We do not need pro-government HR Commissioners

What do you want SUHAKAM to become a more effective Human Rights Commission and institution?

Reasonably, the Chairperson of SUHAKAM and SUHAKAM commissioners should be pushing for more and more reforms so that SUHAKAM will become a more effective Human Rights Commission - but alas this is not the case.

The very 'not-vocal' Chairperson, a former Attorney General of Malaysia, who served the government well during the 1987 Operation Lallang period, the Judicial Crisis of 1988 .... the person who really lakes the requisite credentials to even be appointed as Human Rights Commissioner, finally speaks.....

When met at the Asia Pacific Forum, Suhakam chairperson Abu Talib Othman said the government must study the concerns raised "very seriously" because amending the Act was outside the scope of Suhakam. - Malaysiakini, 29/7/2008 "Najib: Review of Suhakam Act will have repercussions"

And he sounds so much like a GOVERNMENT spokesperson - certainly not like a Human Rights Commissioners.

SUHAKAM, get to it and start working out what should be amended and how should it be amended. Then, tell it to the government....in fact, go ahead and draft the Bill as well. Do not wait for the government to do it...

What do we need to improve SUHAKAM?

1) Definitely a longer term for Human Rights Commissioner - at least 5-6 years, and maybe a maximum of 2 terms only.

2) Definitely full-time Human Rights Commissioners - not part-timers. Take Shafee Abdullah, the prominent lawyer, he is is certainly too bousy in court and with his work - I do not see how he will have time to even attend to his work a an effective HR Commissioner.

3) So many complaints have been made - yet how many have been investigated and a public inquiry held... (If we had an effective HR Commission, we need not be setting up new Royal Commissions for this and that....)

4) Today, many do not see the SUHAKAM as a venue where they can get justice...so what can be done. SUHAKAM is quick to avoid any inquiry citing that there is a court case pending. What about the allegation that surfaced in PI Balasubramaniam's 1st Statutory Declaration - that the police consciously left from his statement matters refering to Najib...or that the prosecutors also did not ask any questions that would bring out the name of Najib (hence keeping the full truth away from the courts..).Should not an INDEPENDENT Human Rights Commission on its own motion start an inquiry into this...for surely it is wrong to say we cannot because there is a pending case. There is NO pending case concerning these allegations - which are very very serious matters of Human Rights.

5) We only hear of SUHAKAM when some groups send some memorandum or other - and then nothing. We should be having several public inquiries being done at the same time given the number of HR Commissioners we have - so why do we not have that happening. Well, because we need to get a certain number of HR Commissioners voting in favour of a public inquiry before we can have one....and guess what busy 'pro-governmnent' HR Commissioners would not vote for public inquiries...we definitely need more transparency. Maybe open to the public SUHAKAM meetings....mmm.

6) What about prosecution powers for SUHAKAM...

7) What about the powers of making orders with regard to damages and compensations to victims.

so many many things could be done to make our SUHAKAM a better Human Rights commission .... but first, we need real Human Rights persons appointed as Human Rights Commissioners. (Or better still, maybe they should be elected in....)

We do not need pro-government persons sitting as HR Commissioners - we need independent persons who have a passion for Human Rights sitting as Human Rights Commissioners..