Back from absence
It has been a while since I updated this blog, hasn’t it? Well for the past weeks I was totally swamped with work that I just did not have time to do anything else very much. But I’m done for now, we’ve effectively started our Christmas holidays (although we still have another week of placements next week, but there won’t be work involved for that).
A (human) right mess!
I’ve always heard horror stories of what happens in the police cells. There was always this suspicion, or reasonably strong belief, from the people that some police practices are not exactly winning prizes for championing human rights. My personal opinion of the police has been skewered somewhat ever since Mr. Anwar Ibrahim came out with a black eye from police custody.
And suddenly, a video of a nude China woman doing sit ups was filmed. And everything after that was a right big mess. The people are enraged. The BBC are reporting every minute of it. And China isn’t very happy with how we treat their citizens.
The responses from the police so far has been amusing at best. "Don’t like our laws, get out of the country?" says the Ketua Polis Negara. Hello! I’m sure a lot of Malaysians do not look forward to doing sit ups in a police cell wearing nothing, is he saying that we should get out of Malaysia too? In any case, I don’t think the tourism ministry are particularly fond of his version of ‘Malaysia:Truly Asia’. I think some people need to think carefully and form words in their heads before making public statements like this. If they don’t, they run the risk of sounding stupid. And causing PR nightmares.
I think it’s good that this thing is brought into the open. The fact that there is actually such an inhuman police procedure goes to show that in the realm of human rights, we’re still very much ‘third world’. I think what made people so angry is the fact that the what the poor woman had to go through was completely legal and the police seem more intent to capture the person who filmed it rather than to admit that such practices are just not right.
I think the main problem with human rights in our country is that we don’t have a guideline on such rights. Sure, most people might say that what the woman had to go through was contrary to human rights, but the police will say that they’re just following procedure. There’s nothing illegal with what they do, which is technically true.
As for the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), well it’s just a toothless tiger. What we need is actual codification of human rights in Malaysia. We need to set it in writing, to give a guideline to the government, the public bodies, the police etc on what can be done and what’s contrary to human rights. And we need to give that statute power, we need to make it so that anyone contravening with this ‘Akta Hak Asasi Manusia’ is acting illegally and will be prosecuted.
Of course, I doubt something like that will see the light of day in the near future. It doesn’t serve any particular purpose to the politicians, and as such they won’t care to champion such a cause. But I believe we do need to tighten up our adherence to human rights. As people get more educated, in turn they begin to be more conscious of their own rights. Don’t believe me? Search the web and see how many young Malaysians write about the poor woman’s ordeal in their blogs, or in bulletin boards or forums online. I can say that the opinions young Malaysians have of the our police right now are at an all time low.
Of course, I’m not saying that the police are all bad all the time. I do know that we have one of the most efficient police forces in the region, and I am thankful that they have kept the peace most of the time. I’m also not implying that our human rights record is downright appalling, for compared to some other countries, ours is still acceptable. What I’m saying is that when there’s room to improve and improvement is for the better, then what’s the harm in improving?
Legal police practices involving nude women doing sit ups can no longer stand in today’s society. It’s simply is not acceptable. If we are to achieve this ‘first world’ status we so covet, we need to make sure that we have the mechanism to protect our people from such blatant infringement of human rights.
December 13th, 2005 at 3:29 am
SUHAKAMs article in response to ur blog:
Malaysia’s five-year-old Human Rights Commission is under criticism for being all bark and no bite in light of the nude-squat issue. ABDUL RAZAK AHMAD finds out whether the criticisms are justified.
IT’S no fun being a “punching bag”, and few know this better than Professor Datuk Mohd Hamdan Adnan.
The consumer advocate earned a reputation for not mincing words when taking on government agencies during his days as president of the Federation of Malaysian Consumers Associations.
But Hamdan, who in the past six years has been in the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) as a representative of non-governmental organisations, finds that the tables have been turned against him.
Those unhappy with Suhakam for not being assertive enough have lately been giving him a piece of their minds instead.
“I always joke that when I was in Fomca, I used to criticise government agencies for not doing their jobs. But since I got involved in Suhakam, I have become a punching bag for people who accuse the commission of not doing its job.
“So I tell people I now know how it feels to be criticised,” said Hamdan with a laugh. But he is not being light-hearted.
Suhakam has come under the spotlight since the video clip of a woman forced to strip by police and do squats surfaced and created an uproar. Now that the Government has set up an independent inquiry to investigate the case, the million-ringgit question is: Where was Suhakam?
Surely, Suhakam should have been the one exposing the case and demanding that action be taken. Surely, Suhakam should be the one investigating and recommending long-term action to prevent such abuses from recurring in future?
From the ongoing debate that the incident has created, the underlying concern on many people’s minds is whether Suhakam has been doing its job.
In response, Suhakam chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman cites one of Suhakam’s earliest probes which was on the allegation of abuse by police that occurred during an illegal gathering on the Kesas Highway to Klang in 2000.
One of the witnesses, a woman, claimed a female officer at the Kapar police station subjected her to a strip-and-squat search. The officer involved told Suhakam’s inquiry panel that such searches were routine practice upon arrest.
The Kesas inquiry recommended that lock-up rules and the Criminal Procedure Code, among others, be made clearer to spell out the extent of permissible searches and forestall any avenue for abuse.
“We have advised them to stop this. Amend the law. Withdraw any instructions if there are any to that effect. But our recommendations were not implemented,” said Abu Talib.
Is he saying that Suhakam has done everything that it could?
“What would your conclusion be when we had already identified instances of violations of human rights by authorities and enforcement agencies, when we took the matter up with them, and advised them that ‘this constitutes violations of human rights, stop it’, but they don’t do it?
“Can you say that we have not done anything? Can you say that we are ineffective?”
Suhakam was set up by an Act of Parliament in 2000. It has four basic duties: To popularise human rights and make it a culture in Malaysia; to ensure that Malaysian laws are consistent with human rights principles; to make Malaysia a signatory to international human rights treatises; and to investigate rights violations.
Suhakam has no enforcement powers but is given strong investigative powers. It is able to call up individuals and obtain documents relating to cases brought before it.
Some believe that this framework is inadequate. The law should be changed so that Suhakam can have the bite to go along with its bark.
“Suhakam cannot rely on the goodwill of the departments to act. The commission can make recommendations but if the departments don’t implement them then what’s the use?” asks DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng.
Lim led a 13-member delegation from the Opposition party to Suhakam headquarters in Kuala Lumpur on Friday. They met Suhakam to air the party’s views ahead of World Human Rights Day yesterday.
“Suhakam must have powers to enforce compliance, and to discipline errant government personnel,” said Lim.
But vesting Suhakam with enforcement powers may not be the answer.
“Suhakam was created to serve an advisory role to the Government. It would be a bad idea to suddenly turn it into an enforcement agency,” said Datuk Seri Mohd Nazri Aziz, chairman of the Parliamentary Caucus on Human Rights and Good Governance.
On this particular point, Abu Talib, a former Attorney-General, concurred.
“In the case of the woman forced to strip and do squats, the police have the power to charge (the accused) if the Attorney-General feels there should be charges.
“But if Suhakam had powers of enforcement, it would lead to a parallel investigation and parallel action. There will be duplicity of powers that can lead to confusion and overlapping jurisdictions,” he said.
The underlying issue, said Abu Talib, is not about giving Suhakam enforcement powers. It is about the desire to act.
“There must be a greater commitment by all concerned, particularly the authorities, if we are going to get close to the ideals of the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights.”
Government agencies aren’t the only ones sitting on Suhakam’s recommendations.
Suhakam is required to submit annual reports to Parliament stating all its activities and recommendations for that year. The report for a particular year must land on the Dewan Rakyat Speaker’s table before the first sitting of Parliament for the next year.
Since its inception, Suhakam has issued four annual reports; the report for 2005 is currently being drafted.
“Suhakam has made so many good reports and many of their recommendations are very practical and doable. But the question is why are they not being debated in Parliament?” asks Bar Council president Yeo Yang Poh.
“Without fail, we submitted our reports but, sorry to say,
they were never debated in Parliament,” said Abu Talib.
Not one?
“None. I therefore hope the chairman of the Parliamentary Caucus on Human Rights will take due regard of our reports, and that the caucus will raise human rights issues we identified in our annual reports and do what is possible to ensure action,” said Abu Talib.
Is Abu Talib implying that the ball is now in the Parliamentarians’ court?
“I can’t answer that. We are required only to submit our recommendations to the authorities, and our annual report to Parliament. I leave it to their wisdom to make use of the material we have provided them,” he said.
Caucus chairman Nazri said in response that one should not mistake the frontline role that Suhakam played in the first place.
“The caucus is an informal grouping of like-minded politicians, but we are not a permanent complaints bureau,” he said.
“Anyone with a human rights abuse allegation should go to Suhakam first, and Suhakam should also interact more closely with MPs to brief them on their reports and recommendations.
“They should also take the initiative to lobby MPs for amendments to laws, which we can then accommodate via a Private Member’s Bill, for instance.”
It’s not clear where this leaves the ball. But someone has got to pick it up, because recent developments indicate that Suhakam will become more prominent.
As it is, said Hamdan, the commission had processed over 1,000 individual complaints of rights abuses, of which 30 per cent were made by individuals claiming to have exhausted all other avenues of redress, and the number was growing.
“To say that Suhakam has not done anything or that there has been no improvement is just totally wrong,” said Hamdan.
He said the police now have more respect for detainees, and that there has been a marked improvement in how prison authorities treat their charges.
“They are more careful and humane in part because of us, and Suhakam does work very closely especially with the police.
“The very fact that we are strongly supported by the Government shows openness and a willingness to make things better. But I suppose that we need to make the effort to be more visible and engaged with the public.
“Because Suhakam is so important to Malaysians, we must be seen to be doing our job,” he said.