MADPET：人權委會須是獨立組織 “應賦權突檢扣留所”(Guang Ming Daily, 11/12/2022) Human Rights Commission must be an independent organization "should be empowered to raid detention centers"

 See earlier post for full Media Statement:-

SUHAKAM Must Be Independent, with the Right To Inspect Police Lock-Ups Without Prior Notice, to investigate and prosecute those who violate rights

 

 

MADPET：人權委會須是獨立組織 “應賦權突檢扣留所”

2022-12-11

大馬人權委員會主席拉末莫哈末

（八打靈再也11日訊）大馬反死刑與酷刑組織（MADPET）表示，大馬人權委員會（SUHAKAM）必須是獨立的組織，並且有權在未事先通知的情況下突擊檢查侵犯他人權利者，同時也有權檢查警方的扣留所。

促擁政黨背景2委員辭職

除了上述所提，MADPET也促請大馬人權委員會內兩名擁有政黨背景的委員，即巫統吉打州居林萬達峇魯區部婦女主主席娜茲拉及巫統士拉央區部署理主席哈斯納辭職，以保障大馬人權委員會的獨立性。

MADPET針對大馬人權委員會主席拉末莫哈末接受訪問時要求政府應該給予人權委員會更多的權利，其中包括在未事先通知的情況下探訪扣留中心一事表示，根據1999年馬來西亞人權委員會法令第4（2）（d）條紋闡明，大馬人權委員會有權按照法律所規定的程序到訪扣留中心並提供必要性的建議。

MADPET協調員查爾斯表示，大馬人權委員會應該享有無需提前通知即可探訪警方扣留所、移民局扣留所及監獄等地方的權力。他舉例，要是有僱主沒收其外籍員工的護照，然後在移民局或警方上門前收到相關通知，那該名僱主即有可能暫時退還護照並警告或威脅其員工否認相關事件否則將被對付。因此即使執法人員上門調查也無法從中獲取真相。

他把以上情況用在人權委員會探訪警局或扣留所一事表示，在此課題上該會應該被賦予無需提前知會相關單位或負責人的權力。而MADPET也認同此要求，並表示突擊檢查的單位不僅侷限於上述所提，同時也包括人權委員會認為可能發生侵犯人權事件的地方或場合。

查爾斯說，人權委員會不僅是提出意見，也該享有調查和起訴違規者的權力。因為即使人權委員會在過去的調查中查出警方或其他執法單位有必要為某些事件負責，可是該組織未曾看過警方對此有展開任何的後續行動去調查或起訴。因此人權委員會應該在無需任何檢察官或政府的同意下就可展開調查和起訴。

應取消首相委任權力

此外，MADPET也認為應該取消首相委任人權委員會名單的這項權力，因為政府或公職人員往往就是被指控侵犯人權的單位或人士，因此委任的任務應該交由獨立機構而不是首相來進行操作。

MADPET也強調有政黨職位的人物不該成為人權委員會的成員，並表示雖然第5條文沒有具體說明活躍的政黨人物不能出任人權委員會的成員，但關於委任委員會的第11A（4）條文卻明確規定任何活躍參與政治或政黨的人不能登記成為委員。因此為了彰顯人權委員會的獨立性，里頭的成員最好是非政黨黨員，或至少過去的3年或現在是沒有黨職在身的人。

有鑑於此，大馬反死刑與酷刑組織呼籲娜茲拉及哈斯納馬上辭去大馬人權委員會委員的身份。- Guang Ming Daily, 11/12/2022

Below a very rough translation into English of the above Guang Ming Daily report. Sorry for any errors

MADPET: Human Rights Commission must be an independent organization "should be empowered to raid detention centers"

(Petaling Jaya, 11th) The Malaysian Anti-Death Penalty and Torture Organization (MADPET) stated that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) must be an independent organization and has the right to conduct surprise inspections without prior notice for violating the rights of others. At the same time, they also have the right to inspect police lock-ups. 

Promoting party background 2 members resign

In addition to the above, MADPET also urges two members of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission who have political backgrounds, namely Nazra, the women's chairperson of the Umno Kedah Kulim Uanda Baru division, and the Umno Selayang division chairperson Hasner resigned to safeguard the independence of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission. 

 In response to the Malaysian Human Rights Commission Chairman Rama Mohd’s request that the government should give the Human Rights Commission more rights, including visiting the detention center without prior notice, MADPET stated that according to the 1999 Malaysian Human Rights Commission Act 4 (2) (d) The stripe clarifies that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission has the right to visit the detention center and provide necessary advice in accordance with the procedures stipulated by law.

MADPET coordinator Charles said that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission should have the power to visit police detention centers, immigration detention centers and prisons without prior notice. For example, if an employer confiscates the passports of its foreign employees, and then receives relevant notices before the Immigration Bureau or the police come to the door, the employer may temporarily return the passports and warn or threaten the employees to deny the relevant incidents or they will be dealt with. Therefore, even if law enforcement officers come to investigate, they cannot get the truth from it.

He applied the above situation to the Human Rights Commission's visit to police stations or detention centers, saying that the Commission should be given the power not to notify the relevant units or responsible persons in advance on this issue. MADPET also agrees with this request, and said that the unit of surprise inspection is not limited to the above mentioned, but also includes places or occasions where human rights violations are considered possible by the Human Rights Committee.

Charles said the Human Rights Commission should not only issue opinions, but also have the power to investigate and prosecute violators. Because even though the Human Rights Commission found that the police or other law enforcement agencies were responsible for certain incidents in past investigations, the organization has never seen any follow-up actions by the police to investigate or prosecute. The Human Rights Commission should therefore be able to investigate and prosecute without the consent of any prosecutor or government.

Power to appoint by prime minister should be abolished

In addition, MADPET also believes that the power of the prime minister to appoint a list of human rights committees should be abolished, because the government or public officials are often the units or persons accused of human rights violations, so the task of appointment should be handed over to an independent agency rather than the prime minister.

MADPET also emphasized that persons with political party positions should not be members of the Human Rights Commission, and stated that although Article 5 does not specify that active political party figures cannot be members of the Human Rights Commission, Article 11A (4) on the appointment of committees clearly stipulates that Anyone who is actively involved in politics or a political party cannot be registered as a commissioner. Therefore, in order to demonstrate the independence of the Human Rights Commission, it is best for its members to be non-party members, or at least those who have not held a party position in the past 3 years or now.

In view of this, the Malaysian Anti-Death Penalty and Torture Organization calls on Nazra and Hasna to immediately resign as members of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission.