Saturday, May 16, 2009

The Malaysian Bar is no longer just calling ...they are demanding..

Access to a lawyer is a fundamental right of an arrested person...

When not only that right is denied, but the lawyers also arrested...and detained in police lock-ups (and also denied the right to a lawyer)... it is just too much...

And, it was this that brought a total of 1,429 lawyers and 81 chambering students the Malaysian Bar’s Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) this Friday afternoon (15/5/2009) to unanimously and unequivocally called for the resignation of the Minister for Home Affairs, the Inspector-General of Police and the OCPD of the Brickfields police station.

Malaysian lawyers are very angry with the impunity shown by the police...No more were they using words like "called for" - now they demanded...

They are no satisfied with just the passing of Resolution but have directed their Bar Council to do more ..

The Resolution that was passed is as follows...
Whereas on the night of 7 May 2009, five members of the Kuala Lumpur Legal Aid Centre, Fadiah Nadwa binti Fikri (Secretary), Murnie Hidayah binti Anuar, Puspawati binti Rosman, Ravinder Singh Dhalliwal (Chairperson) and Syuhaini binti Safwan (collectively known as the “LAC Lawyers”), in their capacity as Advocates & Solicitors, had requested the police at the Brickfields Police Station for access to the detained persons who were arrested that same night whilst holding a candlelight vigil at the same Police Station over the recent arrest of political scientist Wong Chin Huat.

Whereas Article 5(3) of the Federal Constitution entrenches the fundamental right of a person to consult and be defended by the legal practitioner of his/her choice. Further, sub-sections 28A(2) to (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code (“CPC”) set out in detail the rights of arrested persons including their right to communicate and consult with a legal practitioner of their choice.

Whereas the Police denied the LAC Lawyers access to the detained persons, the Police, without any reasonable grounds, proceeded to arrest the LAC Lawyers and only released them on police bail the following day at around 3 p.m., notwithstanding the repeated requests by other lawyers for their immediate release.


1. Strongly condemns and denounces the wrongful arrest, detention and interrogation of the LAC Lawyers.

2. Strongly condemns and denounces the blatant transgression of the rule of law and the constitutional right of every person to counsel and access to justice.

3. Strongly condemns the unnecessary arrest and detention of those exercising their constitutional right to assemble peaceably.

4. Strongly condemns the arbitrary, improper and frequent resort by the Police to section 28A(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, thus denying an arrested person access to counsel and making the right provided under section 28A(3) meaningless.

5. Strongly condemns and denounces the appalling treatment of the LAC lawyers and all those held in custody, including compelling them to wear lock up uniforms and unnecessarily handcuffing them.

6. Strongly condemns and denounces the Police for deliberately refusing to disclose to their family or their lawyers any information in relation to the LAC lawyers after their arrest, including their location and their next course of action.

7. Demands the resignation of the Minister for Home Affairs, the Inspector-General of Police, OCPD ACP Wan Abdul Bari bin Wan Abdul Khalid and DSP Jude Pereira of the Brickfields police station over this shameful incident.

8. Condemns the gross abuse of police powers and demands that the Government offer an unconditional apology to the LAC Lawyers.

9. Demands that the Government commit to and uphold the Rule of Law as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

10. Reiterates its previous calls on the Government to establish the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) in its original form to serve as an independent external oversight mechanism.

11. Demands that the Government uphold and defend the fundamental rights of advocates and solicitors to discharge their responsibilities to their clients in an environment free from threats and intimidation and unhindered by law enforcement agencies.

Proposed by: Ragunath Kesavan
Dated: 8 May 2009

The motion, as amended, was unanimously carried.


amoker said...

good stuff.

ernest cheah said...

HI. Charles,

Kudus to the bar council and the lawyers who attended the EGM.

Your demand is timely, strike the iron when it's hot.

Samuel Goh Kim Eng said...


Will everything fall on deaf/dead ears
When perpetrators seem to have no fear
Since they deemed what they did was right
Taking laws into their own hands without respect and fright

(C) Samuel Goh Kim Eng - 160509
Sat. 16th May 2009.

Doktor Serba Tahu said...

Hmmm..relaks relaks.. jgn gopoh. Fikir dulu sebelum bertindak.
everybody plis read this article : Ini ditulis oleh salah seorang peguam yang ditangkap iaitu Murnie Hidayah. Baca teliti, sape yang salah. Referlah undang-undang dulu...jgn bertindak suka-suka hati...

Ini adalah rangkap yang ditulis beliau:
"Tidak dinafikan saya terharu dengan sokongan dan keprihatinan yang ditunjukkan oleh Badan Peguam Malaysia berhubung dengan penangkapan kami, namun selain daripada isu peguam yang tidak bersalah ditahan, saya berpendapat terdapat satu perkara lagi yang sama pentingnya yang perlu diberi perhatian serius oleh rakyat Malaysia khasnya para pengamal undang-undang iaitu satu usul perlu dibawa dan diputuskan dengan segera berhubung pendefinisian Seksyen 28A (8) Kanun Acara Jenayah ini. Apa yang boleh dirumuskan dari apa yang berlaku pada 7 Mei 2009 yang lalu ialah bagaimana pihak polis boleh menggunakan akta ini sebagai satu ‘blanket’ untuk menafikan hak seseorang tahanan. Ianya satu pencabulan! Ia perlu dan harus dikaji semula!

So, adakah Polis bertindak salah dengan mengikut undang-undang termaktub sebagaimana dalam Seksyen 28A (8) Kanun Acara Jenayah ini?

Anonymous said...

I have not read what (8) said, nor what (3) said, but what is glaring is that there were blatant abuse. Justice is about compassion. Justice is about the end result that befits a crime. So what SCAN asked regarding whether the police was right or wrong cannot be confused with whether the police have acted to deny justice.