Monday, February 27, 2017

Perjuangan memerlukan lebih daripada satu kenyataan atau piket - juang sampai keadilan dicapai?



Satu kenyataan, satu piket atau satu perhimpunan aman adalah tidak mencukupi untuk menjayakan mana-mana perjuangan... Apa yang diperlukan adalah 'stamina' untuk teruskan perjuangan dan tuntutan...

Perjuangan untuk keadilan memerlukan penglibatkan semua orang - hanya menyokong dalam hati dan minda tetapi tidak sendiri melakukan apa-apa tidak memadai...Semua yang menyokong akan bertindak - tindakan beraneka jenis boleh digunakan. Tindakan menghebohkan sesuatu isu kepada orang lain dengan matlamat akhirnya kita mendapat ramai yang menyokong sesuatu tuntutan...Menyuarakan seruan untuk keadilan kepada pihak yang menindas atau berlaku salah adalah juga berkesan...Boleh hantar surat, boleh hantar emel, boleh juga talipon/fax... 

Sebagai penguna, adakah kita hanya melihat harga dan mutu sesuatu barangan bila anda membeli? Jika pekerja syarikat yang membuat produk itu ditindas atau dicabul hak, adakah kamu masih akan membeli produk syarikat/majikan sedemikian? Jika penguna membuat tak tahu tindakan syarikat sedemikian dari segi hak pekerja, hak asasi, polisi alam sekitar, dll - penguna sebenarnya secara langsung 'merestui' kesalahan yang dilakukan sesuatu syarikat tersebut...Justeru, adakah anda penguna 'berprinsip' atau 'bermoral' - dan hanya akan membeli barang atau gunakan perkhidmatan syarikat yang baik dari segi cara layanan pekerja, cara mereka hormati hak pekerja...alam sekitar, dll...? Ramai sebenar kini mungkin hanya tengok harga dan nilai barangan/perkhidmatan - mungkin masa untuk bertukar...

Dalam kes Infineon, Presiden Union kini menjadi sasaran - dan telah dibuang kerja. Pembuangan kepimpinan Union banyak berlaku di Malaysia...dan ini tidak bagus dan harus ditentang. Kepimpinan mungkin dijadikan sasaran dengan harapan ini akan melemahkan persatuan, kesatuan, dll ...Adakah rakyat Malaysia akan menerima hakikat ini? Kini ada undang-undang menyatakan bahawa pekerja tidak boleh didiskriminasikan oleh majikan kerana pekerja terlibat dalam Union, kepimpinan Union - TETAPI masalahnya kini, ada majikan tetap buat dan melanggar undang-undang dan malangkan sistem pentadbiran keadilan bergerak terlalu perlahan dan sangat tak berkesan...

Pekerja dibuang tak ada kerja dan gaji, majikan terus beroperasi secara biasa, dan kes mengambil bertahun-tahun untuk selesai - mana adil... Mungkin, bila pembuangan kerja dicabar sebagai tak wajar, majikan terpaksa terus membayar 50%-100% gaji pekerja sehingga aduan/kes itu diselesaikan secara muktamad. Jika ada undang-undang sedemikian, pasti majikan pun mahu kes dijalankan cepat dan selesai pun cepat - kalau boleh dalam masa 3 bulan..maksima 6 bulan. Kini, tak ada perundangan saperti itu di Malaysia (ada yang kata Indonesia ada)...

Perjuangan untuk keadilan di Malaysia, sama ada keadilan untuk diri sendiri atau keadilan untuk orang lain di Malaysia, adalah semua tanggungjawab kita semua...

Kes Infineon - INFINEON pada masa ini mungkin akan segera membetulkan keadaan - mengembalikan kerja Presiden Union...membatalkan tindakan disiplin(atau hukuman) yang dikenakan 6 orang Exco Union... INFINEON di Germany dan juga Malaysia sedang mengkaji semula kes ini - mungkin ada 'kesilapan' berlaku - dan harapan adalah mereka akan buat yang betul dan hak pekerja/kesatuan sekerja dihormati...

Justeru, untuk membantu keadaan - tindakan anda kini sangat diperlukan. Nyatakan pendapat atau pendapat kamu juga kepada INFINEON...

Perjuangan untuk keadilan harus berterusan sehingga dapat...Bila ketuk pintu, orang dalam tak mahu buka ...TETAPI jika terus menerus ketuk...dan ketuk...akhirnya mereka yang enggan buka pun akan buka... 

Ini isu pekerja Malaysia - mana dia MP, ADUN, tokoh politik, Parti Politik...adakah mereka langsung tak risau sangat isu pekerja dan orang biasa? Wakil Rakyat - tetapi isu rakyat tak ambil peduli? Tanya kenalan kamu dari parti politik...

Harapan saya adalah INFINEON akan berlaku adil dan tak perlu kita teruskan perjuangan sampai dapat keadilan...

Di bawah, beberapa pemimpin Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia yang telah menjadi mangsa ketidakadilan..
Ismail Nasaruddin, President of NUFAM

J Joseph Solomon, Secretary General of National Union of Bank Employees

Mohd Hatta Wahari, now former President of National Union of Journalist(NUJ)

Zulfadlee Thye Abdullah, President of Infineon Technologies Melaka Workers Union

Wan Noorulazhar, Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR) President



Joint  Statement – 31/1/2017

INFINEON MUST STOP UNION BUSTING AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST UNION LEADERS
Reinstate Zulfadlee Thye Abdullah, President of Infineon Technologies Melaka Workers Union

We, the 55 undersigned organisations and trade union are shocked to hear about the wrongful termination of Muhammad Zulfadlee Thye Bin Abdullah, the President of the Infineon Technologies Malaysia Workers Union (Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Infineon Technologies (M) Sdn Bhd) at INFINEON in Malacca, which is said to be the largest assembly of INFINEON with a workforce of about 8000 people.  Zulfadlee, an employee since 1998, has been the President of the Union  since 2005.

INFINEON is a German Company that produces, amongst others, electronic and auto components, which are said to be used by major Brands including Apple, BOSCH, Philips, Microsoft, Hewlette Packard, Dell and Continental.

On 13/12/2016, Zulfadlee was terminated on the grounds that he ‘committed the act of malingering’, with reference to a sick leave obtained on 18/10/2016 from a doctor, Dr Aw Cheng Yew  of  Klinik Melaka, which is a panel clinic of the Employer. The basis of the allegation seems to be because he was present at an activity of the Selangor Division of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress(MTUC)  in Putrajaya on the same date when he was on sick leave.  As such, one may assume that maybe the charge was simply pretending to be sick (or faking illness) for the purpose of avoiding work or duty. 

It must be stated that the reason for termination used was not an employment misconduct stated in INFINEON Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd’s document entitled Policy for Misconduct and Disciplinary. 

Further, the word ‘malingering’ is not a commonly used word, and as such many are unaware of the meaning of that word. To compound matters, in this case, the word ‘malingering’ allegedly was never even clearly explained to Zulfadlee, whose mother tongue is the Malay language. When such English words are used in a charges levied against a worker, and then not explained clearly, it will have a tendency to be confusing and may result in injustice.

In law, Zulfadlee was entitled to 22 days of paid sick leave every year, and it must be pointed out that he was examined by a qualified doctor who concluded that he was entitled to   sick leave, and a medical certificate was signed and issued by the said doctor. A sick leave is given only when the doctor, after examining decides a worker is not medically fit to perform his/her duties at work.

There was no question of Zulfadlee lying or pretending to be sick, for on the subsequent day he went to see a specialist doctor, who allegedly discovered that he had a stone in his bladder and he was then given further sick leave for 3 days on 19/10/2016, 20/10/2016 and 21/10/2016. Despite being on sick leave, Zulfadlee did come to the office for a few hours to do some urgent work on 2 of these days but he was not charged for committing the ‘act of malingering’ for these days.

Being on a sick leave does not  mean that one is to be confined at home and bed rest, and cannot do any other things including also attending some union meeting or activity – a sick leave only means that he is not medically fit for work on the said day, and in law he becomes entitled to paid sick leave.

On 18/10/2016, Zulfadlee said that he had no plans whatsoever to go to the Putrajaya union activity with his union members who planned to go. It was only after he had obtained medical leave whilst he was sending off the union members heading to Putrajaya, that he was convinced by his fellow union members and suddenly decided to follow them in the bus.

Now, even if an Employer disputes the Medical Certificate issued by the doctor, then the Employer should reasonably have taken action against the doctor and/or the clinic – not with the employee.  It must be pointed out that generally a panel clinic of the employer, are less likely to simply issue Medical Certificates to employees unless the doctor is convinced that the said worker is entitled to sick leave. In this case, the Employer really had no reasonable basis to even suggest that Zulfadlee was ‘malingering’ or lied to obtain the sick leave. In such health matters, the Employer is certainly not competent – only the qualified doctor is.

We do not believe that any failings of a doctor, if there even is, should ever be blamed on a worker, and certainly not be used as justification for termination.

Further, attending or participating in a union activity cannot and should never be an employment misconduct and/or a breach of the employment contract.

ANTI-UNION ACTION & DISCRIMINATORY ACTION AGAINST UNION PRESIDENT

As such, we are of the opinion that the termination of the Union President may really not  be because of an ‘act of malingering’ by an employee, but simply a union busting action targeting the Union President and the Union.

In INFINEON’s letter dated 6/1/2017, rejecting Zulfadlee’s  appeal against the termination it was stated, amongst others, ‘…The basis of our decision was premised on the fact that the Management could not condone nor mitigate punishments for a serious act of misconduct committed by a Union President leading the employees of Kesatuan Pekerja - Pekerja lnfineon Technologies Malaysia itwu,’ This letter was signed by Lee Cheong Chee, the President & Managing Director of lnfineon Technologies Melaka.

The said letter, also did state, ‘…your illustrious career and contributions to the Company has been well acknowledged through your progress during your tenure. While that may ordinarily be a mitigating factor in considering any appeal, the Management has decided that the your act of malingering is deemed to be unacceptable and is aggravated in view of you being the Union President at the point the act of misconduct was committed…’

Besides Zulfadlee, 6 other members of the Executive Committee of the Union, including the Vice President and the Secretary, were also targeted and subjected to disciplinary action – and some of this had ended with a stern warning, whilst only the Union President was terminated.

Considering the fact that out of the 40 over employees that participated in the Union program on 18/10/2016, and only the President and 6 of the Union leaders have been subjected to disciplinary action, it certainly looks that  INFINEON  maybe discriminating against employees who are leaders of the Union, and maybe reasonably said to be an act of ‘union busting’.

The timing of these disciplinary actions and the termination of the Union President, when the Union and INFINEON is starting negotiations concerning the next Collective Bargaining Agreement, whereby the first meeting is scheduled for 23/1/2017 is most disturbing. Members of the Union will most likely be prejudiced by this.

It looks like the Employer’s actions in this case was maybe to instill fear in the Union, its members and other employees, which may affect the effectiveness of the trade union. These actions of the Employer would impact on the duty and obligation of Unions to fight for better rights and working conditions, highlight future wrongdoings, and fight against violation of the worker rights. It is failure to recognize and respect  the freedom of association.

The failure of this Union and/or its members to openly protest the wrongful dismissal of the Union President indicates that the Employer’s strategy to create a docile and compliant union maybe working. It may also seriously affect the upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement to the  detriment of employees and Union members.

OBLIGATION TO UPHOLD WORKER AND UNION RIGHTS, AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

INFINEON Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.,a subsidiary of INFINEON, a German company, in this case seem to have acted contrary to the INFINEON’s own policy and Code of Conduct, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines, Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition Code of Conduct, UN standards and principles; and other relevant standards and good practices.

Brands and corporations that do have INFINEON in their supply chain also have the obligation to ensure that justice be done, and that Codes of Conducts or Policies not be violated by reason of these action/s of INFINEON, vide it’s Malaysian subsidiary, INFINEON Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd, including the discrimination and the wrongful termination of the Union leader.

Justice demands that INFINEON Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd should immediately reinstate Zulfadlee without electing to simply just wait for the long drawn out court process in Malaysia, that could take even 5 - 9 years before court may award victory to a wrongfully terminated worker. As such, unless INFINEON immediately reinstates Zulfadlee, an employee of INFINEON for 18 years,  great injustice would be done to this worker who has wrongfully been deprived of his employment and income that is so needed for him and his family to survive.

Unjust Malaysian laws at present, states that if the worker cannot be reinstated, he will be awarded compensation in lieu of reinstatement for just a maximum of 24 months, when previously this compensation would have been payment of all income worker would have earned from date of wrong dismissal until the date of judgment(or reinstatement). The new amended limit is not anymore a deterrent for employers seeking to wrongfully get rid of employees, especially worker leaders.

Further, in the case of a Union leader, the chances of getting employment with any other employer, especially in the same sector, is also most difficult compared to other workers. Termination of strong Union leaders is grossly unjust to the Union and its members. Without immediate reinstatement, great injustice will be done.

Therefore, we

Call for the immediate reinstatement of Zulfadlee Thye Bin Abdullah, the President INFINEON Technologies Workers Union;

Call for the immediate withdrawal of disciplinary action/s against other Union leaders and/or members, and/or for the revocation of any punishment that has already been handed out;

Call on INFINEON and its subsidiary, INFINEON Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd, to respect and promote worker and trade union rights, and cease discrimination against Union leaders, and also cease union busting activities.

Call on Apple, BOSCH, Philips and other companies that has INFINEON in its supply chain to immediately  ensure that INFINEON respect the Freedom of Association of Workers, Worker and Trade Union Rights;

Call on Germany to ensure that INFINEON comply with the OECD Guidelines, United Nations and  International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards, principles and best practices, and other similar obligations to ensure that human rights and worker rights are respected, protected and promoted;

Call on INFINEON and INFINEON Technologies Melaka to respect and promote human rights, including worker and trade union rights

Charles Hector
Syed Shahir bin Syed Mohamud
Mohd Roszeli bin Majid
Pranom Somwong

For and on behalf of the 55 organisations, trade unions and groups listed below

ALIRAN
Asociación de Trabajadoras del Hogar a Domicilio y de Maquila–ATRAHDOM,Guatemala C.A.
Association of Human Rights Defenders and Promoters- HRDP
Building and Wood Worker's International (BWI) Asia Pacific
CEREAL Centro De Reflexión Y Acción Laboral (CEREAL), México
Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights (CENTRAL) -  Cambodia
Christian Development Alternative (CDA), Bangladesh
Clean Clothes Campaign International Office(CCC)
Club Employees Union Peninsular Malaysia
CWI (Committe For Workers International) Malaysia
Electrical Industry Workers' Union(EIWU)
Electronics Industry Employees Union Southern Region Peninsular Malaysia(EIEUSR)
Electronic Industry Employees Union Northern Region Peninsular Malaysia
GoodElectronics Thailand
IndustriALL Global Union
Institute for Development of Alternative Living (IDEAL)
Kesatuan Eksekutif AIROD
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Mitsui Copper Foil(MCFEU)
Kesatuan Pekerja-pekerja Perodua EngineManufacturing Sdn. Bhd
Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Sdn Bhd (KPP Proton)
MADPET [Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture]
Malaysian Trade Union Congress(MTUC)
Movimentu Kamponezes Timor Leste-Mokatil
National Union of Bank Employees (NUBE)
National Union Employees in Companies Manufacturing Rubber Products (NUECMRP)
National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (NUFAM)
National Union of Transport Equipment & Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW)
North South Initiative (NSI)
Paper Products Manufacturing Employees’ Union of Malaysia (PPMEU)
Parti Rakyat Malaysia(PRM)
Pertubuhan Angkatan Bahaman, Temerloh, Pahang, Malaysia
Persatuan Komuniti Prihation Selangor & KL
Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor(PSWS)
PINAY (The Filipino Women's Organization in Quebec), Canada
Progressive Voice, Myanmar
PROHAM -Persatuan Promosi Hak Asasi Manusia
Sawit Watch, Indonesia
Solidarity of Cavite Workers (SCW), Philippines
SUARAM (Suara Rakyat Malaysia)
Tenaga Nasional Junior Officers Union (TNBJOU)
WH4C(Workers Hub For Change)
Workers Assistance Center, Inc., Philippines
Yayasan LINTAS NUSA, Batam-Indonesia

Global Women's Strike UK
Legal Action for Women UK
Women of Colour GWS
MTUC Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan
Pusat Komas
SHARPS, South Korea
GoodElectronics International Network
CIVIDEP, India
Students & Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour (SACOM), Hong Kong
Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)
Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas (JERIT)
Community Development Centre (CDC)

Sunday, February 26, 2017

UN special rapporteur seeks halt to execution of brothers

UN special rapporteur seeks halt to execution of brothers

Published     Updated


The United Nations Special Rapporteur on summary executions, Agnes Callamard, has appealed for a halt to the execution of two brothers convicted of a 2006 murder.

“To proceed with their execution would be in flagrant violation of international standards for the application of the death penalty and would be tantamount to an arbitrary execution,” the UN human rights expert warned.

“There are strong indications that the death penalty may be carried out against the Batumalai brothers following judicial procedures that do not fulfil the most stringent guarantees of fair trial and due process,” said Callamard, stressing that fundamental safeguards had not been observed.

She based this on reports that the brother's claims were disregarded by the court, which failed to call the dead man’s wife as a witness, whose testimony may have corroborated theirs.

The police also reportedly failed to take blood samples and fingerprints to establish any direct link to the accused brothers to the crime.

Suthar Batumalai and B Ramesh Batumalai, were given the death penalty in 2010 for their alleged involvement in a killing four years earlier. During trial, both men pleaded innocent, and have maintained that they intervened only to stop two other men who were attacking the victim.

Having exhausted all legal avenues of appeal, they were set to face execution yesterday.

A new clemency petition was submitted on Feb 23 for consideration by the Negri Sembilan ruler, as the murder case occurred in the state, and the Pardons Board.

Callamard said: “I urge the authorities to approve this clemency request. The executions of the Batumalai brothers must be halted immediately, and they should be re-tried in compliance with international standards.”
 
The expert also warned against the mandatory use of the death penalty in Malaysia for various crimes, like murder.
“Legislation that leaves courts with no choice but to impose death sentences for specific crimes violates various human rights standards.

A mandatory death sentence necessarily fails to take into account mitigating circumstances that might otherwise show the specific crime to be less serious,” she said.

The execution of the two brothers yesterday was put off, but is reported to have been rescheduled.

Double Execution in Less than 12 Hours Must Be Stopped, Amnesty International Malaysia Says

23 February 2017

PRESS STATEMENT

Double Execution in Less than 12 Hours Must Be Stopped, Amnesty International Malaysia Says

Brothers Rames and Suthar Batumalai have less than 12 hours before they  face the noose if the authorities do not stop the execution in view of a pending clemency application.

The clemency application was submitted to the Negri Sembilan Pardons Board today by Haresh Mahadevan & Co, and it must be given time to review the application. The executions must not go on, Amnesty International Malaysia Executive Director Shamini Darshni Kaliemuthu said tonight. No executions must be carried out while appeals are pending.

“Late last night, we learned that Rames and Suthar were scheduled to be executed in Kajang Prison on Friday morning, which mean they have less than 12 hours to live now. The family is distraught and are appealing to the Yang Di Pertuan Negri Sembilan to spare their lives. ,” she said.

The family of Rames, 44, and Suthar, 39, was only informed yesterday that they should visit the brothers for the last time today ahead of their execution “soon”. Amnesty International sighted the letter.

Rames and Suthar were mandatorily sentenced to death in April 2010 under Section 302 of the Penal Code after they were found guilty of a murder committed on 4 February 2006. On 22 February 2017 the pair was moved from their separate detention facilities to Kajang prison where the executions are set to take place tomorrow. International law prohibits the use of the mandatory death penalty.

“The death penalty can never be justified regardless of the crime committed. The authorities must immediately take a step to prevent this double execution,” Shamini said.

Amnesty International believes that the brothers, who were represented at trial by the same lawyer, were convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence alone. During the trial they claimed that they had intervened to stop two other men from attacking and killing the deceased, claims which were disregarded by the High Court. The Court also failed to call a key witness, the deceased’s wife, to testify. Her testimony could have corroborated the brothers’ version of the facts and the involvement of the two other men in the murder.

“The 1984 UN Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty provide that the death penalty be imposed ‘only when the guilt of the person charged is based upon clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts’ and this has not been made clear in this instance.”


Amnesty International has issued an Urgent Action to its global network to intervene on the executions and is also appealing to the Ruler of Negeri Sembilan state to stop the execution.

The secretive nature of executions in Malaysia has been consistently criticised by Amnesty International. Information is hardly made publicly available on individual death penalty cases and families are often informed merely days before that their loved ones will be executed.

“The lack of transparency around executions in Malaysia is a violation of international law and standards. Families must have sufficient time to prepare for the last visit and take any further recourse available at the national or international level.” Shamini said.

There is no conclusive evidence that the death penalty has a unique deterrent effect on crime.

“Amnesty International Malaysia does not downplay the seriousness of crimes committed, but we urge the authorities to consider introducing more effective crime prevention measures that respect human rights instead of continuously using one that has no merit. Amnesty International Malaysia calls on the Malaysian government to put a stop to the double execution and impose a moratorium on executions immediately with a view to full abolition."
______________________________
____________________________________________________
For more information please contact:
Devika Santhosh Nair
Communications Coordinator
Amnesty International Malaysia
+60 17 6506416 or devika@aimalaysia.org

//

--                                            
Much obliged,

Shamini Darshni Kaliemuthu
Executive Director
Amnesty International Malaysia

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

HRD Lena Hendry found Guilty - A Sad day for Human Rights?

On 21/2/2017, Human Rights Defender, Lena Hendry, has been found GUILTY by the Magistrate Court, and another date was fixed for sentencing.  The charge under Section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 carries a jail term of up to three years or a fine of up to RM30,000 or both if convicted..




See earlier related posts:- 

ARTICLE 19, ALIRAN, PROHAM, NUBE,WH4C & 111 Others say Drop Charges against Lena Hendry

Lena Hendry - Drop Charges says ICJ, Article 19, FIDH, Front Line, OMCT & 116 other groups

HR Defender Lena Hendry Acquitted by Court - Draconian law remains..?


Remember:-

On 10/3/2016, she was acquitted by the Magistrate Court 

Activist Lena Hendry has been acquitted of the charge of screening a film on the Sri Lankan killing fields, which had not been approved by the Censorship Board.... "The magistrate has found that the prosecution has failed to prove a prima facie case against her (Hendry) and has therefore acquitted her,...
But the government did not let go, and the prosecution appealed to the High Court...and on 21/9/2016, the High Court allowed the appeal, and
Judicial Commissioner Shariff Abu Samah set aside the Magistrate Court’s order which acquitted Lena in March at the end of the prosecution’s case...The High Court ordered Lena Hendry, an activist, to enter defence
Not sure whether there was an appeal to the Court of Appeal, but in any event , the trial at the Magistrate's Court continued, and Lena Hendry has now been found guilty...


Tuesday, 21 February 2017 | MYT 4:48 PM

Activist Lena Hendry disappointed over conviction




KUALA LUMPUR: Activist Lena Hendry was convicted by a magistrate's court over the charge of screening a Sri Lankan civil war documentary that had not been approved by the Censorship Board.

Hendry, 32, who stood expressionless in the dock upon hearing the verdict, said she was disappointed with the judgment.

"We will definitely appeal. No proof to convict me," Hendry, who was accompanied by her lawyer New Sin Yew, told reporters here Tuesday.

Her well-wishers, friends and supporters surrounded her after the judgment, and they hugged and consoled her.

A supporter of her was holding a placard saying "Human Rights Documentaries are not dangerous".

One of those present in the public gallery was Ivy Josiah, who is Hakam's (National Human Rights Society) exco member and former executive director of Women Aid Organisation.

Josiah said she was disappointed over the ruling, saying that "the film had been shown everywhere in the world."

In his judgment, magistrate Mohd Rehan Mohd Aris ruled that the defence had failed to raise reasonable doubts in the case.

"The accused is found guilty," he told the packed courtroom.

Mohd Rehan ordered both parties to file their respective submissions and set March 22 for sentencing.
He also extended Hendry's bail of RM1,000 pending disposal of the case.

A High Court had on Sept 21, 2016 set aside an acquittal order against Hendry and ordered her to enter her defence over the charge.

In reversing her acquittal order, Judicial Commissioner Mohamad Shariff Abu Samah found that there was a prima facie case against Hendry.

Mohd Rehan had on March 10 last year acquitted Hendry after ruling that the prosecution had failed to prove the case against her at the end of their case.

A total of eight prosecution witnesses and three defence witnesses, including Hendry, had given sworn evidence in the trial. 

Hendry, who was also the programme coordinator for a human rights group Pusat Komas, claimed trial in a magistrate’s court on Sept 19, 2013 to illegally screening the documentary “No Fire Zone: The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka".

The film directed by British national Callum Macrae explores the alleged oppression by the Sri Lankan government of Tamils in the island nation.

She was said to have committed the offence at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall at Jalan Maharajalela here at 9pm on July 3, 2013.  

The charge under Section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 carries a jail term of up to three years or a fine of up to RM30,000 or both if convicted. DPP Nurakmal Farhan Aziz prosecuted the case

Read more at http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2017/02/21/activist-lena-hendry-disappointed-over-conviction/#Cr0umC5heUWR3EFs.99
RESPONSES

21 February 2017
Conviction of Lena Hendry Another Blow to Freedom of Expression!
Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) finds the decision to convict Lena Hendry by the magistrate court under Section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Board regrettable and flawed in nature.
The absence of adequate evidence led to Lena’s initial accquital was sound as there was a lack of evidence on part of the prosecution in their charges. The subsequent conviction of Lena on 21st February depart from this and utilized the flawed system in Malaysia which undo the presumption of innocence that serve as the foundation of any common law based criminal justice system. Convicting the defense based on their inability to prove beyond reasonable doubt of their innocence remains a blatant trangression against the right to fair trial and Lena’s conviction marks another injustice by the Malaysian criminal justice system.
On top of the manifest injustice in her conviction, the attempt to punish an individual for screening a documentary is reprehensible on many levels. A documentary is often made to serve as a historical record of an event that transpired and leaves a legacy or story that can be viewed by the future generations. Censoring or preventing documentaries from being screened does not protect the public but only serve to protect select groups by hiding an inconvinient truth and deprive future generations of important knowledge on history.

Furthermore an attempt to punish an individual for allegedly screening ‘No Fire Zone’ is contemptible to say the least as the act of preventing the screening tantamounts to protecting those who may have committed crime against humanity. if the Malaysian government seeks to protect others against genocide and crime against humanity, why is it now complicit in protecting those who may have commited crime against humanity.

SUARAM reiterate our strongest condemnation against the repression of freedom of expression by the Malaysian government and stand in solidarity with Lena Hendry in her fight for human rights and democracy!

In Solidarity
Sevan Doraisamy
Executive Director
SUARAM

Malaysia: Convicted for Showing a Film
Prosecution of Lena Hendry Violates Right to Free Expression

(Bangkok, February 22, 2017) – A Malaysian court’s conviction of rights activist Lena Hendry for her role in showing a documentary film violates her right to freedom of expression, Human Rights Watch said today. On February 21, 2017, a Kuala Lumpur court found Hendry guilty of organizing a private screening of the award-winning human rights documentary, “No Fire Zone: The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka,” without censorship board approval nearly four years ago. She will be sentenced on March 22, and faces fines and up to three years in prison.

“It’s an outrageous assault on basic free expression that Lena Hendry could go to prison for helping to show a documentary film,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This prosecution is part of the Malaysian government’s disturbing pattern of harassment and intimidation of those seeking to raise public awareness of human rights issues.”

Hendry, a former staff member of the human rights group Pusat KOMAS, was convicted under section 6 of Malaysia’s Film Censorship Act, which prohibits the “circulation, distribution, display, production, sale, hire” or “possession” of any film, whether imported or domestically produced, without first obtaining approval from the government-appointed Board of Censors. Malaysia’s highest court
rejected a constitutional challenge to the law in September 2015. A magistrate acquitted her of the charge in March 2016, finding that the government had failed to make a basic case showing her guilt. On September 21, 2016, the High Court reversed Hendry’s acquittal and ordered a resumption of the case after the government appealed.

Bringing criminal penalties for possessing or privately showing a film without government approval violates freedom of expression by imposing a disproportionate burden on a fundamental right, Human Rights Watch said.

The Film Censorship Act is rarely invoked, and Pusat KOMAS regularly screens films on politics, human rights, culture, and other issues without censorship board approval, with admission by pre-registration only.

The prosecution in this case appears to have been motivated by the Malaysian government’s desire to appease Sri Lankan embassy officials, who had publicly demanded that the film not be shown and visited the venue on the day of the film’s showing to urge the venue’s managers to cancel the event. “No Fire Zone” tells the story of war crimes committed in the last months of Sri Lanka’s civil war in 2009, including Sri Lankan army shelling that indiscriminately killed thousands of civilians and the extrajudicial executions of captured fighters and supporters of the secessionist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

“The Film Censorship Act violates rights by giving the government the power to arbitrarily suppress films it doesn’t want Malaysians to see, and to prosecute those who dare to show them,” Robertson said. “Malaysia should scrap this draconian law’s criminal penalties, revise it to comply with international rights standards, and allow Malaysian citizens to view films of their choosing.”

For more Human Rights Watch reporting on Malaysia, please visit: https://www.hrw.org/asia/malaysia

Penyata Cetak Bank DiPos Amat perlu oleh Rakyat Malaysia? Hak dinafikan tanpa persetujuan terdahulu penguna?

Penyata Cetak Akaun Bank yang dihantar setiap hari oleh Maybank nampaknya sudah tiada - kini mereka mahu kita layari internet dan dapatkan penyata secara sendiri...Kalau penguna secara khusus tak setuju, ini salah? Atau adakah kerajaan UMNO-BN secara salah membenarkan ini?

Please be informed that Maybank will no longer be mailing any hard copy bank statements to customers. You can now conveniently access your e-Statement (online statement) via Maybank2u and receive via your registered e-mail address. With e-Statement, you can view, download or print your bank statements anytime.- Maybank2u.com
Tindakan tak wajar dan tidak mengambil kira hakikat rakyat Malaysia...

Berapa orang sebenarnya mempunyai akses kepada internet? Dan juga printer? 

Kini ramai memilih untuk membuka akaun bank, di mana mereka akan dibekalkan penyata cetak melalui pos ... Jika tidak mahu penyata bulanan, mereka akan hanya buka akaun simpanan sahaja - di mana untuk ini hanya ada buku akaun sahaja...nak update kena pi bank dan update...Sekarang kena cari bank baru, yang akan terus memberikan penyata akaun cetak setiap bulan. Atau adakah ini tindakan kerajaan UMNO-BN yang 'memaksa' semua bank memberhentikan penghantaran penyata cetak?

Jika penguna 'internet banking' sahaja tidak dihantar penyata bulanan melalui pos - mungkin boleh terima...Tetapi, untuk ramai orang, penyata bank cetak ini penting - untuk pasti gaji masuk, untuk pastikan duit pencen masuk, untuk memastikan dividend pelaburan saham masuk, memastikan anak ada masuk wang dalam akaun bank,....kini, ada pula 'auto-pay' banyak bil - ini bererti pihak pembekal akan terus potong dari akaun bank anda, kini ada pula Visa 'pay wave' - jadi kena pastikan juga tak ada wang yang tak dibelanjakan tidak terkeluar dari akaun...Jika membayar melalui cek, nak pastikan cek tersebut sudah diterima dan ditunaikan....

Saya sendiri yang biasa guna komputer dan internet - tetapi memilih untuk tidak mengunakan 'phone banking' atau 'internet banking'...kan, itu pilihan penguna...Saya mahu penyata cetak kerana senang dibaca dan seterusnya disimpan dalam fail...Ada ramai yang tak suka baca dikomputer atau 'smart phone' - lebih gemar baca dokumen cetak...[Berapa ramai ada Printer di rumah untuk cetak, ingat banyak majikan tak akan benarkan pekerja mencetak di tempat kerja dokumen peribadi...malah ada juga majikan yang menghalang pengunaan komputer tempat kerja untuk urusan peribadi...]

Warga tua juga bergantung kepada penyata akaun ini, peniaga pun bergantung kepada penyata akaun ini...yang biasa disimpan dalam fail...Perbandingan penyata akaun dengan rekod sendiri juga senang ada penyata bank cetak ditangan...

Taktik 'berhenti hantar penyata cetak' - sangat menyusahkan rakyat dan penguna - kini tak ada penyata...sukar untuk kita pastikan apa-apa salah laku berlaku...kenapa? Oh tak ada internet..tak tahu guna internet dan komputer...dan juga tak ada PRINTER untuk cetak dan periksa dan simpan...Penguna, bila menyimpan wang dalam sesuatu bank, mahukan faedah(tapi faedah pun kini di Malaysia terlampau rendah) dan mereka mahukan perkhidmatan(mendapat penyata bercetak setiap bulan...dan kemudahan mengeluarkan wang dengan senang, atau buat urusan wang yang lain...Bila masuk perjanjian dengan bank, bank kata akan hantar penyata bercetak setiap bulan - kini bank 'pecah kontrak' tanpa persetujuan khusus penguna?


PERJANJIAN DI ANTARA BANK DAN PENGUNA senang sahaja secara salah diubah satu pihak - iaitu bank? Bukankah ini salah? Ini tak boleh...sebab jika mahu menukar perjanjian, perlu persetujuan kedua-dua pihak...

Kini bank telah memecah kontrak tanpa persetujuan 'penguna' - salah...

Kini nampaknya, Bank macam mahu PAKSA rakyat bersetuju secara tidak langsung, 'memaksa' penguna setuju tidak mahu terima penyata bercetak melalui pos...kalau tak setuju, kamu tak boleh pun dapat penyata melalui emel...Lihat langkah ke-3 untuk mendapatkan penyata melalui emel dibawah...
Registration via email:
STEP 1: Login to M2U.
STEP 2: Select "Bills & Statements" and then "Statements".
STEP 3: If you are a first time user, you will be prompted to "Accept Stop Hardcopy notification". Click Accept.
STEP 4: Click "Email Statement Delivery", enter and confirm password, select the desired Account and enter your e-mail address. Click Continue.
STEP 5: Click ‘Confirm' to complete registration.- Maybank2u.com
Mengenakan syarat sebegini adalah salah. Menurut pendapat saya, hak menerima penyata cetak melalui pos harus dihormati - Jika pengguna mahu guna cara lain untuk melihat akaun mereka, sama ada secara 'online' atau untuk mendapat penyata menerusi emel, itu hak tambahan...Hak sedia ada tak harus dilepaskan...


Sebab lain mengapa penyata cetak yang dijana Maybank diperlukan? Ia merupakan dokumen yang jelas dikeluarkan Maybank - boleh digunakan sebagai bukti untuk apa-apa tuntutan... Penyata ONLINE dicetak hitam puteh oleh 'pengguna' mungkin tidak akan diterima sebagai bukti di Mahkamah atau oleh pihak lain? Boleh pula dakwaan timbul, ia bukan dokumen yang dijana Maybank...Maklumat Online boleh juga kena 'hack' atau ditukar bila-bila masa...Bank sendiri boleh tukar...justeru penyata janaan Maybank yang dicetak Maybank sendiri adalah bukti terkuat...dan tidak boleh dipertikaikan oleh bank tersebut pun kemudian hari...? [Berapa orang ada akses kepada Printer? Kos Printer, Kertas dan Dakwat Printer semua ditanggung pengguna. Kalau mahu cetak dokumen dikedai - kos kini tak kurang daripada RM2 satu muka surat, itu pun hitam putih bukan warna...]

Mereka yang telah dahulu ditanya dan telah jelas setuju tidak mahu terima penyata cetak terus dari Maybank, bank tersebut bolehlah hantar penyata melalui emel atau cara lain...saperti mana dipersetujui kedua-dua pihak, bank dan pengguna..

Kini penyata bulanan tak sampai beberapa bulan, bila mahu lihat penyata dilaman, mereka kata 'setuju dulu tak mahu lagi terima penyata cetak melalui pos biasa' - tak adil.

Kini simpan wang dalam bank, faedah terlalu rendah - kini penyata bulanan pun tak mahu dihantar melalui pos...

Kini ramai terpaksa minta pihak bank untuk akaun cetak, kemungkinan bank pula akan kenakan caj...Saya berpendirian bahawa bank seharusnya tidak mengenakan apa-apa caj untuk permintaan kini untuk penyata cetak bulanan...

Harus diingat, ATM pun kini tak boleh dapat lihat atau cetak penyata akaun bulanan...yang dapat dilihat pun disetengah bank hanya 'Mini Statement' ...untuk beberapa transaksi terkini untuk jangkamasa tertentu...ATM pun kini tak wujud disemua tempat ...kini ramai kena pi bandar untuk guna ATM. Tambahan pula, kini setengah bank sedang tutup cawangan dibandar-bandar kecil...

Kerajaan harus serta merta memastikan semua bank menghantar kepada semua penguna penyata cetak melalui pos untuk setiap bulan hingga kini mulai masa bank berhenti berbuat demikian...

Bank, seterusnya mesti mendapat persetujuan bertandatangan dari penguna, jika mereka mahu berhenti penyata bercetak janaan Bank melalui pos.. Kalau tak dapat persetujuan, bank harus terus penghantaran penyata cetak melalui pos...[Mungkin setengah mungkin setuju tak perlu hantar setiap bulan, 3 bulan sekali OK...}. Bagi penguna akan datang syarat perjanjian jika kata penyata hanya boleh dilihat online atau akan dihantar melalui emel, dan penguna setuju...itu OK. 

Saya percaya bahawa penguna baru (dan sedia ada) ramai akan tukar kepada bank yang terus akan menghantar penyata cetak melalui pos. Kerajaan atau Bank Negara harus tidak memaksa bank berhentikan perkhidmatan(atau perkhidmatan baru)  yang bank mahu berikan kepada penguna...itu hak bank...

Mengapa ini berlaku? Mahu jimat wang - kerana ada bank milikan kerajaan atau kroni hadapi masalah berkaitan dengan 1MDB, RM2 billion dalam akaun peribadi Najib, penurunan nilai ringgit....? 


Mengapa ini berlaku? Mahu jimat kertas - GST kini semua kena berikan resit panjang kepada penguna...Tak logik.

Mungkin Menteri, MP dan 'yang kaya' ada komputer dirumah, internet dan juga mesin cetak warna...senang untuk mereka - tapi fikirkan RAKYAT yang tidak ada semua ini, yang kurang pendapatan... Yang miskin kini tak tahu pun berapa wang masuk dan keluar dan untuk apa...Pegerakan wang dalam akaun bank mereka kini 'tersembunyi' - senang pula mereka ditipu...Adakah ini hasrat kerajaan UMNO-BN.

Kalau, di Thailand, Bank buka sampai malam - senang orang pi buat urusan bank - tak payah pi bank masa kerja? Di negara lain, nak update buku akaun pun senang boleh dibuat dimesin ATM...Mesin ATM yang boleh deposit cek atau wang tunai berada di banyak lokasi - di Malaysia kini hanya ATM dibanyak lokasi - hanya untuk keluar wang atau buat 'bayaran' online mengunakan wang sedia ada dalam akaun - setiap lokasi pun kebanyakkan di bandar saja???

Tindakan berhenti menghantar penyata cetak bulanan kepada penguna melalui pos menyusahkan rakyat - Adakah UMNO-BN peduli? Adakah parti pembangkang peduli? Ingatlah mereka yang kurang berpendatan, warga tua, dll..