13 hours in Airport Lock-up
Tian Chua's fiancee refused entry into Malaysia, denied food and water and deported the next day
by Mabel Au
“There are many people outside my office, I think they are policemen here to arrest me. My colleague will call you later. Please inform my father. Take care.”
Those were Tian Chua’s last words before he was arrested on 10 April 2001. Five minutes later Wai, Tian’s colleague, called and told me Tian was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
I asked him who those people were, whether they had any proof of identity and had shown any warrant.
Wai told me Tian was taken away by eight people but only one of them was in police uniform. The plainclothes police did not show any proof of identity or document. They only told Wai that Tian was being arrested under the ISA and told him to inform Tian’s family.
After the phonecall, I was completely lost. I was confused by the loose procedure of the arrest. To me, the police force is only an executive body of the legal system; they have to operate according to a set of legal procedures. The Malaysian police do not seem to be very familiar with this principle. If the police, being part of the legal system, should fail to respect the rule of law, how can we trust them to defend law and order in society?
Given such unprofessional practices, how can Malaysia claim to be a modern state? How can its leader claim to be the leader of other developing countries? This confusion was only the beginning; more ridiculous things happened that made me feel like I had been taken back to a feudal society.
On 10 April, Tian disappeared. To get more information of the arrest, the families of other detainees and I ran to the police station, the high
court and the national human rights commission (Suhakam).
Sadly, despite all this effort, the police would not release any information to us. We did not even know where our family members were. When I expressed my concern over Tian’s health, the police assured us that “all the detainees are in good health”.
Like all other families of detainees, our right of access to our loved ones was taken away by the heartless authorities. The torture was not only on the detainees but also on the families. Who will compensate us for all this agony? The police, the home affairs minister or the prime minister?
Even Murderers Have a Right to Lawyers
After the arrest, the police accused Tian and the other four ISA detainees of ”allegedly planning to use militant means and violent street demonstrations to topple the government”. The police claimed that they had strong evidence to back the accusation, but they did not charge the detainees in court.
Everywhere in the world, even murderers have the right of access to lawyers and a chance to defend themselves in court. Doesn’t Tian, a person who has never committed any crime but who has fought for justice and democracy in society, deserve a fair trial? Why are the authorities so afraid of taking Tian to court? Do they lack confidence in the court or do they lack confidence in themselves?
The Malaysian judicial system has been disappointing. Universally, the court must be fair and impartial. The job of the judge is to listen to the statements of the prosecutor and the defence lawyer and then to make an impartial judgement.
I had a very strange experience in the Malaysian court, however. I could not differentiate between the judge and the prosecutor when I was sitting in court to witness Tian and the other four ISA detainees’ application for habeas corpus.
The judge seemed more keen on challenging our lawyer than the prosecutor. How could we, ordinary citizens, win in such a situation? Not surprisingly, our application was dismissed. Having sat in the Malaysian court, I felt sorry for the Malaysians.
How can they live in a peaceful society when they have to contend with such people in the judicial system? What would happen if some day people lose confidence in the courts and refuse to respect law and order? Who would be responsible?
"Your Status is National Security"
Since Tian was arrested and detained, I have tried all means to visit him. On 10 June 2001, 60 days after his arrest, I finally managed to visit him for the first and last time.
As I am not a Malaysian citizen, I cannot stay in Malaysia for more than 30 days at any one time. Over a month later, on 21 July 2001, I flew from Hong Kong to Malaysia for the second visit, but the Malaysian immigration denied me entry.
After I demanded an explanation several times, the immigration officer told me: “Your name is on our list. The computer shows that your status is national security”.
I demanded to call my lawyer and my embassy, the embassy of the People’s Republic of China, but all my demands were rejected. The immigration then put me in the lock-up at the airport for 13 hours.
I was denied water and food in the lock-up. Luckily, other women in the lock-up kindly shared their water and food with me. Most of the women were having various immigration problems; all of them had complaints about the Malaysian immigration.
An Indonesian woman with tears in her eyes complained that she could not even make a phonecall to her Malaysian employer to prove her identity as a migrant worker.
A pregnant Bangladeshi woman felt sick as there was no furniture in the lock-up and everybody had to sleep on the hard floor.
Others alleged they had been asked for bribe or that they had been sexually harassed.
The Chinese women alleged they were all slapped in the face once they were brought to the lock-up. They said to me: “I have never imagined the situation in Malaysia can be as bad as what I experienced in these few days. I can tell you there are no human rights here.” Even a mainland Chinese complained about the human rights situation in Malaysia. How ironic that is!
I was deported back to Hong Kong the next day. As the prison authority in Malaysia censors all mail, I have not been able to communicate with Tian since then.
I have no regrets, however. The 13-hour detention in Malaysia provided me with an opportunity to experience the vulnerability of an individual when the people in power do not respect human rights. Once again, it reaffirmed Tian’s belief in the continuous struggle for human rights and justice. He understood very clearly that he might have to sacrifice his individual freedom to fight for his belief.
Being his girlfriend, I understood this well. I remembered Tian asking me what I would do if he became a political detainee one day. My answer was: “I will continue with my work and my life as usual. Then you do not have to worry about me. You can do whatever you have to do for the reformasi movement. Do you have anything special you expect me to do for you?”
Tian thought for awhile and said, “Nothing. I believe you can take care of yourself. I shall be happy as long as you enjoy a happy life.”
My heart sinks whenever I recall what he said. All I wish is that he can keep up his spirit and stay in good physical and psychological health, in order to continue the struggle.
ISA A Political Tool
Their accounts of their personal experience prove that the ISA is a political tool to suppress the voice of the people, by allowing the authorities to detain anybody without trial and without a time limit. As an activist and on behalf of the families of the detainees, I sincerely invite people from all walks of life to support the AIM campaign.
Now tell us what you think. E-mail us.
|
||||||||||||||||
However, as everyone knew, Tian had been beaten up at every arrest since 1998. He has also suffered from asthma attacks from time to time. Nobody can assure me of his well-being until I see him for myself; but I was denied access to him during the first 60 days of the detention.
After 30 April 2001, the opposition parties, 75 (now 81) NGOs and the families of ISA detainees formed a committee and launched the AIM — Abolish ISA Movement. During the AIM campaign, I met a lot of ISA ex-detainees. They were unionists, workers, students and NGO activists. They came out to support AIM and tell people about the torture they had experienced.