Sosma cannot bypass normal procedures, safeguards, rights
The proof of guilt is not a matter for the police or prosecution to determine but a Court of Law.
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture, MADPET,
warned in a statement that the authorities concerned cannot avoid normal
procedures, safeguards and rights by invoking the Security Offences
(Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). “It’s important to adhere to the
legal principle that a person is presumed innocent unless proven
guilty.”
“This proof of guilt is not a matter for the police or prosecution to determine but a Court of Law.”
The NGO was expressing shock that sacked Umno Batu Kawan deputy
divisional chief Khairuddin Abu Hassan was reportedly being held under
SOSMA for reporting alleged cover-ups on wrongdoing at 1MDB and attempts
to sweep them under the carpet. “His arrest seems to be designed to
deter the people from lodging reports against powerful personalities and
companies.”
The NGO called for Khairuddin to be released immediately, SOSMA
scrapped and any law that talks about activities detrimental to
parliamentary democracy be abolished.
MADPET Spokesman Charles Hector noted that Khairuddin was initially
held under section 124C of the Penal Code for “attempts to commit an
activity detrimental to parliamentary democracy”.
Even this section, he added, was too vague since there seems to be
not even a definition as to what really would be an activity detrimental
to parliamentary democracy. “This section can be easily abused and
should be removed from the books.”
“When the Court released Khairuddin last Wednesday, possibly denying
the police application for further remand, he was immediately
re-arrested outside the Court under sections 124K and 124L of the Penal
Code for the offence of committing ‘sabotage’ and attempting to do so
respectively,” said Hector.
The NGO wants to know whether there was new evidence to justify
Khairuddin’s re-arrest after being released by the Court. “Unless new
evidence had come to light, following his release, an immediate
re-arrest of a suspect would be wrong.”
“If Khairuddin’s re-arrest was for a different offence, based on the
same parts of the Penal Code, and based on the same facts, the re-arrest
would be wrong.”
Hector charged that the police seemed to have no respect for the
Court that released Khairuddin. “They had five days during remand to
investigate him on the alleged offences. There was no need to re-arrest
him and put him under further detention.”
If SOSMA is used, he pointed out, the police would be shutting out
the Court as it would not be able to ensure that the authorities
concerned are not abusing their powers of remand.
“There’s no necessity to continue to hold a suspect in detention,
after being released, as he could always be called to give further
statements,” said Hector. “If the prosecution has sufficient evidence,
rightly the person should be charged in Court, and any application for
bail could be challenged. Even if released on bail, the Court could
order that the accused not leave the country.” - FMT News 28/9/2015
Full MADPET Statement - see MADPET Blog
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment