined, but police broke up the rally using baton charges, chemically infused water cannons, and teargas barrages. Nearly 1,700 people were arrested. Journalists and ordinary citizens released photographs and video documenting much of the abuse.

On June 25, police stopped a bus carrying PSM activists to a planned rally, detaining 30 on suspicion of “preparing to wage war against the king.” They were released from pre-trial detention on July 2, but police immediately re-detained six of their leaders under the EO. All 30 were charged under the Societies Act and a section of the ISA outlawing possession of subversive documents. On September 19 the attorney general released them and on October 10, a court affirmed the release as a “discharge not amounting to an acquittal,” which makes them subject to future prosecution. On October 28, six PSM leaders were granted the same discharge

Media Censorship

With nearly all mainstream newspapers and television and radio stations controlled by media companies close to political parties in the government coalition, social media usage has expanded rapidly, joining popular online news portals as alternative sources for news and information. The internet remains uncensored but the Home Ministry in 2011 again refused the Malaysiakini website’s application to publish a daily print version, saying that a publishing permit is “a privilege,” not a right. Malaysiakini has challenged the Home Ministry’s decision; at this writing the High Court was set to review the challenge on December 8, 2011. Online news portals critical of the government also came under repeated cyber-attacks by unknown assailants at key news junctures, such as the Sarawak elections in April and the Bersih rally in July.

In his September speech, Prime Minister Najib promised to amend the Printing Presses and Publications Act but only to end the mandatory annual licensing requirement. The minister of home affairs would retain broad authority, without judicial review, to refuse permission to publish anything he determines “likely to be prejudicial to public order, morality, security … or national interest.”

On July 14 the High Court in Kuala Lumpur upheld the ban on seven books by Malaysiakini cartoonist Zunar and threatened revocation of printers’ licenses if they produced his books.

In September the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission ordered broadcasters not to show a non-partisan voter education public service announcement created by well-known film producer and musician Peter Teo.

Trial of Anwar Ibrahim

The trial of Anwar Ibrahim, parliamentary leader of Malaysia’s political opposition, has raised serious human rights concerns. Anwar is charged with “sodomy” for allegedly engaging in consensual homosexual conduct on June 26, 2008.

Court rulings have denied Anwar’s legal team access to the prosecution’s witness list, critical forensic samples needed for independent examination, and medical examiners’ notes from hospital examinations of the accuser, in violation of international fair trial standards.

In a September 23, 2011, affidavit to the court, Prime Minister Najib affirmed he had met Saiful, the accuser, two days before the alleged incident of sodomy.

Migrant Workers, Refugees, Asylum Seekers, and Trafficking Victims

The Malaysian Immigration Act 1959/1963 fails to differentiate between refugees, asylum seekers, trafficking victims, and undocumented migrants. The government is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and lacks domestic refugee law and asylum procedures.

On July 25 Australia and Malaysia signed a “refugee swap” deal that would have permitted Australia to send 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia for refugee screening in exchange for receiving 4,000 refugees registered by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. On August 31 the Australia High Court struck down the agreement after determining that it did not legally bind Malaysia to protect the rights of transferred asylum seekers.

Malaysia has made little progress in ensuring respect for human rights in its anti-human trafficking efforts. The Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act conflates the crimes of trafficking and smuggling, thereby reducing protections for both groups of victims, and making it less likely that trafficking victims will cooperate in identifying and prosecuting perpetrators.

A 2011 program to register all migrant workers lacked transparency regarding which migrant workers will be permitted to remain in Malaysia.

Some 300,000 migrant domestic workers are excluded from key protections under Malaysia’s Employment Act, including limits on working hours, a mandatory day off per week, annual and sick leave, maternity protections, and fair termination of contracts. NGOs and embassies of labor-sending countries handle hundreds of complaints involving unpaid wages, physical and sexual abuse, and forced confinement. Indonesia and Malaysia signed a Memorandum of Understanding that guarantees a weekly day off and allows domestic workers to keep their passports rather than surrendering them to employers. However, the agreement perpetuates recruitment fee structures that leave workers deeply indebted. Malaysia is one of only nine states that did not vote for International Labour Organization Convention No. 189 on Decent Work for Domestic Workers.

Drug Policy

The National Anti-Drugs Agency maintains over 20 Puspens (drug retention centers) where detainees are held a minimum of two years. Although rates of relapse to drug use have been estimated in Malaysia at 70 to 90 percent, people who are re-arrested as users face long prison terms and caning.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

The government refuses to consider repeal of article 377B of the penal code, which criminalizes consensual “carnal intercourse against the order of nature,” or to replace article 377C on non-consensual sexual acts with a modern, gender-neutral law on rape.

In July the high court refused to permit Aleesha Farhnan Abdul Aziz, a transgender individual, to change her registered name and gender from male to female. In April Malaysian authorities sent 66 allegedly effeminate schoolboys to camp “to guide them back to the right path.”

On November 3 police banned Seksualiti Merdeka, a festival held annually since 2008 to celebrate the rights of people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, as a threat to public order.

Freedom of Religion

Malaysia’s constitution affirms the country is a secular state that protects religious freedom for all, but treatment of religious minorities continues to raise concerns. On August 3, 2011, Selangor state religious authorities raided a Methodist church where an annual charity dinner was being held. The authorities alleged that there had been unlawful proselytization of the Muslims present at the event but presented no evidence to support their allegations.

Nazri Aziz, de facto law minister, said that since Islam allows underage marriage, the government “can’t legislate against it.”

Key International Actors

The United States continues to exercise significant influence in Malaysia through expanding links in trade and investment, military-to-military ties, and cooperation in regional security. When Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassim visited Washington in January 2011, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emphasized the “positive track” of the growing bilateral relationship and suggested the possibility of a US presidential visit. She also urged a fair trial for Anwar Ibrahim.

Malaysia continued to have close ties with China and agreed to a request by Beijing in August to summarily return to China a group of ethnic Uighurs in Malaysia despite the likelihood that they would face torture and ill-treatment. Eleven were sent back while five remain in Malaysia.

Malaysia continued to lead efforts to stymie the efforts of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Committee on Migrant Workers to negotiate a legally binding instrument for the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers.

6‐7 December 2011, Bali, Indonesia

STATEMENT

Preamble

We, the representatives from civil society organisations of 16 Asian countries, gather here on 6 and
7 December 2011 in conjunction with the 4th Bali Democracy Forum to critically assess the situation
and highlight challenges to democratization and human rights in Asia.

The year 2011 has seen both the Arab Spring sweeping away long‐reigning despots and the Occupy
Movement protesting against the marginalisation of the majority of the world’s people. Democracy
and democratization must therefore focus not only on civil and political rights but also the
enhancement of economic, social and cultural rights, recognising the urgency to address the
structural causes of extreme poverty, deteriorating inequality and rampant corruption. Democracy is
not only threatened by authoritarian regimes but also by corporate interests that erode national
sovereignty and suppress people’s participation. In that sense, democracy must be protected not
only from unelected political institutions such as the military and monarchy, but also from unelected
corporate conglomerates.

In Asia, while the reforms in Burma seem promising after two decades of suppression, we must not
forget that war against ethnic minorities like the Kachins is on‐going and as many as 1,700 political
prisoners remain imprisoned. Until armed conflicts and persecution of political dissidents end, the
reforms remain window dressing.

Against this background, the regional consultation themed “Democratisation and People’s
Participation” urges the 4th Bali Democracy Forum to urgently act on following four specific areas:

1. Defending an Enabling Environment for Asian Peoples and Civil Society

Participatory democracy is not complete if civil society lacks an enabling environment to function
effectively and independently. The increased challenge for Asian civil society organisations is the
violation of civil liberties including freedom of expression, right to information, freedom of peaceful
assembly, freedom of association and freedom of religion. This is mainly caused by draconian laws,
lack of judicial independence, arbitrary arrests, pervasive use of torture, extrajudicial killings of
human rights defenders and other use of violence by state and non‐state actors. Ironically, while the
theme for the 4th Bali Democracy Forum is “Enhancing Democratic Participation in A Changing World:
Responding to Democratic Voices”, some Asian governments are doing the exact opposite.
Cambodia is currently enacting a law to restrict freedom of association while Malaysia’s Lower
House recently passed a bill on freedom of assembly that is more restrictive than Burma.

In many Asian countries, repressive laws against civil liberties have created a climate of fear and
compounded the people’s ability to participate political processes. The shrinking of public space by
governments and political parties through violence, control of funding and intimidation stifles civic
participation and genuine public discourse. Some countries like Burma are still plagued with armed
conflicts and ethno‐religious persecution.

Asia lacks a functional human rights court and in many countries, national human rights institutions
do not always work independently and effectively, especially in post‐war and transitional countries.
Ordinary people’s political participation is also curbed by two other factors: firstly, the
ineffectiveness of legislatures in representing the peoples’ needs and aspirations; and secondly, the
controlled media environment which prevents pluralistic political expressions.

2. Independence of Judiciary and Judicial Watch

Independence of the judiciary is fundamental to democracy as it ensures the rule of law in society. In
many Asian countries, there are serious issues regarding the capacity and integrity of the judiciary
and legal professionals. Appointment processes for judges, prosecutors and other legal officials are
often influenced by politics, nepotism and patronage which threaten judicial independence. In many
countries, the office of public prosecutor is not independent from the executive branch.
Government control of regulating bodies (such as bar associations and judicial commissions) also
undermines the independence of the judiciary.

We note with concern that judgments and information about judicial system are often not publicly
available. This increases risk of corruption, hampers ability of civil society to monitor the judiciary
and prevents the general public from understanding the judicial system and access to justice. In
some countries, such as Cambodia, criticizing judgments can constitute contempt of court, severely
restricting the ability of monitoring programs to analyze decisions. Justice is also denied when
citizens cannot access or afford legal representation.

3. Corruption, Right to Information and Democratisation

Corruption is one of the major concerns undermining democracy in Asia. Those with resources can
have undue influence on public policies and this transaction of power for money denies the right of
ordinary citizens to have their interests represented through legitimate political participation.

Democratisation must therefore entails a vigorous campaign against corruption and a strong legal
framework including anti‐corruption laws, right to information laws and other laws with
independent enforcement bodies to enhance transparency and accountability.

4. Transformative Social Protection in Defending and Claiming Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Asia is home to two thirds of the world’s poor and hungry, with more than nine hundred million
living in extreme poverty. At the same time, 78% of Asia’s work force is pushed to the informal
sector where they suffer from extremely low wage and precarious working conditions while often
facing risk of human trafficking. More fundamentally, the neo‐liberal development model of liberalisation,
deregulation and privatisation aggressively pursued by corporations undermines the sovereignty of state to
provide social services, displaces millions of people from their land and natural resources, enlarges the gap
between the rich and the poor, accelerates environmental degradation and eventually engulfed the world in
financial crisis from Asia to the United States and now in Europe. Austerity measures meted out as response to
these crisis further undercut the social protection for the people with regards to education, healthcare,
housing, food, water etc.

Transformative social protection is therefore an urgent demand by the people to address continuing
crises and chronic poverty resulting in massive deprivation and social exclusion of millions in Asia –
denied of their basic economic, social and cultural rights that are essential to their life. Even in countries where they have poverty eradication programs including minimal social protection, these
programs often exclude the most vulnerable including the stateless, undocumented, internally
displaced people and refugees.

Recommendations

In this regard, we, the representatives from civil society organisations of 16 Asian countries, strongly
recommend Asian governments:

On Enabling Environment for Asian Peoples and Civil Society,
• To ratify and implement core international human rights instruments;
• To establish and strengthen regional and national human rights institutions and mechanisms
to protect and promote the rights of peoples and human rights defenders in accordance
with the Paris Principles;
• To implement recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders;
• To review all laws that restrict space of civil society and people’s participation, including the
proposed law on non‐governmental organisation in Cambodia and the Malaysian bill on
public assembly;
• To empower their legislatures and make consultation with all stakeholders a pre‐requisite in
law and policy making processes; and,
• To free media from censorship and concentration of ownership so that the media can
effectively represent different voices of the people.

On Independence of Judiciary and Judicial Watch,
• To provide professional trainings to judicial officials and practitioners;
• To ensure that judicial appointments are made on transparent, objective and impartial
criteria;
• To guarantee independence of the office of public prosecutor, especially from the executive;
• To ensure transparency of judicial process, in particularly all judgments should be made
publicly available except to protect privacy of minors and victims of sexual violence and
other exceptional circumstances in line with human rights; and,
• To work with civil society to ensure independent and accessible legal aid services for all.

On Corruption, Right to Information and Democratization,
• To enact strong legislations that guarantee the right to information and make declaration of
assets by senior public officials and their family mandatory;
• To involve civil society in monitoring and facilitating the enforcement of such laws; and.
• To end impunity in corruption by state officials through strengthening the judicial and
prosecution systems and removing immunity of public officials from criminal charges.

On Transformative Social Protection and Fulfilment of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
• To implement social policies that include universal social protection towards the fulfilment of
the economic, social and cultural rights while giving priority to employment, essential services,
food, social assistance to vulnerable groups such as the elderly and disabled;
• To institutionalize transformative social protection programs and integrate these into national
development strategies that bring about the redistribution of income, wealth and opportunities, and promote ecological stability as well as democratic control over people’s
lives and the economy; and,
• To involve the people, especially the marginalized, in the planning and implementation of
such social protection programs.

We call on all Asian Governments to implement these recommendations in their regional and
national programmes.

We welcome the on‐going initiative of the Indonesian government to foster dialogue between Asian
states on democracy through the Bali Democracy Forum. However, we are disappointed that the
Forum has consecutively excluded for four years the participation of civil society organisations who
are one of the main stakeholders of democracy.

We call on the future Bali Democracy Forums to include civil society organizations in their
deliberation and follow‐up actions. To begin with, the Bali Democracy Forum should make publicly
documents related to the proceedings and decisions of the Forum. The Institute for Peace and
Democracy as the implementing agency of the Forum should step up its engagement of civil society
to ensure meaningful participation of Asian peoples in realising genuine and functioning democracy.