No need to amend - just repeal the ISA.. People need to be consulted before the government decides...

Secret....secret... and suddenly tabled in Parliament and quickly passed. (This is what is happening with the ISA - suddenly, we will have the Bill in Parliament in March - and the MPs will be asked to vote...) 

Something is very wrong with this process - yes, the people seem to be left out. There is no time for even the MPs to get back and consult with his/her constituents, and will have to immediately vote "Yes' if BN, and "No', if Opposition. The voting patterns in the Parliament also is indicative of the character and the quality of Malaysia's parliamentarians. The question is never whether you support it or not - MPs, especially from the UMNO-led BN, have really no need to think, or question, ....but just vote anything put forward by the government.

What are the amendments proposed - please consult the people...on this controversial ISA - There is a precedence, for this was what was done when the Criminal Procedure Code,... was being amended. A select committee formed. Select Committee go around the country having dialogues and getting feedback. Select Committee present feedback and proporsals back to Parliament... and we move on.

Save for 'emergency' Bills, all Bills should be presented to all MPs at least at the sitting before which the Bill is scheduled for 1st reading. This will give time for study', consultations, etc..

PUTRAJAYA: Amendments to the highly-controversial Internal Secu­rity Act (ISA) is expec­­ted to outline in detail acts defined as a threat to national security.

"We are doing this for the public and no one, has any interest or hidden agenda"- DATUK SERI HISHAMMUDDIN TUN HUSSEIN

 

This was to dispel certain perception that the Act was being used to protect the political interest of certain parties.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Hisham­muddin Tun Hussein said the ministry had been engaging groups on the matter, and these concerned people had wanted the Government to spell out clearly what was defined as security threat to the nation.

He said those arrested under the ISA were found to have engaged in militancy and terrorist activities.

“Once the amended ISA is revealed, the public will have a better and clearer picture of the Act.

“We are doing this for the public and no one, including myself, has any interest or hidden agenda,” he said yesterday after chairing a high-level meeting to look to the amendments of the Act.

Also present at the meeting were Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, Culture, Communications and Arts Minister Datuk Seri Rais Yatim, Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Attorney-General (A-G) Tan Sri Gani Patail.

Hisham­­­muddin said the draft of the amendments were in the A-G Chamber’s office and would be presented to the Cabinet once it has been looked through by legal experts.

The Act will be up for its first reading in the coming Parliament session starting March.

The minister said the amendments would involve the five areas of public concern – the length of detention, rights and treatment of detainees and their families, the power of the Home Minister, the use of ISA for political reasons and detention without trial.

“When the public sees that their concerns are being looked into, they will realise that we are doing our job sincerely and truthfully.

“I can say for sure that majority of Malaysians will be satisfied with the amendments,” he said.- Star, 10/2/2010, Move to provide clearer picture of offences under ISA

The Minister was reported stating, "He said those arrested under the ISA were found to have engaged in militancy and terrorist activities.". I believe he was refering to those who had been recently arrested under the ISA.

But Minister, the problem is Malaysians do not trust you (or the UMNO-led BN) government anymore. Do not lie to us. 

With regard the foreigners, I wonder whether Malaysia even has any right to arrest and detain them? What law are they being alleged to have broken? Where did they allegedly break this law?

Who told us that they "were found to have engaged in militancy and terrorist activities"? USA? Britain? - well, they also said that there was weapons of mass destruction when they invaded and colonized Iraq.

Previously, those detained under the ISA had the right to challenge the reasons for their detentions in court - and if the Minister could not convince the courts, the detainees were released. [Maybe, this right of the detainee should be brought back in the current amendments]

The ISA is a very bad law - that allows for indefinite detention without trial (I believe the longest one person has been continuously detained under the ISA is 16 years]. Detained with no right to defend one's self. No right to a fair trial. Nothing - Detained just because the Minister feels it is right to keep the person detained. 

Just abolish the ISA and all other laws that allow for Detention Without Trial. In Malaysia, we already have sufficient other laws. 

No need amendment - just repeal the ISA

Anti-Death Penalty Protest in front of Malaysian Embassy in London on 4/3/2010

PICKET-LINE IN FRONT OF THE MALAYSIAN EMBASSY

FOR AN END TO THE DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG OFFENSES IN MALAYSIA AND ELSEWHERE JOIN US IN FRONT OF THE MALAYSIAN EMBASSY, 45 BELGRAVE SQUARE, LONDON SW1X 8QT (near Hyde Park Corner, Piccadilly Line). THURSDAY 4 MARCH 2010, 1 PM published 29 January 19:25, by encod. update 3 February 13:35 All the versions of this article: [English] [français]

> English (en) > AGENDA > PICKET-LINE IN FRONT OF THE MALAYSIAN EMBASSY DOWNLOAD THE FLYER From March 8 to 12, 2010 during the yearly meeting of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna, governments from all over the world will once again declare their support to the global fight against drugs, i.e. the substances that were prohibited worldwide by a UN Convention in 1961. In Malaysia, as in 21 other countries in the world, people who use or possess relatively small quantities of drugs, including cannabis, are sentenced to death. These sentences are mandatory: judges have no possibility to invoke any extenuating circumstance. Furthermore, the usual burden of proof is reversed so that an individual is presumed to be guilty unless he or she can prove otherwise. International Conventions on Human Rights, various UN Human Rights Bodies and the UN Secretary General have expressed that the “death penalty should only be considered in cases where the crime is intentional and results in lethal or extremely grave consequences, not in cases of economic, non-violent or victimless offences. In those cases a death sentence may be considered as an arbitrary execution.” The use, sale or trafficking of drugs is not intended to have a lethal outcome. People use drugs to feel good or to feel better, and as long as there is a demand there will always be a supply. Also in Malaysia, drug use has continued to rise in spite of the death penalty. The people who are occasionally caught by authorities do not have major responsibilities in this business. Killing them will not scare the drug gangs away. On the contrary: thanks to these punishments, the leaders in the drug business can continue to justify extraordinary high prices for their goods Legitimized by the United Nations, drug prohibition continues to drive repressive policies and legislation including death sentence. These policies are typically rooted in moral in stead of rational arguments, and impede the development of progressive and effective responses to any problems that the use of drugs may cause. Attached documents FLYER 4 MARCH (PDF - 1.7 Mb, 3 February)

Was because PR ADUNs betrayed the people of Perak - Better focus on differences rather than 'distractions'

Well, the Federal Court has ruled that the UMNO-BN Menteri Besar is the MB of Perak. It was a unanimous decision apparently (5-0), but we have to wait for the written judgments to see whether all 5 agreed on all matters or not.

The fight for the Perak MBship was at all times, in my opinion, a question of proper procedure and timing. 

When the THREE(3) plus 1 Pakatan Rakyat State Assemblyperson left the Pakatan Rakyat, and withdrew their support from the PR-Menteri Besar - that was it. Nizar had already lost the confidence of the majority...and his options was to resign, or to get the Sultan to dissolve the State Legislative Assembly so that new elections be called. Sultan has the right to dissolve or not - and here, he chose not to dissolve it, hence Nizar had no choice but to resign.

But, before Nizar formally resigned, the Sultan proceeded in appointing UMNO-BN's Zambry as the new MB of Perak. Could the Sultan do that? Was the appointment of Zambry, before the resignation of Nizar, valid? - That should have been the questions that the court should have focussed on, and decided but somehow it all went somewhere else..

Nizar had no choice and had to resign - that is fact. 

Zambry would have become the Menteri Besar after that - that is another fact.

What was unfair was that the people of Perak were cheated - the people chose Pakatan Rakyat as their legitimate government, and now they have to endure again an UMNO-led BN government for a few months...years

Whose fault is it?

* Well, it is the fault of the ADUNs who potrayed themselves as belonging to one party, a factor the people took into account and voted them in, and thereafter jumping and throwing the support with the BN

* Well, it is the fault of the Pakatan Rakyat for choosing and allowing these persons to run under the PR ticket as ADUNs. [That is why background...and history is an important consideration. I believe most were ex-BN, hence with an history of 'jumping' - so it came as no surprise when they jumped back again.... but for DAP, it certainly was a big shock]

*  Well, it was also the fault of the UMNO-led BN who 'woo-ed', etc these persons...hence not respecting the democratic choice of the people...

PKR has just too many ex-BN types ....and they are being joined by more and more 'party hoppers' from the BN....Zaid Ibrahim, Chua Jui Meng,... and come next elections, what will be the price for jumping back to the UMNO-led BN, and I will not be surprised that it is some of these leaders of PKR that may be leading the group...

The people needs to know that the Pakatan Rakyat (and its chosen MPs and ADUNs) are not going to betray them. After all, it is a 'great risk' that many take in casting a vote for the Opposition ....and betrayal by the elected rep is something that may just push Malaysians back to the 'tidak apa' position and the keeping of the UMNO-led BN in power... so beware Pakatan Rakyat.

What the people need to know now is how will the government under the Pakatan Rakyat be different?...better?

Hence, focus on the legal battles of Perak, Anwar's 2nd Sodomy Trial, failures of UMNO-led BN's past and present failures is just not enough - how will you be different?

Local Council Elections - that the PR promised before 2008 GE - and then there is still no Local Council Elections at all - no legal battles, nothing... [Only Perak under Nizar allowed its people to elect their own Kampung Heads (and 1 Kampung Baru head) - why was this also not done in the other Pakatan Rakyat ruled States....

Allah issue - guess what, there are State Enactments also in the Pakatan Rakyat states that say that Allah (and some other words) cannot be used by persons other than Muslims. Yes, it clearly goes against the position of the Pakatan Rakyat - so, why are they not amending these 'bad laws' which only needs a simple majority to amend. A weakness in Pakatan Rakyat. A fear...A worry - but this certainly is not a characteristic we want to see in the future people who seek to govern Malaysia...and most of its States, do we?

The Federal Court, the highest court in the country, has delivered a unanimous decision in declaring that Zambry Abd Kadir of BN is the rightful Perak menteri besar.

In doing so about 11am, it also dimissed the application by Pakatan Rakyat's Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin.

In immediate comments at a press conference, Nizar said he has not decided whether or not to file a review.

"We will scrutinise the written judgment and then decide," he said, calling for calm among supporters.

"This is the saddest day (for) Malaysia as this shows the judiciary is not indepedent. Our target now is to win back Perak."
 

Perak BN senior exco Hamidah Osman said: "I am grateful for the decision and hope everyone will accept it. This is a victory for the people of Perak."
However, DAP leader Lim Kit Siang disagreed, saying the "5-0 decision is a shameful moment for the judiciary".

On his Twitter page, he described this as a "black day for justice".

PKR Gopeng MP Dr Lee Boon Chye said: "Although we lost 1Perak, we might win 1Malaysia in the next general election."
 

Perak DAP head and Sitiawan assemblyperson Ngeh Koo Ham said the current Perak government is not the people's government as 54 percent of the voters had chosen Pakatan in the 2008 general election.

Outside the court, the Pakatan Rakyat crowd shouted "Bubar DUN", "Zambry penakut", "tipu" and "rasuah" when they heard the news.

BN supporters, however, celebrated as their leaders came out of court.

The decision
President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, led a five-member bench in delivering the verdict.

The others were Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Arifin Zakaria and Justices Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin, Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Abdull Hamid Embong of the Federal Court.

Justice Arifin who read the judgment ruled that it is not necessary for a vote of confidence to be done in the state assembly, and that the sultan can sack the MB. Zambry therefore commands support in the House with 31 seats. 

The attorney-general's chambers was represented by the head of prosecution division Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah and Kamaluddin Md Said, the head of the Trial and Appeals division.

Nizar's lawyers were Philip Koh, Chan Kok Keong, Leong, Edmund Bon, Miohd Hanipa Maidin, Ranjit Singh, and Razlan Hadri Zulkifli.

Zambry's lawyers are Cecil Abraham and Sunil Abraham. Zambry himself was not present in court for the decision.

Mohd Hafarizam Harun and M Reza Hassan held a watching brief for Umno. 

Previous judicial decisions

BN was seen to have usurped power in Perak when three Pakatan Rakyat assemblypersons switched sides to become BN-friendly Independents in February last year, leading to Pakatan seeking legal recourse.

On May 11, Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim had ruled that Nizar is the rightful menteri besar.

"He is, and was, at all material times the chief minister of Perak," Abdul Aziz told the court.

However, the appellate court's three-member bench unanimously overturned the decision in favour of Zambry, saying that the High Court judge had failed to properly and adequately appreciate the entire evidence before him.

"We hold the view that the granting or the withholding of the request for the dissolution of the state legislative assembly is royal prerogative,” ruled Justice Md Raus Sharif.

The Federal Court had, on Nov 5 last year, heard Nizar's appeal and submission for more then six hours

The court had earlier dismissed Nizar's application for a full bench of 11 judges or an enlarged panel. - Malaysiakini, 9/2/2010, Perak MB - it's Zambry!

Compulsory Public Service for Doctors - I say maintain & lengthen, and...

Malaysia spends a lot of money in training Malaysians to become doctors - but alas, a large number of the doctors just cannot wait for the end of their 'compulsory service' period to run away into the private sector .... or even overseas. The available spaces for persons to be trained as doctors is also limited - so if we give it to people who will leave 'public service' very fast, does it benefit Malaysians, especially the poor and those not rich who still depend on government hospitals for healthcare.

Just a short while back, there was a suggestion that the length of this compulsory public service be extended to 10 years from its current 3 years. That came from the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department - but alas,  today the suggestion is to reduce the 'compulsory service' , and this suggestion is coming from the Minister of Health.

I believe that that the following is the best solution

 

(1)    For all doctors, the current 'two years of housemanship and three years of compulsory public service' is maintained. Note that also these 'fresh doctors' benefit a lot from the experience that they obtain in public service - the number and range of patients they get to see in these few years maybe even more than the number they may see in the next 10 years. Further, it certainly puts them in touch with Malaysians, especially the poor and the low-incomed, which they will never see in private practice - good for 1Malaysia... a 'national service'

(2)    Full scholarships medical graduates be required to provide at least 10-20 years of public service.

(3)    Medical Graduates from the local universities be required to do the current 'two years of housemanship and five(5) years of compulsory public service'

 

(4)    Salaries of doctors and specialist (and other medical workers) be increased.

(5)    There be no age-limit for the joining of public service. This means that doctors at even 40 or 45 be allowed to join the public service with full benefits, including pension. The requirement should be a minimum of 10 years of service. Retirement age for doctors/specialists/medical staff should also be increased to 65.

(6)    Maybe, we should be also looking at Thailand - where people can go to private hospitals/clinics and get healthcare at the same rate as in government hospitals/clinics. This may be a solution of extending the coverage of public health/medical care, without being just concerned about the numbers of doctors in public service.

(7)     Am very concerned with the present Prime Minister of Malaysia, the Minister of  Health and the DG of health, as they seem little concerned about ensuring free 'universal healthcare' for all. There is too much emphasis on 'medical tourism' - attracting foreigners to come to Malaysia to get healthcare not just in 'private' facilities but also government establishment. We still cannot cater to the health/medical needs of the people of Malaysia - and we are already interested in 'profits'. Remember, it was this PM who tried to privatize IJN - sell it to a private entity - our one and only national heart institute, which is already beyond the reach of the most Malaysians - save for 'public servants' and rich private individuals.

I will be concerned about proposals coming from the Minister of Health (or its DG) - they certainly seem not so concerned about the medical/healthcare of Malaysians. Najib's 1Malaysia Clinics, a good move, but I wonder whether it is just a 'public gimmick' that will 'blind' us from what maybe his true 'corporate nature' , i.e. interested only in making profits for a few... 

 

 

PETALING JAYA: The Government is mulling over whether to reduce the compulsory public service period for doctors to two years.

Currently, medical graduates are required to do two years of housemanship and three years of compulsory public service.

Health director-general Tan Sri Dr Ismail Merican said yesterday that the ministry was looking into it and would announce a decision as soon as possible.

Health Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai had earlier yesterday refuted suggestions that the Government would extend the compulsory public service to 10 years.

“It is not true. We are not going to extend it to 10 years.

“We are looking to cut it short,” he said in a press conference after launching B-Nes Sdn Bhd.
Earlier this month, Minister in Prime Minister’s department Senator Datuk T. Murugiah suggested that doctors’ compulsory public service be extended to up to 10 years to ease the shortage of doctors in the country.

Liow said that the reduced service time would make it more attractive for doctors to continue working for the Government.

He said that there were about 300 to 400 doctors leaving the country every year while the number of trainee doctors had increased to 3,000 from 700 in 2001.

“If you force them to work, they will tend to leave.

“You must create attractiveness and better incentives,” Liow said, adding that if the ruling was implemented, it would take effect for the new batch of medical graduates as the current batch have a fixed learning schedule.

When asked if this would apply to doctors working abroad, he replied that specialists and doctors above the age of 40, do not need to serve the compulsory service.

Meanwhile, Liow said that Malaysian doctors would not be effected by the implementation of the Asian Free Trade Area (Afta) agreement this year as they are able to compete with foreign doctors.

He also said that there would not be an oversupply of doctors because of the liberalisation.- Star, 8/2/2010, Shorter compulsory public service period for docs mulled
 

Sultans/YDPs in Pakatan Rakyat States can lead the way by commuting death sentence to imprisonment

If you are caught with a certain amount of drugs - even if you did not know that you were carrying(or had the) drugs - you can end up being charged for an offence of 'drug trafficking' . And at the end of the trial, when you are convicted the judges do not have any choice but to sentence you to death....

39B.  Trafficking in dangerous drug. (DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT 1952)

(1) No person shall, on his own behalf or on behalf of any other person, whether or not such other person is in Malaysia -

(a) traffic in a dangerous drug;
(b) offer to traffic in a dangerous drug; or
(c) do or offer to do an act preparatory to or for the purpose of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

(2) Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and shall be punished on conviction with death.

Judges have no option to give another sentence, especially when the accused is really a person not involved in the drug trafficking business but a 'mule' who was conned, or was a person that seem to have been 'set up' by some persons.

Well all someone needs to do really is to put a bag filled with drugs in your car boot without your knowledge, secretly alert the police...who will stop your car - and guess what you will be charged with 'drug trafficking' - and will be required to prove otherwise, and can you do that convincingly? I doubt it - and you go to the gallows...to be killed by Malaysia for 'drug trafficking'.

Don't the prosecution have to prove that I was involved in drug trafficking, as it most criminal cases?

Well, for drugs that are some legal presumptions that apply :

1- If you are found with a certain amount of drugs - then you are involved in drug trafficking

2- If the drugs are found with you, in your house, your car....it is deemed that it is yours, and that you knew it was a dangerous drugs.

Then, the burden shifts to the accused person to prove otherwise - and this is almost impossible, and so many have been killed by the State, and many languish waiting for the day that they will be executed...

For justice, the following need to be done:-

1- Abolish the death penalty

2- Abolish the mandatory death sentence - returning back the decision as to what sentence to impose on the judge hearing the case. [The law, if it wants to can state the maximum and/or minimum sentences - giving judges a discretion when it comes to sentencing]

3- Remove all these legal presumption as to possession, knowledge of the nature of drug, and drug trafficking, etc  - The burden of proving this must always lie with the prosecution just like it is in all other criminal cases..

37.  Presumptions. (DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT 1952)

In all proceedings under this Act or any regulation made thereunder -

....(d) any person who is found to have had in custody or under his control anything whatsoever containing any dangerous drug shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have been in possession of such drug and shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have known the nature of such drug;

(da) any person who is found in possession of -

(i) 15 grammes or more in weight of heroin;
(ii) 15 grammes or more in weight of morphine;
(iii) 15 grammes or more in weight of monoacetylmorphines;
(iiia) a total of 15 grammes or more in weight of heroin, morphine and monoacetylmorphines or a total of 15 grammes or more in weight of any two of the said dangerous drugs;
(iv) 1,000 grammes or more in weight of prepared opium;
(v) 1,000 grammes or more in weight of raw opium;
(va) a total of 1,000 grammes or more in weight of prepared opium and raw opium;
(vi) 200 grammes or more in weight of cannabis,
(vii) 200 grammes or more in weight of cannabis resin;
(viii) a total of 200 grammes or more in weight of cannabis and cannabis resin;
(ix) 40 grammes or more in weight of cocaine;
(x) 2,000 grammes or more in weight of cocoa leaves;
(xi) 50 grammes or more in weight of 2-Amino-1-(2, 5-dimethoxy-4-methyl) phenylpropane;
(xii) 50 grammes or more in weight of Amphetamine;
(xiii) 50 grammes or more in weight of 2, 5-Dimethoxyamphetamine (DMA);
(xiv) 50 grammes or more in weight of Dimethoxybromoamphetamine (DOB);
(xv) 50 grammes or more in weight of 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine (DOET);
(xvi) 50 grammes or more in weight of Methamphetamine;
(xvii) 50 grammes or more in weight of 5-Methoxy-3, 4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MMDA);
(xviii) 50 grammes or more in weight of Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA);
(xix) 50 grammes or more in weight of N-ethyl MDA;
(xx) 50 grammes or more in weight of N-hydroxy MDA;
(xxi) 50 grammes or more in weight of N-methyl-l-(3, 4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-butanamine;
(xxii) 50 grammes or more in weight of 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA);
(xxiii) 50 grammes or more in weight of Paramethoxyamphetamine (PMA);
(xxiv) 50 grammes or more in weight of 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine (3, 4, 5-TMA); or
(xxv) a total of 50 grammes or more in weight of any combination of the dangerous drugs listed in subparagraphs (xi) to (xxiv),

otherwise than in accordance with the authority of this Act or any other written law, shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to be trafficking in the said drug ....

How many people have been executed for 'drug trafficking' in Malaysia? How many were real drug traffickers - and how many were stupid ignorant 'mules'? How many were innocents who had drugs planted on them? 

How many are still waiting for the day that they will be hanged? 

Well, there is the power to pardon? This power is with the King and the Sultans....so maybe, for the Pakatan Rakyat States, the Menteri Besar's can advice that all persons awaiting their death sentence be pardoned - their sentence commuted to a life sentence (or maybe a full natural life sentence)

SINGAPORE: Two Malaysians, one of them a woman, were sentenced to death on Friday for drug trafficking.

Pang Siew Fum, 54 and Cheong Chun Yin, 26, were arrested by the city-state’s Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) officers on June 16, 2008 after they were found to be trafficking a total of 7.7kg of diamorphine.

Local media reported Friday that Cheong arrived at Changi Airport on a SilkAir flight from Myanmar carrying a black trolley luggage bag.

He later met Pang at Terminal 2 and handed her the bag in the carpark before he left in a taxi while Pang drove to Toa Payoh.

CNB officers who had been tailing the pair subsequently arrested them.

About 2.7kg of diamorphine was found in the black bag, and at Pang’s house, officers found another two luggage bags containing about 5kg of diamorphine.

Pang claimed she thought the bag from Cheong contained precious stones and Buddha pendants, while Cheong claimed he thought the bags held gold bars. -- Bernama- Star, 5/2/2010, Death for two Malaysians caught trafficking drugs in Singapore

Well, let us use the power of pardon


42.  Power of pardon, etc. [FEDERAL CONSTITUTION]

(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong has power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of all offences which have been tried by court-martial and all offences committed in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya; and the Ruler or Yang di- Pertua Negeri of a State has power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of all other offences committed in his State.

(2) Subject to Clause (10), and without prejudice to any provision of federal law relating to remission of sentences for good conduct or special services, any power conferred by federal or State law to remit, suspend or commute sentences for any offence shall be exercisable by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong if the sentence was passed by a court-martial or by a civil court exercising jurisdiction in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya and, in any other case, shall be exercisable by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri of the State in which the offence was committed.

(3) Where an offence was committed wholly or partly outside the Federation or in more than one State or in circumstances which make it doubtful where it was committed, it shall be treated for the purposes of this Article as having been committed in the State in which it was tried. For the purpose of this Clause the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, the Federal Territory of Labuan and the Federal Territory of Putrajaya, shall each be regarded as a State.

(4) The powers mentioned in this Article -

(a) are, so far as they are exercisable by the Yang di- Pertuan Agong, among functions with respect to which federal law may make provision under Clause (3) of Article 40;

(b) shall so far as they are exercisable by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri of a State, be exercised on the advice of a Pardons Board constituted for that State in accordance with Clause (5).

(5) The Pardons Board constituted for each State shall consist of the Attorney General of the Federation, the Chief Minister of the State and not more than three other members, who shall be appointed by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri; but the Attorney General may from time to time by instrument in writing delegate his functions as a member of the Board to any other person, and the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri may appoint any person to exercise temporarily the functions of any member of the Board appointed by him who is absent or unable to act. 

(6) The members of a Pardons Board appointed by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri shall be appointed for a term of three years and shall be eligible for reappointment, but may at any time resign from the Board. 

(7) A member of the Legislative Assembly of a State or of the House of Representatives shall not be appointed by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri to be a member of a Pardons Board or to exercise temporarily the functions of such a member. 

(8) The Pardons Board shall meet in the presence of the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri and he shall preside over it. 

(9) Before tendering their advice on any matter a Pardons Board shall consider any written opinion which the Attorney General may have delivered thereon. 

(10) Notwithstanding anything in this Article, the power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of, or to remit, suspend or commute sentences imposed by any court established under any law regulating Islamic religious affairs in the State of Malacca, Penang, Sabah or Sarawak or the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya shall be exercisable by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as Head of the religion of Islam in the State.

(11) For the purpose of this Article, there shall be constituted a single Pardons Board for the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya and the provisions of Clauses (5), (6), (7), (8) and (9) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the Pardons Board under this Clause except that reference to "Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri" shall be construed as reference to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and reference to "Chief Minister of the State" shall be construed as reference to the Minister responsible for the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya.

(12) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Constitution, where the powers mentioned in this Article -

(a) are exercisable by the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of a State and are to be exercised in respect of himself or his wife, son or daughter, such powers shall be exercised by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong acting on the advice of the Pardons Board constituted for that State under this Article and which shall be presided over by him;

(b) are to be exercised in respect of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the Ruler of a State, or his Consort, as the case may be, such powers shall be exercised by the Conference of Rulers and the following provisions shall apply:

(i) when attending any proceedings under this Clause, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall not be accompanied by the Prime Minister and the other Rulers shall not be accompanied by their Menteri-Menteri Besar;

(ii) before arriving at its decision on any matter under this Clause, the Conference of Rulers shall consider any written opinion which the Attorney General may have delivered thereon;

(c) are to be exercised by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler of a State in respect of his son or daughter, as the case may be, such powers shall be exercised by the Ruler of a State nominated by the Conference of Rulers who shall act in accordance with the advice of the relevant Pardons Board constituted under this Article.

(13) For the purpose of paragraphs (b) and (c) of Clause (12), the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler of the State concerned, as the case may be, and the Yang di-Pertua-Yang di-Pertua Negeri shall not be members of the Conference of Rulers.

BN ADUNs should also get RM500,000 from Selangor Government. End discrimination - respect people's democratic choice

Selangor State government gives Selangor State Assembly Persons(ADUNs) yearly a sum of RM500,000-00 to be used in their respective constituencies. If the ADUN is a member of the State Exco, he/she gets RM600,000 [Why this discrimination?]

But the money apparently is only given to the Pakatan Rakyat ADUNs .... not the UMNO-led  BN ADUNs or other ADUNs.

For State Constituencies where the non-Pakatan Rakyat ADUN won, the money for the said constituencies(i.e. that RM500,000) is given to some Pakatan Rakyat ADUN to spend for that said constituencies.

What I see wrong with this is that this was exactly the same thing that the UMNO-led BN  was doing - giving yearly payments only to its own ADUNs and MPs for usage allegedly in their 'constituencies'. 

We have criticized this UMNO-led BN's practices in the past, calling for the end of discrimination - asking that all allocations that are being given to individual ADUNs/MPs should be given to ALL MPs/ADUNs irrespective of the party affiliations.

The people in the constituency have elected their rep - hence this decision must be respected, and all elected ADUNs [or MPs] must be treated the same ...equally [Art. 8 Federal Constitution].

If Pakatan Rakyat is different.... then the Selangor government should be giving this RM500,000 directly to the ADUNs the people wants, irrespective of whether they are from the Pakatan Rakyat or not.

Why is Selangor Government not giving the money to the UMNO-led BN ADUNs? Their answer is that the UMNO-led BN Federal Government is only giving a lot of money to its own ADUNs/MPs and not others, so we do the same. Comparatively, what their ADUNs/MPs are receiving is so much more than RM500,000... 

I say, that if that is the justification why Selangor is not giving the money to the non-Pakatan Rakyat ADUNs   - then it is pathetic. It is certainly wrong. Just because someone did a bad thing to you, it is not right to do the 'similar bad thing' to them. We have to be different and do what should be the RIGHT thing to do - i.e. Selangor should give all ADUNs the same RM500,000 for use in their respective constituencies

Set the standards... set the example... set up good democratic practices that respect the democratic process - the choice of the people.

There was pyrotechnics galore at the Selangor Select Committee for Accountability, Competency and Transparency (Selcat) right from the start of the hearing this morning but with a dramatic difference.

Unlike previous hearings, state officials were left out in the cold as two Pakatan assemblypersons turned on each other.

State watchdog committee chairperson Teng Chang Khim kept trading verbal punches with his DAP colleague Ronnie Liu during the morning session over the latter's style of disbursing constituency allocations.

Things even reached the stage where Teng decided to switch off Liu's microphone to stop him from speaking.

Hauled up

Liu, who is the state assemblyman for Pandamaran, was one of three Selangor Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers hauled up by Selcat to explain spending discrepancies in their constituency allocations.

The other two were Sri Setia assemblyman Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad and Sri Muda assemblyman Shuhaimi Shafiei.

Liu of DAP is state executive councillor for local government and research.

He is also in charge of dispersing the allocations for the other two seats won by the BN, former Selangor menteri besar Khir Toyo's Sungai Panjang and MCA assemblyman Yap Ee Wah's Sungai Pelek.

Nik Nazmi, the political secretary to the present Selangor Menteri Besar, and Shuhaimi are both from PKR.

Liu, Nik Nazmi and Shuhaimi were said to have exhausted 99%, 87% and 71% respectively of their yearly allocation within the first six months last year.

Every state seat is entitled RM500,000 as constituency allocation while the amount for an exco member and the Speaker is RM600,000..... - Malaysiakini, 1/2/2010, Selcat fireworks: Teng switches off Ronnie

 

Another death in police custody - stop 'defaming' the dead and investigate how he died thoroughly

When will it all stop?

Another death in police custody - alleged death by strangulation ... police claim he hung himself...

And, CCTV recordings is not assisting police in their investigations... something is amiss.

There has just been too many deaths in police custody in Malaysia - too many 'shoot to kill incidents' where almost all the victims get shot dead, hence no witnesses to challenge the police version. No public inquiries into 'shoot to kill' incidents yet...maybe the government will remedy that.

But, with death in police custody, the government has previously taken the position that there will be inquests (inquiries into the death) - but when it happens, lack of evidence...poor investigation usually provides one outcome ....i.e. no one criminally responsible for the death, mmm

CCTV with recording capabilities - but now they say it does not help....

How does one in a police lock-up hang oneself? So, his cellmates were happily standing around when he made preparation...and hung himself... What about others in the room? Did nobody see anything

What is the police doing by 'ruling out foul play' - have they even completed the investigation into the death? Do not tell me that the police have become super efficient in their investigation. All the police need to do is to investigate and investigate thoroughly all possibilities... Get all the witness statements properly recorded... The Inquest will decide whether there was 'foul play' or not - not State police chief SAC I Datuk Osman Salleh (or the police). A majistrate, sitting as the  Coroner, in the inquest will decide. 

What we need is speed - The inquest must be immediately held. If not, the police will come and say that the 'previous cellmates' cannot be found, and this police officer has been transferred, etc... in short difficult to find relevant witnesses - and the Inquest will only have to rely on the alleged statements of witnesses taken by some police officer. Remember, in the case of death in police custody, one of the principal suspects is the police...Really, someone else should be investigating these death in police custody cases...

Why did the police(or some other)  pour 'dirt' on the deceased? Who revealed his past convictions, etc... Does it matter now? Or should we not be focusing on the death in police custody. The police should stop 'defaming' the dead - it is something that the authorities seem to be doing after 'shoot to kill' incidents, and now in 'death in police custody cases' - if not, what is the source of information that reporters rely on. 

Are they trying to say that these are 'evil men' - and Malaysians should not be bothered about how they died (or were killed)? What is the reason behind all these disclosures - and some are not even proven facts (tested in court that led to a conviction) but mere suspicions and allegations. 

Police should stop trying to justify 'killings' by painting a picture that the dead victims were really 'bad' 'evil' people. That is not the issue at all. 

The issue is whether the police killed him? whether someone else killed him? Was it the police's negligence that caused the death? After all hanging oneself takes time - unlike taking a gun and shooting yourself... Surely the cellmates, the police personnel monitoring the lock-ups, the officers monitoring the CCTV recordings would have seen something that would have prevented the death? Where were the cops.... what were they doing?

BAHAU: Police have ruled out foul play in the death of an ex-convict who was found strangled in his cell at the Jempol police station on Monday morning.

State police chief SAC I Datuk Osman Salleh said findings by a forensic pathologist from the Tuanku Ja’afar Hospital in Seremban also revealed there were no other injuries on 28-year-old P. Babu.

“The only marks visible on the deceased’s body were on his neck and these were consistent with someone who had committed suicide by hanging,” he told The Star.

Osman said police have also viewed the closed-circuit television (CCTV) recordings at the lock-up and had spoken to his cellmates in the course of their investigation.

“The CCTV recordings too didn’t reveal anything,” he said.

Babu, a sawmill worker with several convictions previously, had surrendered to police on Jan 28 to assist in investigations into several robberies near here.

Osman said in the early hours of Jan 26, Babu and three accomplices aged in their late 20s and early 30s had allegedly robbed a couple at a rubber estate near here.

“The couple called the police and a patrol car was immediately despatched to the scene.

“When my men reached the area, they managed to detain one of the suspects while the others managed to escape on their bikes,” he said, adding that police also recovered some stolen jewellery from the man.

Babu, who was released from prison three months ago after serving a six-year jail term for robbery, and the two others surrendered to the police two days later.

It is understood that Babu had also served time for drug-related and cheating offences previously.

When met at the family home at Rumah Rakyat near here, Babu’s uncle M. Mahadevan, 35, said the family would ask for an independent post-mortem.

“We are not going to accept the post-mortem done by the hospital authorities as we don’t believe Babu committed suicide,” said the district council employee.

Mahadevan said although his nephew died at about 3am, he was only allowed to see the body after the post-mortem was conducted several hours later.

He also asked why there were no CCTVs in the toilet as this could have helped determine how Babu died.

“The police have asked us to collect his remains for burial but I will only do so after the independent post-mortem has been done,” he added. - Star, 2/2/2010, No foul play in detainee’s death, cops say

BAHAU: An ex-convict who turned himself in at the Jempol police station last Thursday to assist police investigations into several robberies was found dead in his cell early yesterday.

P. Babu, 28, who was released from prison just three months ago after serving a six-year term for robbery, was found hanging from a beam in the lock-up toilet, at about 3am.

According to police sources, Babu and three other friends were on their way to rob a house in a rubber plantation near here on Jan 26, but were foiled by policemen on patrol, who opened fire when the suspects refused to stop.

Despite being hit on the leg, Babu and his friends escaped on two motorcycles.

Babu, however, gave himself up at the station two days later, and this led to the arrest of the other three.

It could not be immediately ascertained if Babu had shared the cell with other detainees.

State plantation affairs and human development committee chairman V. S. Mogan, when met at the Jempol Hospital where the body was taken for a post mortem, said police must explain how Babu died.

“Although initial reports show that Babu hanged himself, we hope the police can also enlighten us on what really happened.

“This is important because people are already making assumptions over his death,” Mogan said.

Jempol MIC Youth chief M. Palani later lodged a police report over Babu’s death.

State PKR deputy chairman and Port Dickson assemblyman M. Ravi, who was also at the hospital, said Babu’s family should ask for an independent post mortem if they were unhappy with the one conducted at the hospital.

Babu, whose parents died some time ago, lived with an uncle.

State deputy police chief Datuk Abdul Manan Hassan said police were awaiting the post mortem report and that investigations were underway. - Star, 2/2/2010, Ex-convict assisting police investigation found dead in cell

 But, the family does not buy the story that he committed suicide.

And, it certainly is too soon for the police to even say

The family of a man, said to have committed suicide while in police custody, have refused to collect his remains from the morgue and are seeking another post-mortem.

Sawmill worker P Babu, 28, was found dead in the Jempol police lock up at about 4am after he surrendered himself in connection with a robbery case.

When contacted, Jempol MIC Youth chief M Palani said the first post-mortem report classified the death as suicide.

The deceased had apparently used his shirt to hang himself.

"But this is unofficial. We were told that we would get the black and white report within seven days," he added.

'Strong willed person'

Palani said the family have rejected the findings because "Babu was a strong willed person and would not have this decision (to commit suicide)".

"We are also questioning the fact that he hung himself using his shirt. Shouldn't he be wearing a police issued t-shirt (for detainees)?" he asked.

Yesterday, Palani filed a police report calling for a thorough investigation into Babu's death.

Both MIC and PKR politicians have cried foul over the incident and offered to help the family secure a second post-term.

For years, activists and politicians have been complaining about the high number of fatalities involving Indian Malaysian police detainees.

In January 2008, a police constable was charged with causing hurt to extract a confession from A Kugan, 22, who died in police custody in Subang Jaya.

In July, P Gunasegaran, 31, was found dead in the Sentul police station. An inquest is currently underway.- Malaysiakini, 2/2/2010, Family rejects 'suicide' claim, wants independent autopsy

SELCAT- step in the right direction. Open to the public? Non-PR ADUN should also get the RM500,000

It is interesting how SELCAT (Selangor Select Committee for Accountability, Competency and Transparency) is demanding accountability and transparency of all, including the Pakatan ADUNs...keep us the good work. 

Is it open to the public? It should be ....and maybe the minutes should also be posted on the net so that even those who missed the session will know what happened...

Before every SELCAT session, the public must be informed of the date/time/venue, and most importantly the Agenda...

And let us not get distracted with someone drinking water during the meetings - but stay focused on the issues, the questions and the answers... 

Let us consider Ronnie Liu, and what came out in the Malaysiakini report - and we see that there is a lot of gaps (question marks?)

* Ronnie spend RM600,000 (for his seat), and RM1,000,000 for 2 other State seats held by the Opposition-BN, and he used up 99% within 1st 6 months of 2009

* Money was given to 168 entities - We would like to know who, and for what? And apparently 48 of these were religious bodies, guilds and associations - again a list, the amount given and for what will be good...(or is it all 'secret') 

* There are allegation that money was given to some 'unregistered bodies' - Again we need more information about this

* He organised 3 "durian festivals" - is this not a waste of money? 

* Surely, there must be guidelines as to how these money should be utilized - it should maybe be used to help the poor and oppressed, emergency assistance, etc... (for, if not monies from the State and Federal government should be used through its relevant departments....)

Is this RM500,000, or in cases like Ronnie Liu's, RM1.6 million for 3 State Constituencies really 'bribe money'

Maybe this RM500,000  should be used by the ADUN for:-

- Rental & Maintenance of Service Centres

- Salaries for his support staff

- Posters, Pamphlets, Banners, etc for his/her constituency 

- Emergency assistance especially for the poor and oppressed.

...certainly not for "durian festivals

And, I think that is the State Government of Selangor is giving this allocation of RM500,000 for each State Constituency through the ADUN (State Assemblyperson) - then the money should be going directly to  the ADUNs, irrespective of whether he/she is from Pakatan Rakyat, UMNO-BN, Independent, etc ...but it looks like the money is only going to the Pakatan Rakyat ADUNs

So, Pakatan Rakyat is following the 'bad practices' of UMNO-led BN - shame on you, Pakatan Rakyat. 

Yes, the BN ADUNs/MPs may be getting funds from the Federal Government, PM's Department, etc... that is all under the control of the UMNO-led BN... but that does not excuse Selangor Government's failure to provide this RM500,000 to the non-Pakatan Rakyat ADUNs in Selangor...

Pakatan Rakyat has to set the example ....the good example... and not behave just like the BN.

Remember that Malaysian people want greater Transparency & Accountability....

There was pyrotechnics galore at the Selangor Select Committee for Accountability, Competency and Transparency (Selcat) right from the start of the hearing this morning but with a dramatic difference.

Unlike previous hearings, state officials were left out in the cold as two Pakatan assemblypersons turned on each other.

State watchdog committee chairperson Teng Chang Khim kept trading verbal punches with his DAP colleague Ronnie Liu during the morning session over the latter's style of disbursing constituency allocations.

Things even reached the stage where Teng decided to switch off Liu's microphone to stop him from speaking.

Hauled up

Liu, who is the state assemblyman for Pandamaran, was one of three Selangor Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers hauled up by Selcat to explain spending discrepancies in their constituency allocations.

The other two were Sri Setia assemblyman Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad and Sri Muda assemblyman Shuhaimi Shafiei.

Liu of DAP is state executive councillor for local government and research.

He is also in charge of dispersing the allocations for the other two seats won by the BN, former Selangor menteri besar Khir Toyo's Sungai Panjang and MCA assemblyman Yap Ee Wah's Sungai Pelek.

Nik Nazmi, the political secretary to the present Selangor Menteri Besar, and Shuhaimi are both from PKR.

Liu, Nik Nazmi and Shuhaimi were said to have exhausted 99%, 87% and 71% respectively of their yearly allocation within the first six months last year.

Every state seat is entitled RM500,000 as constituency allocation while the amount for an exco member and the Speaker is RM600,000.

Warning for drinking water

Liu was the first to testify this morning and shortly after received his first warning for openly drinking water for which he was ruled out of order by Teng.

Teng said consuming food is forbidden during the hearing which considered part of the state assembly session

However, Liu ignored the Speaker and continued drinking, forcing Teng to give instructions for the bottle to be removed.

In his defence when questioned, Liu blamed the enormous number of religious bodies, guilds and associations in Klang for the speedy end to the funds.

His constituency Pandamaran is situated at the heart of the town.

But when Liu listed out the beneficiaries at Teng's demand, it showed that there were only 43 under those categories out of the total number 168 entities.

Liu was also found to have disbursed funds to a number of unregistered bodies and was rapped by Teng for not keeping to the rules and thereby setting a dangerous precedent.

He also drew blood when he described Liu's way of distributing funds as being no different from that of the BN when he and the DAP had attacked a former BN assemblyperson for using up his annual allocation within the first two months of 2008, the last general elections year.

Durian feast questioned, duo sails through

The biggest controversy surrounding Liu's testimony was over the RM16,583 spent on organising three 'durian festivals'.

It was revealed during the hearing that one such function cost a whopping RM10,000.


When quizzed on the number of durians served by Selcat member Saari Sungib, Liu did not provide a number and replied that he was out to serve "quality durian" to the people.

Both continued to slam each other over allocation promises with Liu interrupting Teng until the latter switched off the former's microphone.

This is the first of such incident to mar a Selcat hearing since last year's initiation of the annual two sessions.

In stark contrast to Liu, Nik Nazmi and Shuhaimi's testimony was relatively short. Combined, their afternoon testimonies lasted about 30 minutes.

The duo explained to the Selcat member that their constituencies were suffered several floods in 2008 and 2009, which caused them to use a big number of the allocations to aid the flood victims.


At a press conference later, Teng described Nik Nazmi and Shuhaimi's testimony as "superb" but graded Liu with a mere "average".

"It is (Liu's) first time. This is a learning experience for all of us," said Teng.

Liu: My accounts 'clean'

Teng also likened Liu's testimony to the performance of district officers during another Selcat inquiry regarding state allocation previous BN assemblypersons.

He said Selcat had concluded its inquiry into constitutuency allocatios and will submit a report to the state assembly for further action.

At another press conference, Liu said he was not "hurt" by the inquiry. He also denied that he was being "grilled".

"I only not allowed to drink water, you know when you are testifying, your lips will feel dry," he said.

He also stressed that he is "clean" and all his accounts were above board. - Malaysiakini, 1/2/2010, Selcat fireworks: Teng switches off Ronnie

Malaysia should have OWN law about refugee/asylum seeker recognition process..rights, etc

It has always been an embarrassment when United Nation's recognized refugees and asylum seekers were being arrested, detained, .... just like any other undocumented migrant.

True, Malaysia has not ratified the 1951UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees - but still, Malaysia do recognize refugees in practice...

Maybe the time has come for Malaysia to legislate laws governing not just refugees but also asylum seekers. Maybe, Malaysia should have its own procedure leading towards recognition of a person's refugee, asylum seeking status. This law should have provisions as to the application method/procedure, appeals procedure, provisions for judicial review, right to stay in Malaysia during the process of application,appeal, review, etc.., provisions as to right to work, stay, movement, etc.. We can have our own 1Malaysia law that deals with the issue of refugees and asylum seekers. The control will then be with the government - not some UN Agency. 

Today, when a person runs to Malaysia claiming asylum - what happens? Is there any law that deals with this area?

The recent move for the government of Malaysia to issue 'Refugee ID Cards' is a good move but really more can be done for Malaysians are a caring compassionate people - and these values must also manifest itself in its government..

Malaysia plans IDs for refugees to prevent arrest

The Associated Press ,  Kuala Lumpur   |  Mon, 02/01/2010 1:14 PM  |  World 

Malaysia plans to issue identification cards to refugees who are recognized by the United Nations, allowing them to stay in the country temporarily and avoid arrest as illegal immigrants.

Malaysia, which has declined to join the U.N. convention on refugees for fear of attracting a flood of migrants, previously has arrested refugees frequently as illegal aliens. Mostly from Myanmar, the refugees often have spent months in overcrowded detention center and faced caning and deportation. 

The plans announced Monday reflect a softening of Malaysia's position toward the refugees, although it continues to refuse them official recognition. 

Home Ministry Secretary General Mahmood Adam said the government would work with the U.N. refugee agency to issue the cards so immigration enfocement personnel would recognize and spare U.N.-designated refugees. 

"As long as they are recognized as refugees by the U.N., they can stay here temporarily," he told The Associate Press. "They cannot work here, but they can do odd jobs." 

He could not give an exact timeline but said the initiative was in the "final stage." 

According to the U.N. agency, about 75,600 refugees and asylum-seekers were in Malaysia as of November. Most fled persecution in Myanmar. 

Yante Ismal, a spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, welcomed the development and further discussions to form a documentation system. 

"Proper documentation for refugees is essential to their protection," she said. 

All of the refugees in Malaysia are waiting to be resettled to a third country that officially accepts refugees, which grants them legal status and the right to work.- Jakarta Post, 2/2/2010, Malaysia plans IDs for refugees to prevent arrest

Why not just charge if they have the evidence...or are these 'suspects' mere distraction?

Many are pleased that the police have arrested 'suspects' with regard the incidences of vandalism/arson of places of worship - but I am concerned. I am concerned whether the correct persons were arrested...

After all, there has been a lot of 'public' pressure on the police, and sometimes just to 'reduce' this public media pressure, police may simply arrest persons and detain them. 

What are the evidence that the police have against these 'suspects', and why are they taking so much time to complete their investigations? After arrest, if the police need more time for investigations that require the presence of the 'suspect', then they go to court and apply for a remand order...

This is a simple case - and they should have either charged them in court, or released them. If the police do not have enough evidence, then they can always release now ....to arrest later and charge. There is no justification for such a long remand. 

 

Let us look at section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which discusses remand, and how long they can remand a person and for what purpose.. 

117.  Procedure where investigation cannot be completed within twenty-four hours.

(1) Whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody and it appears that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by section 28 and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information is well founded the police officer making the investigation shall immediately transmit to a Magistrate a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case and shall at the same time produce the accused before the Magistrate.

(2) The Magistrate before whom an accused person is produced under this section may, whether he has or has no jurisdiction to try the case, authorize the detention of the accused in such custody as follows:

(a) if the offence which is being investigated is punishable with imprisonment of less than fourteen years, the detention shall not be more than four days on the first application and shall not be more than three days on the second application; or

(b) if the offence which is being investigated is punishable with death or imprisonment of fourteen years or more, the detention shall not be more than seven days on the first application and shall not be more than seven days on the second application.

(3) The officer making the investigation shall state in the copy of the entries in the diary referred to in subsection (1), any period of detention of the accused immediately prior to the application, whether or not such detention relates to the application.

(4) The Magistrate, in deciding the period of detention of the accused person, shall take into consideration any detention period immediately prior to the application, whether or not such detention relates to the application.

(5) The Magistrate in deciding the period of detention of the accused shall allow representations to be made either by the accused himself or through a counsel of his choice.

(6) If the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the case and considers further detention unnecessary he may order the accused person to be produced before a Magistrate having such jurisdiction or, if the case is triable only by the High Court, before himself or another Magistrate having jurisdiction with a view to transmission for trial by the High Court.

(7) A Magistrate authorising under this section detention in the custody of the police shall record his reasons for so doing. - (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE (REVISED 1999)

 So, why are they still being held on remand - and why did the Magistrate allow a further 7 days..

The remand order on seven individuals suspected of arson attempts on two churches and a school in Taiping have been extended until Feb 2.

The seven-day extension was granted by Magistrate Rahni Kartini Abd Rahim today as the original order expired today.

Remand proceedings at the Taiping Magistrate Court were held behind closed doors.

The group - aged 17 to 29 - are being investigated under Section 295 of the Penal Code for defiling a place of worship and Section 436 for causing mischief with fire or explosives.

The first offense carries a maximum two-year jail penalty and/or a fine, while the second offense carries a maximum 20-year jail term and/or a fine.

They were detained on Jan 22 to assist investigations over the Jan 10 arson attempts on St Louis Church (left), All Saints Church and SMK Convent.

Molotov cocktails were hurled at the three structures which resulted in minimal damage.

The incident in Taiping is believed to be related to the landmark High Court judgment which overturned the Home Ministry ban on the use of the term 'Allah' by Catholic magazine Herald Weekly.

Since the controversial decision last month, numerous places of worship of several faiths have been struck by vandalism or attempted arson attacks. Most targets have been churches.- Malaysiakini, 27/1/2010, Seven suspected 'arsonists' remand extended

What are the offence they are being suspected of? 

Section 295 of the Penal Code

295.  Injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class.

Whoever destroys, damages, or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons, or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage, or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 436 for causing mischief with fire or explosives

436.  Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy a house, etc.
Whoever commits mischief by fire or any explosive substance, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, the destruction of any building which is ordinarily used as a place of worship, or for the administration of justice, or for the transaction of public affairs, or for education, or art, or for public use or ornament, or as a human dwelling, or as a place for the custody of property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to twenty years, and shall also be liable to fine.