One month to decide on ISA case is very UNJUST...

5 persons are in DETENTION - not walking around free on Bail - and the Judicial commissioner Zainal Azman Abdul Aziz wants ONE month to make his decision - i.e. on February 26. This is TORTURE - this is an injustice. In this case, we need early dates, speedy hearings and quick decisions, and this inability to give a speedy decision has just added to the injustice faced by the detainees. If you do not have the capacity to give speedy decisions, then you, Azman Abdul Aziz, is not fit to be a Judge and should just resign or just stop hearing cases which NEEDS speedy decision-making capability. What exactly are you going to do that you need ONE month for you to come to a decision? This is Detention Without Trial - and there is no charges, trial, conviction and sentencing. There is no question of being GUILTY or NOT GUILTY. The decision to detain is "POLITICAL" and the Minister can give any kind of reasons like even "being an agent of the people of planet WAWASAN, who have plans to invade Malaysia" - and there is NO WAY for the detainee to challenge the 'stupid' or 'false' reason of the Minister in court. A person arrested under the ISA is NOT guilty of any crime...he is innocent. He is NOT a criminal. Hindraf 5: Decision on Feb 26

Soon Li Tsin | Jan 28, 08 3:49pm

It will be a month before the five Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leaders know if they can be brought to court for a proper trial as the Kuala Lumpur High Court set Feb 26 as the decision date for their habeas corpus application. Judicial commissioner Zainal Azman Abdul Aziz said he needed more time to go through the documents before making a decision. “Please bear with me as I would need some time to go through the authorities. I will need until the end of February to go through all the documents,” he told the packed court. On the last day of the habeas corpus application, lawyer Karpal Singh argued that the Internal Security Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in his affidavits failed to prove ‘certain circumstances’ needed when issuing a detention order under Section 8(1) of the Internal Security Act 1960. He said that Abdullah failed to show exceptional reasons why he bypassed Section 73 which provided for a period not exceeding 60 days for investigations including the right of the applicant to put up his defence. “The dire lack of material in the two affidavits filed by the minister to show certain circumstances for him to have acted directly under Section 8, makes the detention orders made by him on Dec 13 last year procedurally and fatally flawed,” he said. The Hindraf five - P Uthayakumar, M Manoharan, R Kenghadharan, V Ganabatirau and T Vasanthakumar were detained under Section 8(1) ISA on Dec 13 last year under Abdullah’s orders. As such they were immediately sent to under a two-year detention to the Kamunting detention centre without first having to undergo a 60-day investigative period. Can’t challenge minister’s orders Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail replied that the minister had made the detention orders after receiving a complete investigation report from the police. “The minister is not solely reliant on police but also from other sources. In his affidavit, he said that the investigations were complete and perfect before he addressed his mind. “He has a right to issue calls for investigation from his own people He has an unfettered decision on matters of national security which he would know best,” he said. The senior lawyer added that Abdullah’s detention orders cannot be reviewed by the courts and the burden to prove any bad faith on the minister’s part lies with the applicants. Before the court adjourned, Karpal made a plea to the judicial commissioner to consider the impact of allowing the minister’s powers go unchecked. “This is a test case and its very crucial for every citizen in the country. Can the Internal Security minister act without investigation which the law requires and arrest anybody he pleases? “What about the grounds of the detention order which cannot be questioned by the courts? Such dictatorial powers given to minister has far reaching implications and consequences,” he said. He told judicial commissioner Zainal that the courts have to ensure that excesses of the executive does not go beyond the law. “The little mercies left must be given attention to. The courts must apply detention laws strictly. The court must go into the position of legal implication and make a ruling that upholds the constitution. “Detention without trial is a very cruel thing, only those who have undergone it would understand. I pray that the court would rise to the occasion and grant us our application.” he asserted. Karpal also requested for the decision date to be as soon as possible because two detainees - Uthayakumar and Manoharan - have been warded in Taiping Hospital for dehydration after having gone on a hunger strike since Jan 22. Wife’s plea to the AG Meanwhile, outside the courtroom, detainee Ganabatirau’s wife Puvaneswary was seen approaching Abdul Gani near the court lifts. Covered in tears, she told the AG that her husband was innocent and expressed her concern over the fate of her two daughters. Abdul Gani appeared calm and comforted Puvaneswary before telling her that she can get her lawyers to contact him and see what can be done for Ganabatirau. After Abdul Gani disappeared into the lift, a teary Puvaneswary told reporters that her husband was not guilty and what was being done to him was unfair. She left soon after with several companions. Hindraf supporters who crowded the area outside the fourth floor courtroom also lingered at the Jalan Duta court lobby before leaving.