If the Commission can address the crucial issues as a matter of priority, then it deserves all the co-operation and respect By P Ramakrishnan We have come with an open mind to have a free, frank and hopefully a fruitful dialogue with the Commission. Though there was no consultation regarding the suitability of the date and the convenience of the time, we have, nevertheless, come offering our co-operation. It is in this spirit that I wish to address the Commission very frankly. 1. We fail to understand why the Commission is located at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Commission is not addressing the international human rights situation. Its concern is the status of human rights in Malaysia ... right here, at home. By raising this I don't mean to suggest that it ought to be located at the Ministry of Home Affairs. That is not my intention. For its own credibility as well as to convince the public at large of its independence, the Commission should distance itself from its present location – the sooner the better. Otherwise it would be perceived as an appendage of the government. That would be a pity. We want the Commission to be an effective instrument of justice that will fearlessly and vigorously protect and promote human rights. 2. We reject the definition of human rights as enunciated in the Act. It is not acceptable to us. Whatever human rights that were guaranteed by the Merdeka Constitution have, over the years, either been whittled down or abolished through various undemocratic legislation and regulations thus rendering human rights meaningless and making a mockery of the very concept of human rights. 3. We regret that the mandate of the Commission is too narrow and restrictive. It is stated that when a complaint is a subject matter of any proceedings pending in any court, the Commission cannot take up the complaint. It is also stated that a complaint taken up by the Commission, when it subsequently becomes a subject matter of court proceedings, then the Commission has to cease its inquiry immediately. Knowing that some cases drag on for years without an end, it is patently unjust that a complainant is without remedy for so long. In a situation where a case is dismissed on technical grounds, the Commission is unable to intervene because the court had determined the case. It is grossly unfair that a complainant is denied his justice through a technicality. We are not sure whether in certain cases the Commission can carry on with parallel inquiry when the case is in court. Let me explain: While Tian Chua's case of having taken part in an unlawful assembly is pending in court, can the Commission investigate his complaint regarding police violence against him? In this instance, the police violence against Tian Chua is not pending in court. He is being charged for unlawful assembly. Likewise, while Irene Fernandez's case for publishing false information is proceeding in court, witnesses in this case have told incredible tales of horror and terror involving police brutality and barbarity. Can the Commission on its own investigate this alleged police barbarism which is not a subject matter before the court? While the foreign witnesses are available at this moment, would the Commission take up this case? 4. We are greatly disturbed that suspects are treated as convicts: they don't have access to lawyers when arrested; they are thrown into crowded cells housing convicted criminals; they're stripped to their underwear and stripped off their dignity; they're denied toilet privacy and facility; they lack drinking water and their meals are terrible. Some of them have even been reportedly assaulted. This situation is intolerable and repugnant to our notion of justice. The Commission should look into this as a matter of urgency. 5. We are encouraged that the Commission has taken a commendable stand on the right of assembly. We urge the Commission to state its stand on ISA, OSA, the Sedition Act, the Police Act, the Universities And University Colleges Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act - all of which impinge upon our human rights. It is common knowledge how these Acts have been used and abused to stifle dissent and silence criticism. This is another area which is crying out for redress. If the Commission can move with a sense of urgency and address these crucial issues as a matter of priority, then it deserves all the co-operation and respect.
|
