AEPF Express Outrage over Human Rights Violation in Malaysia

Dear Prime Minister Najib,

We, of the Asia-Europe Peoples’ Forum (AEPF), are alarmed by the recent arrest of leaders and members of Bersih — the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections.

As a network of people’s organisations, coalitions, NGOs, academics, trade unions, and parliamentarians who uphold the principles of democracy, rule of law, justice, and human rights, we at the AEPF denounce this blatant disregard by the Malaysian government of the civil and political rights of its citizens. We particularly condemn the crackdown against Parti Socialis Malaysia (PSM) and the continued detention without any charges or open trial of 30 PSM members including a Member of Parliament for simply campaigning for clean and fair elections.

May we remind you that Malaysia, as a member of ASEM (with whom we at AEPF actively engage), adhere to the Asia-Europe Cooperation Framework (AECF) which “envisage(s) Asia and Europe as an area of peace and shared development uphold(s) the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, respect for democracy, the rule of law, equality, justice and human rights, concern for the environment and other global issues, eradication of poverty, protection of cultural heritage and the promotion of intellectual endeavours, economic and social development, knowledge and educational resources, science and technology, commerce, investment and enterprise.”

The Malaysian government’s actions are contrary to these AECF principles.

Based on information from networks in Malaysia, at least 150 persons have been arrested or summoned by the police for investigation on politically-motivated charges. A Filipino labor leader – Romy Castillo – who attended the month-long study trip with PSM was among those arrested and detained.

We cannot allow the harassments, arrests, especially the torture and inhumane treatment of the detained PSM members and their supporters to continue.

We strongly support the following calls of our Malaysian networks such as PSM and SUARAM, together with other human rights organisations like FORUM Asia, for the government of Malaysia to:

• Immediately release all those being arbitrarily detained for their participation in peaceful Bersih-related activities and drop all charges against detainees

On July 2, 6 PSM leaders (Sungai Siput MP Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj, PSM deputy chairperson M. Saraswathy, central committee members Choo Chon Kai and M. Sukumaran, Sungai Siput branch secretary A. Letchumanan, and PSM Youth leader Sarat Babu) were put under indefinite preventive detention under the draconian Emergency Ordinance by the police. Further, these 6 leaders and another 24 PSM activists – all were peacefully holding information-campaign activities for clean and fair elections – are charged for offenses under penal code article 122 (“waging war against the king”), the Sedition Act, and the Police Act of 1967. The Malaysian government should ensure the detainees the physical and mental integrity of the detainees and allow for family and lawyer access.

• Rescind the decision to declare Bersih an illegal organization and stop arresting peaceful political activists promoting Bersih 2.0

Bersih was established for the purpose of promoting reform of Malaysia’s electoral laws, regulations, and procedures. As a coalition of over 60 NGOs, it has made comprehensive proposals that deserve the consideration of your government and the Election Commission. The Bersih leaders and supporters have pursued their civil and political rights to participation in their government as provided by international human rights laws and principles.  Malaysia should respect and protect the human rights of its people especially when Malaysia is also a member of the UN Human Rights Council.

• Allow the march of Bersih 2.0 planned in Kualu Lumpur on July 9, 2011 to proceed

Bersih leaders have publicly pledged that the planned July 9 march will be peaceful. The Malaysian government should allow the march to proceed and clearly undertake not to unilaterally block, disrupt, or otherwise break up the march as long as it remains peaceful. Similarly, the planned marches by Perkasa and UMNO Youth should also be allowed under the same provisos and conditions that they are peaceful. We call on the authorities to confine their role to maintaining the peace by keeping separate all three marches and rallies to be held on July 9 so that there would be no incidents between marchers. The police should not harass or arrest persons peacefully travelling to join and participate in those marches on July 9.

We look forward to your immediate and fair consideration to our calls.

For justice and peace,

 

 

Tina Ebro                                                                      Charles Santiago

Institute for Popular Democracy                              Monitoring Sustainability of Globalisation

AEPF Co-coordinator for Asia                                   AEPF Co-coordinator for Asia

 

Maris dela Cruz

AEPF Secretariat for Asia

c/o Institute for Popular Democracy

28 Mapagkawanggawa corner Magiting Streets

Teachers’ Village, Diliman, Quezon City Philippines

 

AEPF is a network of about 500 civil society organisations across Asia and Europe. Among them are the following organisations and individuals that took part in drafting and in circulating this letter.

 

Asia House (Germany)

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM Asia)

Development and Civilisations Lebret-Irfed (France)

Focus on the Global South (Thailand, Asia)

Finnish Asiatic Society (Finland)

Institute for Popular Democracy (Philippines)

Indonesian Partnership for Local Governance Initiatives (Indonesia)

Monitoring Sustainability of Globalisation (Malaysia)

One World Action (United Kingdom)

Transnational Institute (Netherlands)

Vietnam Peace and Development Foundation (Vietnam)

11.11.11. (Belgium)

Action for People’s Democracy in Thailand

Akbayan Youth (Philippines)

Alab Katipunan-Fervor of the Katipunan (Philippines)

Alyansa ng Maralitang Pilipino – Alliance of Poor Filipinos (Philippines)

Alliance of Progressive Labor (Philippines)

Altsean-Burma

Aniban ng mga Manggagawa sa Agrikultura (Philippines)

Anti-POSCO PPSS (Orissa,India)

Asia Floor Wage Alliance (India)

Back Pack Health Worker Team (Burma)

Both ENDS (Netherlands)

Burma Layers’ Council

Burma Partnership

Center For Peace & Civil Society (Pakistan)

Centre for Policy Analysis, India
Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE)-ASIA

Centre for Human Rights and Development, Food Coalition (Mongolia)

Citizens’ Peace Watch (Philippines)

Coalition for Nuclear Disarmamant and Peace (India)
Committee for Asian Women (Thailand)

DEMOS (Indonesia)

Dignity International (Malaysia/Netherlands)

EU-ASEAN FTA Campaign Network (Southeast Asia)

Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (Bangladesh)

Europe solidaire sans frontières (ESSF), France

Forum for Democracy in Burma

Global Call to Action Against Poverty (Philippines)

Green Watershed (China)

Human Rights Defenders-Pilipinas (HRD-Pilipinas)

Human Rights Education Institute of Burma (HREIB)

Human Rights Working Group (HRWG-Indoenesia)

Indian Social Action Forum (India)
Indonesian women’s Coalition for Justice and Democracy/Koalisi Perempuan Indonesia untuk

    Keadilan dan Demokras (Indonesia)

KePPaK PEREMPUAN (Indonesia)

Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya (Philippines)

Inkrispena (Indonesia)

Initiatives for International Dialogue (Philippines)

International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (Indonesia)

Institut Perempuan-Women’s Institute (Indonesia)

Institute for Global Justice (Indonesia)

Institute of Social Development (Sri Lanka)

International Institute for Research and Education-Manila (Philippines)

Judicial System Monitoring Programme (Timor)

Kampanya para sa Makataong Pamumuhay/Life of Dignity for all Campaign (Philippines)

KAUKUS 17++ network (Indonesia)

Labour Party Pakistan

Lao Biodiversity LBA (Lao)

Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center (Philippines)

Malaysian Election Observers Network (Malaysia)

Migrant Forum in Asia (Asia)

Mindanao Peoples’ Peace Movement (Philippines)

Nadi Ghatti Morcha (Chhatisharh, India)

National Trade Union Federation (Pakistan)

Nasional Secretariat Indonesia People Empowered and Preparedness Networking (Indonesia)

Network for Democracy and Development (NDD)

Network for Transformative Social Protection (Asia)

Nigeria Labour congress (Nigeria)

Nonviolence International Southeast Asia

Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (Pakistan)

Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee (Pakistan)

Pambansang Katipunan ng mga Samahan sa Kanayunan (Philippines)

Partido Lakas ng Masa-Party of Laboring Masses (Philippines)

Partido ng Manggagawa-Labor Party (Philippines)

Pax Romana- ICMICA Asia

PEACE (India)

Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (Philippines)

Philippine Airlines Employees Association-PALEA (Philippines)

Peoples’ Empowerment Foundation (Thailand)

People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (Korea)

Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (Uttar Pradesh, India)

Perhimpunan Rakyat Pekerja (Working People Association) Indonesia

PERGERAKAN Indonesia (Indonesia)

Preparation Committee for Confederation of National Union (Indonesia)

Progressive Youth Front (Pakistan)

RESPECT Network – Europe

Rosa Luxemburg Foundation-Brussels Office (Belgium)

Shwe Gas Movement from Burma

SOLIDAR (Belgium)

Southeast Asian Centre for e-Media

Stop the War Coalition (Philippines)

Student Council Alliance of the Philippines (Philippines)

Students and Youth  Congress of Burma ( SYCB)

Taiwan Association for Human Rights (Taiwan)

Think Centre (Singapore)

United Cavite Workers’ Association (Philippines)

Uppsala Social Forum (Sweden)

WomanHealth Phippines

Women League of Burma (WLB )

Women Workers Help Line (Pakistan)

Women’s Day Off ( Philippines)

Worker  Hub For Change ( WH4C ) International  

World Forum for Democratization in Asia (Taiwan)

Yayasan LINTAS NUSA – Batam (Indonesia)

Young Progressives Southeast Asia (Philippines)

Individuals:

 

Prof. Anuradha Chenoy, Jawaharlal Nehru University (India)

Dr. Francisco Nemenzo, Professor Emeritus, University of the Philippines

Hoang Phuong Thao (Vietnam)

Ichiyo Muto (Japan)

Josefa S. Francisco, Chairperson, International Studies Dept, College of International,   

     Humanitarian & Development Studies- MIRIAM COLLEGE (Philippines)

Prof. Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Jawaharlal Nehru University (India)

Ms. Valentina Sagala, Women’s Institute ( Indonesia)

YC Cheeuh, Trade Union officer, NUBE (Malaysia)

 

 

 

 

SUHAKAM – THE RIGHT TO A PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) welcomes the ongoing consultations between the authorities and BERSIH relating to the proposed assembly, which will now be held in a stadium, following the advice given by His Majesty Yang Di Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin on 4 July and the subsequent audience by BERSIH with His Majesty on 5 July 2011.

While welcoming this positive development, under the circumstances, the Commission wishes to reiterate that freedom of peaceful assembly is provided under Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution and Article 20(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), and that freedom of expression and opinion is provided under Article 19 of the UDHR.

The Commission looks forward to the early resolution of the matter between the authorities and BERSIH in the spirit of conciliation, as enjoined by His Majesty the Yang Di Pertuan Agong, and shall duly monitor the event.

The Commission also wishes to express its concern over the recent arrests and detentions of several Members of Parliament and activists under Section 3(1) of the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 and calls on the authorities to immediately release all those who are still being detained. They should be accorded their rights to an open trial with legal representation as enshrined in Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the UDHR which state that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary detention; everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair public hearing; and everyone has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
As a member of the UN Human Rights Council, it is incumbent upon the Government to uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of the rights of the people. In this regard, the Commission has consistently called for repeal of all preventive detention laws and reiterates that detention without trial is a violation of human rights principle

“HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ALL”
TAN SRI HASMY AGAM,
Chairman
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
7 July 2011TAN SRI

 

Joint Letter from Human Rights Watch – Amnesty International – FIDH – OMCT – Forum Asia to Malaysia Prime Minister

Malaysia Bersih – Joint Letter – Jul 4 2011

 

 

Malaysia: Free 30 Peaceful Political Activists Government Refuses Permit for Opposition Rally, Jails Pamphleteers

Source: Human Right Watch on Malaysia

http://www.hrw.org/en/asia/malaysia

(Bangkok, June 28, 2011) – The Malaysian authorities should order the immediate release of 30 members of the opposition Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM) who were pulled off their bus and arrested on the way to a political rally in Penang on June 25, 2011, Human Rights Watch said today. They were charged with “waging war” against the king of Malaysia.

The authorities are holding the 30 in remand for seven days while the police investigate the charge that the party was restarting the Communist Party of Malaysia, a long vanquished communist movement that signed a peace treaty with the government in 1989. The Penang police publicly presented as evidence against the activists a few shirts with photos of former Communist Party of Malaysia leaders and several leaflets promoting political change in the next election.

“Charging the political opposition with restarting a movement that died with the Cold War 20 years ago is more than a little absurd,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “These arrests show the government’s fundamental disregard for the democratic process and its willingness to go to great lengths to frighten Malaysians with political bogeymen from the distant past.”

The charge of “waging war” against the king, section 122 of the Penal Code, carries penalties of up to life in prison as well as fines.

General elections are not slated for Malaysia until 2013, but the government has tightened repression on all election-related activity. The Coalition for Free and Fair Elections (Bersih) 2.0, a civil society coalition urging electoral reforms, announced a major public march and assembly for July 9. The home affairs minister, Hishammuddin Tun Hussein, responded that the government would not permit the march and the Minister of Information, Communication and Culture, Dr. Rais Yatim, called the event an “evil and unlawful rally.”

Prime Minister Najib Razak accused Bersih 2.0 of trying to “wrest back political momentum” from the ruling Barisan Nasional (National Front), a charge that Bersih’s steering committee immediately rejected.

According to a media account, 81 opposition activists have been arrested since June 22. They include 28 Socialist Party members arrested in Johor on June 25, who were reportedly charged under the Sedition Act and the Printing Presses and Publications Act. Police also arrested a number of activists in various locales for selling or wearing yellow Bersih 2.0 shirts.

In November 2007, the first Bersih march and rally for clean and fair elections brought together approximately 60,000 participants.

The Malaysian government’s actions to deny the rights to freedom of association, expression, and peaceful assembly run counter to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the government’s commitments to respect international human rights standards as a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The government should heed the call of the governmental Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) and permit the Bersih rally to proceed, as well as possible counter-marches to Bersih being planned by United Malays National Organization (UNMO) Youth and Perkasa, Human Rights Watch said.

“Rather than trying to silence peaceful critics, the Malaysian government should be working to ensure that election processes are fair and that they fully protect the civil and political rights of all Malaysians,” Robertson said. “Arresting people for wearing t-shirts and distributing leaflets simply shows the depths of the government’s intolerance of opposing viewpoints.”

 

Interlok Arrests: Najib Should Walk the Talk

A protester was pushed down, his face rubbed against the road, kicked and then arrested.

I am not writing about what happened in Libya. This scene took place in Kuala Lumpur, a couple of minutes away from KLCC, Malaysia’s symbol of growth and prosperity.

Ahead of time, the police had locked-down Kuala Lumpur to prevent members of Human Rights Party  and supporters from gathering to stage a protest, calling for the ban of Interlok.

Friends who were on location around the KLCC said that the police verbally abused the protesters including media workers.

Indians sighted around the Shangri-La Hotel and KLCC area were stopped, interrogated and even had their identity cards scrutinized.

Journalists were asked to show their media passes and shouted at for filming the violent arrests.

A few days back Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak slammed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi for unleashing violence on his people who were opposed to his rule.

“We believe he should not use violence. What is important for us is to take into account the aspirations of people…The system should be legitimate, it has to be based on support of people” –

These are Najib’s words.

His deputy, Muhyiddin Yassin, called on Gaddafi to allow the people to demonstrate peacefully.

Therefore, what happened on the streets of Kuala Lumpur today clearly shows that the UMNO-led Barisan Nasional government practices double standards.

Interlok contains racial slurs against the Indians.

It is a slap on the face of Malaysian Indians and clearly a play of racial politics, crafted to please the ultra-Malays.

It’s me or chaos – this the mantra of Gaddafi. Toe the government line or face abuse is the slogan of Barisan Nasional and particularly UMNO leaders.

And if Ghaddafi says that the Al-Qaeda instigated his people to take to the streets, UMNO says that issues raised against Interlok were carved out by the opposition.

This is a joke.

In Northern Africa and the Middle-East, we are seeing an uprising as people stand up to re-claim their rights.

Here, Malaysian Indians are fighting to retain their dignity against a piece of literature which is derogatory. And if UMNO cares about democracy, the leaders would allow for legitimate dissent instead of trying to keep a lid on it.

As I write this, the whereabouts of the 109 protestors who have been arrested are unknown.

This further caricatures the abuse of power by the police force. And bins Najib’s 1Malaysia policy which zeroes in on national integration through racial unity.

Opposition politicians and non-governmental organizations have repeated calls for the setting-up of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

The recent high-handed behaviour of the police at peaceful protests signals the crucial need for an independent body to act as a check and balance on the force.

I, therefore, call on the government to immediately set-up the IPCMC and release all those detained at the protest.

Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament, Klang.

 

反贪会称马哈迪贪污指控不实:查尔斯挑战政府诉韦恩讨清白

Source: Malaysiakini

谢仲洋 7月8日 傍晚 5点50分

民主行动党国会议员查尔斯圣地亚哥表示，若《马来西亚独行者：在动荡时期的马哈迪》评传作者巴力韦恩(Barry Wain)声称前首相马哈迪在数次金融丑闻“烧掉”1000亿令吉的指责不实，政府理应起诉韦恩，以还马哈迪一个清白。

首相署部长纳兹里今日在回复查尔斯的书面回答指出，经查证该本评传后，反贪委员会认为韦恩所指控的贪污成分不存在，因此在不触犯《2009年反贪法令》的前提下，反贪委员会不会进行任何调查。

没争论挥霍千亿令吉

不过，查尔斯声称，纳兹里的书面回答没有针对韦恩指控马哈迪烧掉1000亿令吉，进行特别驳斥或否认，因此认为纳兹里对此项指控没有异议。

“他们没有对马哈迪挥霍1000亿令吉的指控提出争论（dispute），似乎接受马哈迪挥霍（存在）。”

“若真如答案所言，（反贪会）已调查马哈迪。我们要知道调查结论是否会公诸于世？”

“我们要求纳兹里和反贪会告诉公众，调查内容是什么？为什么反贪会会认为不构成贪污成分？”

“因为这本评传已很清楚指出，确实存在贪污和滥权的成分。”

政府应起诉韦恩正名

他表示，若韦恩的指控不确实，政府应起诉韦恩以正视听。

“我要求政府在证据确凿的情形下起诉韦恩，以保护马哈迪的名节、反贪会和政府。如果做不到，就必须让反贪会的调查公布。”

去年底出版，由澳洲资深媒体人韦恩撰写的《马来西亚独行者：在动荡时期的马哈迪》，内容指控马哈迪在掌政时期的数次金融挥霍1000亿令吉，作者坚称曾与马哈迪进行3次访问，捍卫内容的正确及百分百无误。

 

查尔斯：伐木公司与政党有关系:本南性侵案不解决大马成贱民国

Source: Malaysiakini

谢仲洋 7月8 下午 1点15分

在本南支援组织（Penan Support Group）发表维权报告，揭发又有7名本南族女性遭伐木工人性侵后，民主行动党巴生国会议员查尔斯圣地亚哥今日呼吁政府成立皇家调查委员会，彻查本南族女孩与妇女遭性侵案件。

他形容，若我国无法解决本南女性遭性侵课题，将被国际社会视为“贱民”（pariah）国家。

“我们一定要解决这道课题，尤其大马投票支持联合国2007年原住民权益宣言（UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007），否则他国将把大马视为贱民国家。”

【点击观看短片】

斥妇女部掩盖性侵案

查尔斯今日在国会走廊召开记者会，抨击妇女、家庭及社会发展部，对本南女性所遭受的惨况视若无睹，甚至试图掩盖性侵案件的发生。

“这是马来西亚一再发生的题材（theme）。”

他指出，最年轻的受害者年龄竟然只有10岁。

警方经费为由不查案

他也无法苟同，警方宣称经费不足而不能查案的理由。

“有关当局保持沉默，警察以缺乏资金为由放弃调查，违背了早前的诺言。”

查尔斯指出，首相纳吉政府必须为这些不幸遭性侵的本南族女性伸张正义。

“性侵案和罪案涉及伐木公司，这些伐木公司也与政党有密切的联系。这些‘政治庇护’让伐木商得以蔑视法律。”

祖莱达下周紧急动议

在该维权组织发布报告后，出席报告推介仪式的人民公正党妇女组主席兼安邦国会议员祖莱达，已承诺将于下周一提呈国会紧急动议，要求辩论通过敦促政府成立皇委会，彻查东西马原住民在过去所遭受的各种剥削。

查尔斯今日表示，该报告揭发了本南族正遭受砂拉越州政府与伐木公司的围堵和占领。

“（州政府）没有对本南族利益进行任何保护，他们是这个国家最脆弱的群体。”

 

柔佛三人再命丧警枪下:26团体痛斥总警长下台

Source: MerdekaReview

作者／本刊黄书琪 Jul 08, 2010 03:57:23 pm

【本刊黄书琪撰述/摄影】警方枪下亡魂有多少？又有家属向国会议员、首相陈情，三名印裔及马来裔青年逾2008年至2009年期间，遭柔佛州警方射杀丧命，警方以自卫为由捍卫开枪举动，惟无法让家属信服，其中一名18岁马来少年的母亲今抵国会，递交请愿书，希望民主行动党国会领袖林吉祥可以代为申冤。 14岁马来少年阿密努拉希（Aminulrasyid Amzah）遭警方枪击毙命的案件都还没落幕，又有民众上京陈情，为命丧警枪下的青年申冤。 马来西亚人民之声柔佛分会今天前往国会，递交26个柔佛州党团签署的陈情书，希望透过民主行动党国会领袖林吉祥，向首相纳吉提出三项要求，即： 一、命令全国总警长立即辞职，并向涉及警员采取法律行动； 二、成立皇家委员会调查所有警方的枪击毙命案件。 三、成立独立警方投诉及违例委员会（IPCMC）监督警方滥权状况。 林吉祥接下陈情书后表示，他将会代为向首相纳吉说明此事，要求首相给予合理交代。 根据陈情书，在2008年10月20日凌晨三时左右，于新山的柔佛花园（Taman Johor），三名30岁左右印裔青年奥古斯丁（Augustine A/L Mahamenathan）、贾卡迪山（M. Jagathesan）及西华（Siva）先后被四名警察开枪射杀。 前两人身中多枪当场毙命，第三人从枪口下幸运逃生。其中一名死者家属提供的文件显示，死亡原因是胸口及腹部中枪而毙命。警方宣称他们怀疑死者为劫匪因而上前盘问，而该三名男子却用巴冷刀及屠刀攻击警察，所以警方开枪自卫。 质疑警方说辞 不过，根据奥古斯丁的哥哥贾丁（Justin A/L Mahamenethan）及生还者西华反映，上述三人于当日凌晨时分一同到柔佛花园的地下跑马机店。大约凌晨一时，四名便衣警察到来，出示证件后便把三人扣上手铐。 接着，便衣警察先把奥古斯丁拖出店外，西华及贾卡迪山则留在店里。随后西华听到从店外传来数响枪声。过后，西华及贾卡迪山也被拖出店外。他们被解除手铐，并被命令往前逃跑，而四名便衣警察在后面开枪。贾卡迪山不幸中弹倒下，而西华则侥幸逃脱。西华逃脱枪口之后，在离开案发现场不远处，看到便衣警察还在向已经被射倒地的贾卡迪山的身上继续连开数枪。 第一名受害者哥哥贾丁，因为不满警方所给的说辞，所以报案要求针对此案件展开调查。直到现在，没有任何进展。 18岁少年遭警方击毙 另外一宗案件则是发生在2009年10月20日，地点位于柔佛再也花园（Taman Johor Jaya）通往巴西古当的路上，一名年仅18岁的马来青年莫哈末阿夫汉（Mohd Afham Arin）及其同龄友人莫哈末菲道斯（Mohd Firdaus bin Marsawi）共乘一辆摩托，遭三名便衣警察追逐并开枪击毙。 陈情书内指出，莫哈末阿夫汉遭警方一枪击中心脏大动脉而死王亡。警方在案发隔日召开新闻发布会宣称，三名分别乘坐三辆摩托的警察当天企图拦截莫哈末阿夫汉及莫哈末菲道斯共乘摩托车，警方怀疑他俩涉及发生在柔佛再也花园的抢劫案。因为乘坐摩托车后座的莫哈末菲道斯企图用剑袭警，警方被逼开枪自卫而杀死了莫哈末阿夫汉。莫哈末菲道斯当时逃脱遭受枪杀的厄运。 莫哈末菲道斯在2010年1月7日立下一份宣誓书表示，他们并没有用剑袭警，也不是警方所说的抢劫犯。他是在2009年10月19日晚上与莫哈末阿夫汉及一名友人一起在巴西古当森德综合镇（Taman Scientex）共进晚餐后，乘莫哈末的摩托一起前往莫哈末阿夫汉姐姐位于福林园（Taman Daya）的住家。 他们在柔佛再也花园前的一处红绿灯，遇上骑着三辆摩托的三名陌生男子，后者指示他们停下。由于他们害怕这三人是抢劫犯，所以不敢停下。随后其中一名陌生男子向他们高喊“警察！警察！警察！”并企图截停他们，当时，这三名警察并没有身穿制服。因此，莫哈末阿夫汉及莫哈末菲道斯不敢停车受检。 之后，二人加速往巴西古当方向驶去，大约半个小时后，莫哈末菲道斯听到摩托后方传来一响枪声。他马上举起双手表示投降，但接着他又听到第二响枪声，过后双双摔倒在地上。 可是摔在不同方向。莫哈末菲道斯在摔倒后，被其中一名陌生人用枪指着，他马上站起来，并再次举手投降。由于害怕，他慌张地向后退，结果不小心跌下后方斜坡草丛中。莫哈末菲道斯趁机逃走，然后在一个公共电话亭致电给友人要求对方来接他。过后便没有莫哈末阿夫汉的任何消息。他隔天照常上班，在中午12时接获莫哈末阿夫汉家属的电话通知，才知道莫哈末阿夫汉已被警方枪杀死亡。 死者莫哈末阿夫汉的母亲莎比雅（Sapiah Md Elah，右图）今日亲到国会，并递交陈情书给林吉祥，她在谈及其亡子时泪洒记者会现场，哭求政府还子清白，昭雪冤情，把涉案者依法处置。

 

Human Rights Traning

Jom! join the human rights training in Klang, know your rights when police stops you or arrest you, your right to lawyer, your rights during detention and human rights issues in Malaysia.

Admission is free and lunch will be served.

Program Outline

0945 – 1000    Registration

1000 – 1010    Opening speech by MP Klang Charles Santiago

1010 – 1210     1) Introduction to Human rights & General principles

2) Human Rights in Malaysia – Key concerns & challenges

(Detention without trial, civil and political rights, migrant and refugee, etc)

3) Open discussion, 30 minutes

[Speaker : Mr. Tah Moon Hui, Suaram]

1210 – 1240     Lunch time (will be served)

1240 – 1400     Know your rights

– Introduction to Bar Council’s redbook pamphlet

– What is your rights when facing police, arrest, detention and search warrant

[Speaker : Mr. Richard Wee, The Malaysian Bar]

1400               End

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) is a non-governmental Malaysian human rights organisation working for a free, equal, just and sustainable society. Through fighting for civil liberties that are enshrined in the Malaysian Human Rights Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to enable peoples’ participation and the fruition of a civil society in Malaysia. SUARAM monitors, documents, exposes and opposes violations of human rights by Malaysian authorities. SUARAM also works to empower the Malaysian people to build a mass movement for human rights. SUARAM actively intervenes and supports people who have been detained arbitrarily or without trial, evicted from their homes, abused by the police etc. You are always welcome to support our work.

Human Rights Committee of The Malaysian Bar believes that human rights lawyers are not born, but are made. As such, we have during our term primarily sought to increase the level of awareness and education of rights norms within the Bar, and to encourage and generate greater interest among members of the Bar in human rights work….Human rights work is diverse and multi-faceted. By virtue of our profession, every member of the Bar is well-equipped to take an active part in human rights work, and be an advocate or activist for human rights.      (quote from http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/)

 

Human rights: what’s stopping Malaysia?

Source : The Nut Graph

10 Dec 08 : 8.00AM

By Elizabeth Looi and Shanon Shah

elizabethlooi@thenutgraph.com,shanonshah@thenutgraph.com

Eleanor Roosevelt reading the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Spanish text
(source: wikipedia.org)

“MALAYSIA has only signed two out of the eight core international human rights treaties,” says Alice Nah, National Human Rights Society (Hakam) executive committee member.

“As time goes on, however, Malaysia’s reluctance to sign these treaties will become more untenable, particularly if it wants to be a recognised and respected member of the United Nations (UN),” she tells The Nut Graph in an e-mail interview.

Considering the spate of state-led crackdowns on public assemblies, and detentions of activists and opposition politicians under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in recent months, Malaysia seems miles away from this particular goal.

The 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is marked on 10 Dec 2008. The UDHR was adopted by the UN General Assembly in1948 in France. While not legally binding, it is considered a moral obligation for signatories to honour its principles. And this is also why 10 Dec is now internationally recognised as Human Rights Day.

What is legally enforceable is the series of eight UN treaties referred to by Nah that were subsequently derived from the UDHR.

Of the eight treaties that have entered into force, Malaysia has only ratified Cedaw and the CRC — both acceded in 1995 — and with reservations. Malaysia has signed but not ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

What’s stopping Malaysia?

Why is Malaysia so reluctant to ratify the rest of the UN treaties? Tan Sri Simon Sipaun, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) vice-chairperson, says the commission has recommended for the government to ratify the treaties on economic, social and cultural rights, and on civil and political rights but there has been no positive response so far.

“I imagine that the government must have its own reasons for not ratifying them at the moment. Possibly one of the important factors which [the] government has to consider before deciding is associated with the (bumiputera) affirmative policy which could be interpreted at the UN level as discriminatory,” he tells The Nut Graph.

Another Suhakam commissioner, Datuk Dr Denison Jayasooria, elaborates: “The continued reliance on legislation which violates fundamental liberties such as the ISA on preventive detention, the Official Secrets Act and the Printing Presses and Publications Act on freedom of expression makes it difficult for Malaysia to ratify the UN bill of rights.”

Denison cites other laws such as the Police Act which restricts public assemblies, and the Universities and University Colleges Act that control university students’ articulation of alternative views.

Hakam’s Nah explains: “The human rights treaties specify what states can and cannot do to people — they are legally binding. Perhaps Malaysia is afraid of making such commitments.”

Suaram executive director Yap Swee Seng acknowledges that Suhakam has been trying to get the Malaysian government to ratify these treaties, but without any luck. He tells The Nut Graph, “The common excuse by the government is that we need to change our domestic laws so that they are compatible with these treaties before we ratify them. The NGOs, of course, consider this a lame excuse.”

At the heart of the problem is perhaps Suhakam’s status as a national human rights body. Although it was established by Parliament under the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999, Suhakam’s mandate is to investigate human rights abuses. But it can merely advise the Malaysian government, nothing more.

By comparison, the mandate for the National Human Rights Council of Korea includes “other matters deemed necessary to protect and promote human rights”. This allows the Korean commission, among others, to file its opinions on human rights issues with the courts.

Even so, the Korean commission’s independence has recently come under threat by the South Korean government. Additionally, all is not lost with Suhakam — it has a wide mandate to inculcate human rights awareness and education, even in government schools.

Holding accountable

The UN treaty system is not without its criticisms. The first is that it is extremely bureaucratic. Apart from the different treaties, there is also currently a Human Rights Council, which in 2006 superseded the Commission on Human Rights.

The current council also has a separate mechanism called the special procedures to address either specific country situations or thematic human rights considerations around the world. The bureaucratic morass is made worse by the fact that the UN is an inter-governmental organisation. In other words, governments can spend an inordinate amount of time wrangling over even the tiniest of details in a particular declaration or convention.

Abortion protest sign outside Denver, US, during the 2008 Democratic National Convention (source: wikipedia.org)

For example, the Vatican and the US under Bush have consistently blocked attempts to include the right to abortion in any UN effort to defend sexual and reproductive rights. A block of Muslim countries, often led by Malaysia, has also consistently opposed the UN’s efforts to protect the basic rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals. Many Muslim countries prefer the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which is not legally binding.

These criticisms notwithstanding, Nah says that the UN treaties would still be important instruments in holding the Malaysian government accountable to its human rights track record.

“As with any human process, there are faults in the UN system, but these faults can be overcome if there is political will.”

She notes that the Malaysian government will need to report to the UN’s Universal Periodic Review of its human rights track record in February 2009. This is basically Malaysia’s human rights report card from the UN. Continuous poor performance will be embarrassing.

Civil society activist and DAP Member of Parliament (MP) for Klang, Charles Santiago, says it’s imperative for Malaysia to sign all the UN human rights treaties.

“We need to force political parties to take a position on UN treaties. It is also important to ensure that in policy-making, rights must become part and parcel of the process. MPs must be familiar with this as well,” Santiago tells The Nut Graph in a phone interview.

According to Santiago, framing the right to development, water or housing ensures an enabling environment that helps all poor people, regardless of race and religion.

At the moment, however, Suaram’s Yap says that there needs to be more awareness. “Ratifying treaties is still a pretty new concept to a lot of people. People might not know what these treaties are and what the benefits are of ratifying them.”

Nevertheless, Yap remains hopeful about growing public awareness and its impact on political leaders.

“I think with the [current] political changes, there is much more room for human rights work. [After] the past 10 to 20 years, people are now more aware of human rights. [This] is an important foundation [for] progress. So I am quite optimistic about our human rights prospects.”