Thursday, December 31, 2015

Acquital for police involved in HR lawyer Somchai's abduction and disappearance

Top Thai court upholds acquittal of officers in missing lawyer case

The decision means no one has been prosecuted for abducting Somchai Neelapaijit, a Muslim lawyer who vanished in 2004 while he was defending suspected militants who had accused authorities of torturing them while in custody.

BANGKOK: Thailand's top court on Tuesday (Dec 29) upheld the acquittal of five police officers accused of involvement in the abduction and disappearance of a prominent human rights lawyer.

The decision means no one has been prosecuted for abducting Somchai Neelapaijit, a Muslim lawyer who vanished in 2004 while he was defending suspected Islamic militants who had accused authorities of torturing them while in custody.

The unsolved case has been a stain on the law enforcement record in a country where official corruption and forced disappearances are commonplace and the police have long been accused of failing to adequately investigate themselves.

Somchai disappeared from the streets of Bangkok under the government of Thaksin Shinawatra during a surge in fighting between the army and militants in Thailand's deep south.

Thaksin, who was eventually deposed in a military coup, was on record as saying the lawyer had been killed by at least four government officials, although his body has never been found.

Five police officers eventually stood trial over the incident after eyewitnesses reported seeing Somchai bundled into a car on the night he vanished.

But the court only considered charges of robbery and coercion, not for disappearing him or murder.

One officer was convicted and later disappeared in a landslide while the other four walked free.

In 2011, the Appeals Court ruled all five not guilty, a decision that Thailand's top court - the Supreme Court - upheld on Tuesday.

"The Supreme Court has agreed that (the petition) sounded unreasonable, therefore the court upheld the acquittal", one of the judges said in court.


The judges also ruled that under Thai law Somchai's family has no right to bring its own civil case because there was no evidence to show he was dead or seriously injured.

"Thailand does not have a law for enforced disappearance, so suspects cannot be charged with homicide until a dead body is found," said Somchai’s wife Angkhana Neelaphaijit. "This is a major limitation in all enforced disappearance cases in the Thai court."

"I feel very disappointed. This is a failure of the judicial process," Somchai's daughter Pratubjit told reporters outside the court. "I would like to ask the same question I have asked for the past 10 years: where is Somchai? Where has he disappeared to?" she added.

Rights groups accuse successive Thai governments, and the country's Department of Special Investigations (DSI), of failing to get to the bottom of Somchai's disappearance.

"Seven successive Thai prime ministers have admitted government involvement and pledged action in the case of Somchai Neelapaijit, but with no tangible result," Sunai Phasuk, Thailand researcher with Human Rights Watch, told AFP.

Somchai's family had hoped a breakthrough had been made when they obtained leaked phone records from a DSI file suggesting the five officers were in close proximity to Somchai and in contact with each other on the night he disappeared.

But the Supreme Court Tuesday ruled that evidence as inadmissible because the records were photocopies and not original documents.

"We know that evidence is sitting in a folder somewhere in the DSI," Sam Zarifi, regional director of the International Commission of Jurists told AFP. "We're back to them now. The Thai government and the DSI need to move forward with the investigation and resubmit the evidence they have."

According to the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances, there are at least 81 open cases of enforced disappearance dating back as far as the mid-1990s.

One recent case is that of Por Cha Lee Rakcharoen, also known as Billy, a rights activist campaigning for the Karen ethnic minority, who was apprehended by national park officials in Thailand in April 2014, ostensibly 

Supreme Court acquits five police officers of charges in missing human rights lawyer case

Supreme Court acquits five police officers of charges in missing human rights lawyer case
BANGKOK: — The Supreme Court today freed all five police officers charged with robbery and abduction of human rights lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit ending over a decade long court trial.

The ruling of the highest court was read in front of Somchai’s widow Mrs Angkhana Neelapaijit at the Criminal Court in Bangkok.

The five police defendants were accused of the abduction of Somchai on March 12, 2004. Since then he was not accounted for.

The abduction happened while Pol Gen Sant Sarutanont was commissioner of the Royal Thai Police and fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra ruled the country.

At today’s final ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the appeals Court which had acquitted the five officers of all the charges.

Reasons given by the Supreme Court were that Somchai’s family could not act as a co-plaintiff and there was no evidence showing that Somchai had been dead or seriously injured.

The human lawyer went missing since he was forcibly taken away by these officers since on March 12, 2004. The five officers were seen forcing him into a car on Ramkhamhaeng road in Bangkok.

He was then defending people allegedly tortured by police during an investigation. Until today he was still not accounted for.

Thaksin had indicated to the media while he was in power that the lawyer was dead. He later denied it.

Mrs Angkhana said before today’s verdict whether the ruling was positive or negative, she would accept it.

However if it turned out to be negative, she would study the ruling thoroughly to push for a case to bring the culprits to justice.


Court acquits Somchai case cops

30 Dec 2015 at 03:30 3,127

Angkhana, wife and likely widow of Muslim lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit, who was disappeared in 2004. The Supreme Court on Tuesday freed the five ex-policemen accused of abducting the civil rights attorney....

Please credit and share this article with others using this link:

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

1MDB - What political funding? Company belongs to Malaysians - not political party or politicians?

What political spending? For whom? Well, it is a Malaysian government owned company - and, it should not be spending money for any particular political party/ies (BN, UMNO, MCA,PKR..??) or for any politician even if he is the Prime Minister?  

The money(profits) that is made by any government-owned company must flow back to the government and to the Malaysian people. Why? Because we are the owners...Maybe, not even just owners but possibly also guarantors for debts of the said company. 

Likewise, it should not be spend for even Bumiputra matters/concerns - the money/profits must all flow back to the government. It will form part of the government funds to be spend accordingly for the people of Malaysia.

Now, if it was an UMNO-owned company, then all the profits will flow to UMNO members....

And, if it was a BN-owned company, then profits flow to the BN member parties and their members...

But being a Malaysian peoples' company - it should never support any political party or personalities. 

As Malaysians, we are all very concerned about 1MDB for possibly 2 reasons 

1- Because we are the owners of this company; and 

2- Because Malaysian government may have stood as guarantor for the said companies debts...[Gov’t has guaranteed RM177.8b worth of GLCs' debts? WHY? GLC not government-owned?]

THEREFORE, we, Malaysians, are very interested in any information, disclosures and/or 'expose' concerning this 1MDB and its practices...

Many things have been highlighted by Sarawak Report and the Wall Street Journal(WSJ) - now WSJ is a well known newspaper. I am of the opinion that it is wrong for the government to 'block' our access to information...we have a right to know as the 1MDB is our direct concern as Malaysians.

What is sad is that when these allegations are made, the 'knee-jerk reaction' sometimes seem to be a denial on the part of our Ministers and government? I wonder whether these politicians even have had time to investigate properly and see whether it is true or false - which really should be the immediate response of government. 'We will look into it and give our response soon'.

Malaysians are not fools to believe everything they read - they will wait for the Malaysian government response, listen to all views and opinions and form a personal stand. But the problem, is that our Prime Minister, Minister and government do not give us an answer or a proper rebuttal...And, it is this 'silence' or 'inadequate response' that makes us here in Malaysia believe that what was disclosed may more likely be the truth...

The policy of being 'secretive', 'non-responsive' Najib and the government must change. They forget that they are fully responsible to all of us Malaysians... I hope that Malaysia will emulate Thailand, where every week the Prime Minister reports back to the people. See earlier post:-.Prime Minister weekly live TV reports to the people - like the MH370 briefing sessions?

This time Zahid Hamidi warns us and calls this 'unverified sources' - whether it is verified or not is irrelevant, when an 'alleged wrongdoing', all that Malaysia need do is investigate and give us a response...He should not jump to quick conclusions about WSJ reports too...

“We should not be influenced by the information that is being spread by this particular media.

“And we should not punish based on the information that comes from unverified sources,” Ahmad Zahid told reporters in a press conference at the Putra World Trade Centre (PWTC).
How long will the Malaysian investigations on 1MDB take? And, what exactly are they investigating.

I do hope that the allegation of corruption against Najib Tun Razak, which is separate from the 1MDB issue, is also investigated promptly...



WSJ: 1MDB prioritised political spending despite insufficient funds

Published     Updated     

1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) is alleged to have continued prioritising political spending despite its insufficient cash flow to repay its heavy debt, reported the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) today.

1MDB board of directors were so alarmed by the poor financial state that they expressed their fears at a board meeting last year.

The directors even discussed if they had landed in hot water and whether the police would launch a probe on the firm.

The US-based daily based its report on the minutes of a 1MDB meeting on Dec 20, 2014.

"The minutes portray a fund that repeatedly prioritised political spending, even when 1MDB’s cash flow was insufficient to cover its debt payments.

"Board members wondered aloud if they would get into trouble. In a meeting on Dec 20, 2014, they discussed what to do about the police who came to investigate allegations of financial irregularities, according to the minutes," WSJ reported.

1MDB's debt had soared to RM42 billion as of March 2014.

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak had signed cheques from his personal accounts to lawmakers, who used the money as they saw fit, said a cabinet minister who was not named.

The daily also reported that Najib had gathered a group of Umno leaders in July when he was under pressure to resign. He reminded the Umno leaders that they had benefited from the RM2.6 billion political donation.

“I took the money to spend for us,” the minister quoted Najib as saying.

WSJ was unable to pin-point the source of the RM2.6 billion despite having conducted a six-month examination.

It, however, claimed the public entities spent hundreds of millions of dollars on a massive campaign to ensure Umno continue to stay in power.

"The payments, while legal, represented a new milestone in Malaysia’s freewheeling electoral system, according to ruling-party officials," said the report.

1MDB also transferred hundreds of millions of dollars to politicians through Ihsan Perdana Bhd, a company formed in 2011 to carry out 1MDB’s corporate social responsibility programmes, said a person involved in setting up the fund.

Ihsan Perdana is exempt from filing financial statements, according to Malaysian company records.

WSJ reported that Malaysian investigators believe the cash that had ended up in Najib’s personal accounts had been channelled to government agencies, banks and companies linked to 1MDB.

At least US$14 million (RM42 million) flowed into Najib's accounts via Ihsan Perdana, according to documents from a Malaysian government investigation.- Malaysiakini

Monday December 28, 2015
02:50 PM GMT+8
Ahmad Zahid Hamidi questions the veracity of Wall Street Journal's allegations on financial irregularities at 1Malaysia Development Berhad. — File picAhmad Zahid Hamidi questions the veracity of Wall Street Journal's allegations on financial irregularities at 1Malaysia Development Berhad. — File pic KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 28 — Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi today questioned the veracity of reports US-based Wall Street Journal (WSJ) on alleged financial irregularities at 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).

He said Malaysians should not unduly swayed by the news reports and consider 1MDB guilty when investigations into the state-owned firm were still underway.

“We should not be influenced by the information that is being spread by this particular media.

“And we should not punish based on the information that comes from unverified sources,” Ahmad Zahid told reporters in a press conference at the Putra World Trade Centre (PWTC).

He asked Malaysians to be patient with the on-going investigations on 1MDB and allow agencies such as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) to do their jobs.

“It is best to leave this matter to the investigators in Malaysia in order for the truth to prevail.”

Ahmad Zahid asked to comment on the WSJ news report alleging that a 1MDB unit had sent at least US$850 million (RM3.7 billion) to an offshore entity made to appear controlled by Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC).
- See more at:

Brave mother who highlighted police wrongdoings not praised but persecuted?

Do the Malaysian Police torture persons in custody? Yes, they do sometimes, it seems, and a most recent case of this was the case of  Syed Mohd Azlan..

Police officers that tortured and killed detainee - what will the AG and the Malaysian government do?

EAIC - Polis bunuh Syed Mohd Azlan dalam tahanan, lupuskan keterangan,...??

What about those that do not die in custody? Well, the most famous case would be that of Anwar Ibrahim's 'black eye'...

When a person is arrested and tortured in police custody, and do not die, is this wrong? Yes, it is very wrong - it is torture. Police are not allowed to beat up or torture people... 

The victim alive, however, finds it very difficult to complain - or prove his/her claim of torture (beatings, etc..). 

Why? The reason simply is that it may at the end of the day be only his word - which may be contested by the police officers who tortured, supported  by his fellow police officers and others - an example of this is the Syed Mohd Azlan's case...In that case, the EAIC also found that police officers helped dispose evidence of the wrongdoing.

If the victim makes a police report -well, he may risk being charged with making of a false police report - or even the possibility of further torture and other injustices. So many a victim just keep quite and do not complaint. 

The police and the Malaysian government must, as a high priority, be interested in cleaning up our police force and eliminating torture.

As such, the recent reported action of the police of going after a mother of a detainee, for highlighting alleged wrongdoing of the police - she alleged that the police had hit her child and asked for money? What the police did was arrest her and investigate her for Sedition...Absurd?

He said she was arrested for her Facebook post on Dec 23 alleging that the police had hit her child and asked for money

Police or public servants, asking for money - well, this could have happened and that is why we have corruption offences...

What the police should have done was to conduct a thorough investigation on the allegation of torture and corruption against some police officer/s - not go after the very person that highlighted this, who really by definition today is a Human Rights Defender.

The police action is so very wrong - and it certainly also goes against Malaysia's recently proclaimed commitment on human rights defenders at the UN this November.  AG Apandi Ali, proceeding with HR Defender Lena Hendry's trial after 26/11/2015 inconsistent with Malaysia's new position?

Was Malaysia being honest when it committed to the protection of Human Rights Defenders? Well, I and a lot of good Malaysians hope that is so. What the police did to that brave mother was wrong - it is her allegations that need to be investigated, not her who highlighted these alleged wrongdoing. It is time Malaysia weed out corrupt public officials for the good of Malaysia.

In fact, the police should have thanked this brave, thus far unnamed woman for highlighting alleged wrongdoings by police officers. Because, if people highlights such matters, the Malaysian police force can be rid of Torture and Corruption...She is a Hero.

But, this action against this unnamed mother will only DETER people from highlighting torture and corruption...Malaysia certainly do not want this. We want a corrupt-free and torture-free country and police force.

SEDITION ACT - well, this is a legislation that even TRUTH will not save you. Yes, in our Sedition law, even if what you say was true, it is not a defence. That is one of the reasons why this draconian legislation must be repealed.

I hope the police immediately stop this harassment - and make a public announcement when they do this. People need to be encouraged to fearlessly highlight any or all wrongdoings within the police force and the government.

The police should also be brave enough to be professional and act justly without fear or favour. Remember politicians come and go, and the police at the end of the day serves only Malaysia and the people of Malaysia - not some politician or politically party that is now holding power in government. 

Governments come and go but the police and the civil service remains - and remember always that your actions are being watched, and what you do will determine the respect accorded to you today and, more importantly in the future when you, the public servant, is no longer employed by the government. Will you be remembered as a good person or...?

Friday, 25 December 2015 | MYT 3:38 PM

Woman detained and under sedition probe for insulting police on Facebook

KLUANG: A 44-year-old businesswoman from Taman Seri Impian here was arrested Friday for insulting the police on a social networking site.

Kluang OCPD Asst Comm Mohamad Laham (pic) said she was arrested at 12.05am at her house in Jalan Seri Impian 1/12, Taman Seri Impian, for posting the insulting comments on Facebook.

Her mobile phone was also confiscated during the arrest.

He said she was arrested for her Facebook post on Dec 23 alleging that the police had hit her child and asked for money.

Her son was arrested on Nov 29 for owning a stolen motorcycle and charged in court, with the case ongoing.

"Her posting gave a bad impression of the police and she has been remanded for three days until Sunday for investigations to be carried out," he said Friday.

ACP Mohamad said the case was being investigated under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948, which carries a jail term of not more than three years or a maximum fine of RM5,000 or both on conviction.

"I also advise the public not to take to social media to bad mouth others, or you will have to bear the consequences and also action from the law," he added.

He also said that insulting others on social media was a criminal offence and the police had the right to take action under the law. - Star, 25/12/2015,

Tuesday, December 29, 2015

Malaysian Airlines Flight Attendants and NUFAM - No Happy New Year?

No Happy New Year for flight attendants in Malaysian Airlines and their union, NUFAM (National Union of Flight Attendants in Malaysia) because now MAB(Malaysian Airlines Berhad) claims that  NUFAM's application for recognition was defective??? 

In my opinion, MAB should have reasonably replied to NUFAM's application for recognition submitted on 11/9/2015 within 21 days if they believed it was 'defective' or inadequate. There is an obligation to inform NUFAM 'in writing the grounds for not according recognition' - not keep silent until only now.
Section 9(3) Industrial Relations Act 1967 states that, ‘…An employer or a trade union of employers upon whom a claim for recognition has been served shall, within twenty-one days after the service of the claim- (a) accord recognition; or (b) if recognition is not accorded, notify the trade union of workmen concerned in writing the grounds for not according recognition…’
But, MAB kept silent - hencing forcing NUFAM to take the next step in bringing up the matter to the DGIR. The Malaysian government and the DGIR was thus questioned for the delay. See also Joint Statement issued on 19/11/2015:- 67 Groups :- Government-Owned MAB, the new Malaysian Airlines Operator, Must Recognize Unions and Not Deny Freedom of Association.

Finally the Director General of Industrial Relations started doing their work - and sent a letter to NUFAM and MAB(Malaysian Airlines Berhad) setting a meeting to discuss NUFAM's claim for recognition submitted on 11/9/2015. The meeting was fixed on 22/12/2015 (The letter dated 16/12/2015). Reasonably, I believe that the 22nd December meeting would have been for the purpose of arranging the secret ballot - to show the proof that NUFAM does indeed have the support of more than 50% of the flight attendants in MAB.

Now, NUFAM informs us that MAB sent a letter on the date of the meeting(22/12/2015) to the Industrial Relations Department alleging that the Union application for recognition was defective

What MAB did was most embarrassing, and what I would consider very wrong. If they did not want to accord recognition, they should have rightfully informed NUFAM of their reasons 21 days after they received NUFAM's application in September 2015. If they did, whatever inadequacies, if any, could very well been dealt with long ago. But, as we know, MAB did not reply - and the first time, they did respond was just on 22/12/2015. This is unacceptable especially for a company own by Malaysia - the people of Malaysia. 

It all stinks of DELAY - let us not pre-judge the matter, and let us see what Fong Khei Phor (the DGIR) will do? 

Will he now allow MAB to do this, and get away with it? OR will the DGIR proceed towards according recognition of NUFAM? Will he deal with this speedily - or will he procrastinate? 

The government, vis-a-vis the DGIR, have been responsible for delaying before. One case that comes to mind is the case of RENESAS involving the  Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR)..
The 3rd claim for recognition was submitted to RENESAS on 8/10/2010, and this time using the National Courier Poslaju. After receipt of the UNION’s letter, RENESAS send it back to Poslaju asking that the letter be returned to the UNION. Poslaju provided a letter confirming this. RENESAS could not deny receipt this time, and rightfully the DGIR should have done the needful which was to the conduct of a ‘secret ballot’. But, there was inaction on the part of the DGIR for many months despite repeated demands by the UNION, and finally on 12/8/2011, the UNION had a picket in front of the Ministry of Human Resources. The DGIR then informed the UNION that the said relevant documents had been misplaced, and the blame was put on the Deputy DGIR responsible, who allegedly has since then been removed from that position. The DGIR then asked the Union to submit yet another claim for recognition. - Joint Statement finally supported by 87 groups dated 4/4/2013 'RENESAS MUST IMMEDIATELY ACCORD RECOGNITION TO THE UNION AND REINSTATE WAN NOORULAZHAR' [Now, this statement was sent to the Prime Minister and also the Minister of Human Resources vide letter, and there was no denial or reply]

When it comes to freedom of association of workers, and unionization, sadly Malaysia shamefully has a bad record. As the number of workers increase in the country, Malaysia finds the number of unions and union membership declining in 2015 -  Union busting in Malaysia - Unions reduced, Union membership declining.

In 2014, there were 735 trade unions but in 2015, there are just 723 trade unions ...And, if we just look at the private sector trade unions, there were 485 in 2014, and 475 in 2015 

In 2014, union members was 930,512 but in 2015, that number had declined to 923,938

Now, in the case of the Malaysian Airlines, allegedly not all employees are regular employees until retirement but there are allegedly quite a number on fixed-term contracts.  

Hence, when recognition is delayed - it will definitely prejudice workers and their trade unions. If the secret ballot is delayed, then come they day to vote many of them may no longer even be MAB employees. The Malaysian government, in particular the DGIR must act fast - and not make the freedom of association for workers elusive in Malaysia.

Malaysian government do not even have a policy to insist on permanent regular employment - there is also no legally stipulated limits on the number of fixed-term contract employees, or the scope of work which 'fixed-term contract employees' can be employed in. In India, for example, fixed-term contracts are only allowed in non-core business work. 

In Malaysia, even if the work exists, the employer is free not to extend or renew fixed term contracts - and simply just hire a new worker. How unjust is this? Really, we need a law to ensure that contracts of workers are extended for so long as the work they were employed to do exists. The present practice of not extending contract is also absurd, as it is foolish, to get rid of workers who already have the necessary skill and experience - and hire new workers which have to be trained again.

For workers in modern Malaysia, where most people buy homes, cars and even house-hold appliances on credit(loans), they have monthly financial obligations to repay loans that last for years and years - hence all the more important is financial security for the worker and his/her family/dependents, and for this regular employment, which guarantees employment until retirement unless terminated by reason of misconduct or retrenchment, is a MUST...Without this, it is tough. Such workers may also be easily exploited and oppressed, and will be too afraid to stand up for their rights.

It is not profits and losses of employer companies that determine the wellbeing of Malaysia - it is really the financial security of its people and their families that determine the wellbeing of Malaysia.

MAB is a Malaysian government fully owned company now running the Malaysian Airlines, and so what happens with NUFAM reflects directly on Malaysia. 

We will be watching...

Some earlier news reports:- 

MAB delays recognition for flight attendants union(FMT News)

MAB must recognise union – 62 groups - The Malaysian ...

Thursday, December 24, 2015

European Parliament resolution of 17 December 2015 on Malaysia

We have read statements and media reports about this EU Resolution, and now it is time for us to read the entire resolution which deals with human rights and justice issues - Human Rights Defenders, Death Penalty, 1MDB, Corruption, Police, Peaceful Assembly, Sedition Act, National Security Council Bill, etc..

European Parliament resolution of 17 December 2015 on Malaysia (2015/3018(RSP))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Malaysia,

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2014 on the future of EU-ASEAN relations(1) ,

–  having regard to the Statement by the EEAS Spokesperson of 15 April 2015 on the recently adopted amendment to the Sedition Act in Malaysia,

–  having regard to the Statement by the EEAS Spokesperson of 17 March 2015 on the arrest of Nurul Izzah, opposition Member of Parliament in Malaysia,

–  having regard to the Statement by the EEAS Spokesperson of 10 February 2015 on the conviction of Malaysian opposition politician Anwar Ibrahim,

–  having regard to the EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights,

–  having regard to the Statement by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights of 9 April 2015 on draft anti-terror and sedition laws,

–  having regard to the joint press release by the EEAS on the EU-ASEAN policy dialogue on human rights of 23 October 2015,

–  having regard to the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders,

–  having regard to UN Universal Periodic Review session of October 2013,

–  having regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons of June 2015,

–  having regard to the second Universal Periodic Review of Malaysia before the UN Human Rights Council, and its recommendations, of October 2013,

–  having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

–  having regard to the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders of 1998,

–  having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966,

–  having regard to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) of 1984,

–  having regard to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Human Rights Declaration,

–  having regard to Rules 135(5) and 123(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the EU regards Malaysia as a key political and economic partner in South-East Asia; whereas the EU and Malaysia are negotiating a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement and a Free Trade Agreement;

B.  whereas the space for public debate and free speech in Malaysia is rapidly narrowing as the government resorts to vaguely worded criminal laws to silence its critics and quell public discontent and peaceful expression, including debates on matters of public interest; whereas these laws include the Sedition Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Communications and Multimedia Act and the Peaceful Assembly act, amongst others;

C.  whereas on 3 December 2015 the National Security Council Bill was passed in the Malaysian Parliament by a majority vote; whereas the bill grants the National Security Council led by the Prime Minister sweeping powers to declare a state of emergency in any area deemed a security risk, giving broad powers of arrest, search and seizure without warrant;

D.  whereas under the Sedition Act alone at least 78 people have been investigated or charged since the beginning of 2014;

E.  whereas former opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim was sentenced on charges of sodomy in February 2015 following a politically motivated prosecution which resulted in criminal proceedings that failed to meet international standards of fair trial; whereas he has been denied appropriate medical care;

F.  whereas LGBTI people in Malaysia are criminalised under the country’s anti-sodomy law and regional laws prohibiting cross-dressing, and face political hate speech, arbitrary arrest, physical and sexual assault, imprisonment, and other abuses;

G.  whereas Malaysian cartoonist Zulkiflee Anwar Ulhaque (Zunar) is facing charges under the Sedition Act following critical tweets against the government with regard to the sentencing of Anwar Ibrahim; whereas blogger Khalid Ismath and academic Azmi Sharom face similar charges;

H.  whereas the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has questioned the Prime Minister in connection with graft allegations after the discovery of over 600 million euros in his bank account without any justification of source and purpose, as well as on separate allegations that hundreds of millions of euros were missing from deals involving a state firm he launched, 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB);

I.  whereas media outlets and publishing houses have faced restrictions under the Printing Presses and Publications Act following reporting about these allegations, and whereas lawyer Matthias Chang and politician Khairuddin Abu Hassan were arrested following their investigations into these allegations;

J.  whereas the High Representative raised concerns regarding the abusive use of criminal laws during her visit to Malaysia on 5-6 August 2015;

K.  whereas, according to the UN and NGOs, the Malaysian police forces have increasingly resorted to acts of torture, late night arrests, unjustifiable remands and selective prosecution;

L.  whereas Malaysia continues to practice the death penalty with up to 1 000 prisoners currently on death row;

M.  whereas Malaysia is a Member of the UN Security Council and the current ASEAN Chair, and the 27th ASEAN Summit was held in Kuala Lumpur from 18 to 22 November 2015;

1.  Reaffirms the EU’s strong commitment to the Malaysian people with whom the EU has strong and longstanding political, economic and cultural ties;

2.  Deplores the deteriorating human rights situation in Malaysia and in particular the crackdown on civil society activists, academics, media and political activists; expresses concern with regard to the spike in the number of people facing charges or arrest under the Sedition Act;

3.  Is particularly concerned about the adoption of the National Security Council Bill and urges its withdrawal; calls on the government to maintain a proper balance between the need to safeguard national security and the imperative to protect civil and political rights;

4.  Urges the Malaysian Government to immediately release all political prisoners, including former opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, and to provide them with appropriate medical care, and to drop politically motivated charges, including those against cartoonist Zulkiflee Anwar Haque (Zunar), blogger Khalid Ismath, academic Azmi Sharom, political dissidents Khairuddin Abu Hassan and Matthias Chang, and human rights activists Lena Hendry and Maria Chin Abdullah;

5.  Urges the Malaysian authorities to repeal the Sedition Act and to bring all legislation, including the Prevention of Terrorism Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Communications and Multimedia Act, the Peaceful Assembly Act, and other relevant provisions of the penal code, in line with international standards on freedom of expression and assembly and the protection of human rights; calls on the Malaysian authorities to facilitate peaceful assemblies, and to guarantee the safety of all participants and their freedom of expression across the whole country;

6.  Urges the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), as recommended by the Police Commission of Inquiry in 2005, to investigate allegations of torture and deaths in police custody;

7.  Underlines the importance of independent and transparent investigations into the graft allegations, and of full cooperation with the investigators; urges the Malaysian Government to refrain from putting pressure on the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and media;

8.  Deeply deplores the rise of supremacist groups which contribute further to the creation of ethnic tensions;

9.  Encourages the Malaysian Government to open a dialogue with opposition parties and civil society stakeholders;

10.  Calls on the Malaysian Government to ratify key international human rights conventions, including the ICCPR, the ICESCR, the CAT, the ICERD, ILO Convention 169, the ICC Rome Statute, as well as the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its optional protocol;

11.  Asks the Malaysian Government to extend a standing invitation to all the UN Special Procedures, thereby enabling special rapporteurs to visit Malaysia without asking for an invitation;

12.  Reiterates its position that the death penalty is a cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, and calls on Malaysia to introduce a moratorium as the first step towards the abolition of the death penalty for all offences and to commute all death sentences to prison terms;

13.  Calls on the EU and its Member States to coordinate policies towards Malaysia, in line with the EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights, in order to encourage reform on the above issues of concern through all possible means, including in the context of the UN where Malaysia is a non-permanent member of the Security Council in 2015-2016;

14.  Urges the EU Delegation to Malaysia to step up efforts to finance projects on freedom of expression and reforming repressive laws, and to use all appropriate tools, including the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, to protect human rights defenders; urges the withdrawal of the anti-sodomy law and calls on the EEAS, in line with the EU guidelines on the protection and promotion of the rights of LGBTI persons, to step up its work on the rights of LGBTI people in Malaysia who face violence and persecution, and to aim in particular towards the decriminalisation of homosexuality and transgenderism;

15.  Reaffirms the importance of the EU-ASEAN policy dialogue on human rights as a useful tool to exchange good practices and promote capacity-building initiatives;

16.  Calls on the Commission to make sure that human rights concerns are duly taken into account during future negotiations on an EU-Malaysia FTA and PCA;

17.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the parliaments and governments of the Member States, the parliament and government of Malaysia, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the governments of the ASEAN Member States.

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

Rape and Sodomy of 13 year old girl - a Deputy Supt of Police found guilty?

Police and enforcement officers have the obligation to society to be honest and responsible in carrying out their duties, and to be good people. We depend on them to ensure that we all live happily in crime-free environment. 

But alas, now perception of many with regard to the police and enforcement officers is tarnished when they themselves are committing crimes - rape, torture, murder, corruption, etc. Now, we have a case of a senior police officer found guilty of rape and sodomy of a minor.

Several months ago, we heard of police officers involved in torturing and killing a man in custody. What was disturbing there was also the apparent 'cover up', and even the case of police officers involved in getting rid of evidence of the crime. The revelation of the guilt of these police officers was not as a result of a police investigation - but the outcome of an  Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) inquiry. [See earlier post:- Police officers that tortured and killed detainee - what will the AG and the Malaysian government do?]

Police officers that tortured and killed detainee - what will the AG and the Malaysian government do?

EAIC - Polis bunuh Syed Mohd Azlan dalam tahanan, lupuskan keterangan,...??

We need a open public inquiry...a new get to the truth about Aminulrasyid Amzah

As expected, Court of Appeal overturned RM2.5 million judgment favouring Malek Hussein....

Something is very wrong with the Malaysian police and enforcement officers - and, this RM2.6 billion scandal and the delay in the corruption investigation and/or prosecution of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is also not helping matters - More than 4 months now.

What is happening to the investigation and prosecution of the police officers that killed Syed Mohd Azlan in police custody on 3/11/2014 (more than 13 months now)? Has any police officer been arrested? The   Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) media statement highlighting the outcome and recommended actions to be taken came out on 30/10/2015.




Sabah ex-vice cop gets 100 years jail for rape, sodomy of minor

The Kota Kinabalu sessions court sentences a former Sabah anti-vice chief police to 100 years in jail and 15 strokes of the rotan for raping and sodomising a 13-year-old girl. – The Malaysian Insider file pic, December 23, 2015. 
The Kota Kinabalu sessions court sentences a former Sabah anti-vice chief police to 100 years in jail and 15 strokes of the rotan for raping and sodomising a 13-year-old girl. – The Malaysian Insider file pic, December 23, 2015. 
An ex-senior police officer was sentenced to 100 years in jail and ordered to be given 15 strokes of the rotan for raping and sodomising a 13-year-old girl, Star Online reported.

The news portal said Deputy Supt Rohaizat Abd Ani, 56, was found guilty of four charges of rape and one of sodomy between February and May 2012.

Kota Kinabalu Sessions Court judge Ainul Shahrin Mohamad imposed the maximum 20 years jail for each of the charge on the accused who was once the Sabah anti-vice chief.

Rohaizat, a father of two children, raped and sodomised the girl in a room at Tang Dynasty Hotel in Kota Kinabalu on February 1, 2012. The following day and between May 1 and 6, the accused raped the girl in another room of the same hotel.

However, Rohaizat will have to serve a total of 80 years in all – 20 years for the first two charges (both to run concurrently) and 20 years each for the other three (to run consecutively).

Rape carried a maximum 30 years in imprisonment while sodomy 20 year plus whipping of up to 24 strokes.
Considering the accused age, he would likely spend the rest of his life behind bars due to the length of the prison term.

Star Online said Rohaizat, dressed in a dark grey jacket, remained calm and composed when the sentence was handed down to him.

His wife, who followed the proceedings also showed no expression as the judge read out the verdict.

The judge, however, allowed a stay of the sentences pending appeal in the High Court.

Bail was raised to RM100,000 with one surety and the accused was told to surrender his passport and report to the police in Bukit Aman in Kuala Lumpur on the 1st and 15th of each month.

Earlier, deputy public prosecutor Azeezi Nordin, who pressed for a heavy punishment, said that as a senior police officer, Rohaizat should be a guardian to the public.

"The victim was 13 years old at the time of incident, she was raped and sodomised by a 52-year-old, it was clearly a total manipulation of an adult against a child.

"The repetitious act of the accused in three months from February showed that he never considered the victim's age, emotions and consequences of his action."

Lawyer Zahir Shah, who represented Rohaizat, said they would file an appeal only against the sentence.

The accused, who is suspended from duties, had served as Setiu disrict police chief briefly and as deputy chief Federal Reserve Unit in Penang when he was charged in August 2013.

Counsel Mary Lee held a watching brief for the Sabah Women Action Resource Group. – December 23, 2015.
- See more at:

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Gov’t has guaranteed RM177.8b worth of GLCs' debts? WHY? GLC not government-owned?

Why is the Malaysian government guaranteeing debts of companies - and these are really not totally owned government companies but GLC's(government linked companies)

What are GLC's? Well, my perusal of the internet, revealed an article that these are companies where the government owned at least 20% of the issued or paid up capital. That means individuals and others could be owning the rest, and benefiting from the GLC status - and the ease of getting loans, for after all the Malaysian government has guaranteed the debt.

GLCs are defined as a company in which the government owns at least 20% of the issued and paid-up capital (Ministry of Finance, 1993) - A posting by 

Who are these GLC companies, and how many percentage of each individual GLC does the Malaysian government really own? Who are these other 'owners'? Malaysians or 'foreigners'?

How much debt of each of these different GLC's has the Malaysian government guaranteed?

Problem with GLCs, is that when they end up having financial problems and losses just like MAS, suddenly it is yet again peoples' money that is used to 'bail out' these failing GLCs - and guess what?... the 'other owners' also benefit? What do they contribute?

A normal company has financial problems, it dies and the shareholders/investors lose out. Share value drops - may even becomes zero. But when it comes to a GLC, are things different? The risk is almost non-existent? Look at how much Khazanah paid to the other MAS shareholders to buy their shares?

When government owns and operates businesses - is it not a conflict? 

Well, businesses are interested in making profits - and for many of them, workers are not partners-in-business but rather mere commodities - human resources - To be oppressed and exploited as much as possible? What becomes important then as we say is 'profits' rather than justice and rights of workers.

Well, would that not explain the erosion of worker and trade union rights in Malaysia? Would that also not explain, the fact that the number of trade unions in Malaysia and union membership have seen a decrease in 2015? See earlier post:-  Union busting in Malaysia - Unions reduced, Union membership declining.

Would that not explain the 'union busting' in Malaysia? Over the years, we have seen the removal of key leaders in trade unions, dismissal of union members, delay in registration of unions, unionist arrested for 'excessive noise' during pickets, etc - and, the response of the Malaysian government was pathetic.

Joint Media Statement:- "Utusan" must respect NUJ leader; call off domestic inquiry

HR Defender WAN NOORULAZHAR - dismisssed for allegedly highlighting worker rights concerns?


MAB delays recognition for flight attendants union(FMT)

Now, some of these cases where freedom of association and worker rights were not respected or promoted have been GLCs, have they not? One would have expected better from government owned or GLCs, and now maybe we can understand...

Government, when they operate through companies, they are also able to escape scrutiny of Parliament, obligations of transparency and accountability, .... in fact, they escape many of the check and balances in place that will apply to government, Ministries, government departments... 

MAS - at the end of the day, no one even took responsibility for its failings,...only the workers suffered. 

Transparency please! Government should be government of the people for the people, and a government for the businesses(GLCs) is a conflict and confusing. 

People of Malaysia has now guaranteed RM177.8b of GLCs debts - but alas, is it not some of these very same GLCs that are charging the people more and more...Why? 

Accountability please - if it is GLCs, then it must be accountable - fully accountable to the people - to Parliament. Auditor General should do annual audits. We also need maybe Parliamentary Select Committees continuing to monitor GLCs to ensure that they are functioning well. No use coming out and telling us after 'the milk is spilled'.  


Gov’t has guaranteed RM177.8b worth of GLCs' debts

Published     Updated     

PARLIAMENT The government has guaranteed RM177.8 billion worth of debts of government-linked companies as at June 30, 2015.

However, a written reply given to Parliament does not name the GLCs, nor the nature of the debts.

The parliamentary reply was to a question from Ngeh Koo Ham (DAP-Beruas) and delivered during the final Dewan Rakyat session of 2015, which concluded this month.

In another written reply to Ngeh, the government stressed that it has not breached its self-imposed debt ceiling of 55 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

As at the end of the second quarter, the federal debt stood at RM627.5 billion, or 54 percent of the GDP.

Of that, only three percent, or RM18.8 billion, are offshore debts.

"The government's debt position remains in order and can be categorised as moderate," the written reply says.

Top government bond holders are the Employees’ Provident Fund (RM127.6 billion), the Retirement Fund Incorporated (Kwap) at RM20.3 billion and banks at RM148.8 billion.