GISBH - Did the government lie? Why change the charge from being member of organised criminal group - to just an unlawful society? Was there ABUSE of POWER - just to use SOSMA to deny BAIL - so they suffered prolonged remand detention - They were charged with a SOSMA listed offence - when now, it seems that they ought to have been charged originally for being a member of an UNLAWFUL Society - which meant they would have been out of BAIL rather than languishing in remand detention because the LAW denies BAIL if one is charged for any of the many SOSMA listed offences...
GISB Holdings Sdn Bhd chief executive officer Nasiruddin Mohd Ali and 21 other individuals have pleaded guilty to an alternative charge of being members of an unlawful organisation...The charge is framed under Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966 (Act 335) and is punishable with a maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment, or a fine not exceeding RM5,000, or both, if convicted..They were previously charged with being members of an organised criminal group under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code, which provides for imprisonment of between five and 20 years upon conviction. - Star, 7/11/2025
GISBH - What happened? Prolonged detention under SOSMA and delayed starting of the criminal trial and ending of the trial - For how long will the accused be detained until they have no choice but to choose to PLEAD GUILTY so that they can finally have certainty to be able to go free...return to normal life.
Finally, they 'BROKE' - prolonged detention for don't know how long OR plead guilty to this 'NEW and different charge' and be sentenced, and be released after serving sentence... SUCCESS - they finally pleaded guilty and was released at last...I perused some past judgments under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code and interestingly saw that in most cases it ends with a guilty plea - not a decision of a FULL fair trial, which would have helped us understand (1) whether the charge is even sustainable when the said 'organised group' was previously even gazetted as such, or (2) how does one even prove in court that it was truly an 'organised criminal group'...
So, is the government strategy is to encourage 'a guilty plea' if not you will be indefinitely detained without Bail? Many Malaysians have lost trust in the Malaysian administration of criminal justice - so many 'innocent persons' chose to plead guilty so that they can be certain when they will get out - rather than end up in detention for don't know how long until their trial starts and ends. Note about 30,000 persons in Malaysian prisons are 'remand prisons' waiting for their trial to start or be over - and if they are found at the end of the day to be NOT GUILTY - Malaysia does not even provide compensation for time spend unnecessarily in detention - a GREAT INJUSTICE. Sadly, many do not even try to file civil suits to get some compensation...and the problem persists.
MAJOR problem if they from GISBH insisted on the TRIAL on that 'organised criminal group' charge
1 - They were charged for being members of an organised criminal group under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code, which provides imprisonment of not less than five years and a maximum of 20 years upon conviction - it is also a SOSMA listed offence, so generally no BAIL.
The question then was WHEN was GISBH listed as an organised criminal group? PROBLEM here is that it was just listed recently - how can they be GUILTY. Being a member of GIBSH, an 'organised criminal group' is only a CRIME if they became and remained a member of GISBH, after it was listed as an 'Organised criminal group' and the public have been notified of it - only then would it be a CRIME in Malaysia... Remember the SWATCH watches case - The courts THREW IT OUT because the watches were seized by the police, it was not yet....
Justice Amarjeet also said that the prohibition on the items only came after the seizure was conducted, therefore Swatch Group was not contravening any law prior to the raid...On August 10, 2023, the Home Ministry gazetted its August 9, 2023 ban or prohibition order against the import, production, sale, circulation, distribution or possession for such purposes of Swatch watches with “LGBTQ+” “which is likely to be prejudicial to morality is prohibited throughout Malaysia”....Between May 13 and May 15, 2023, Swatch Group claimed that several Home Ministry officers had conducted raids on 11 Swatch outlets across the country and seized 172 watches with nine different designs from the Pride collection. - Star, 25/11/2025
YES, that is the LAW - so, when exactly was GISBH actually and listed as an 'organised criminal group' ....or even an unlawful society/association. ODD here because GISBH was always a legally registered company in Malaysia -- there were all part of the company or linked to that company - when exactly did GISBH declared an UNLAWFUL SOCIETY ...where is the relevant Gazette? If GISBH was just gazetted as an unlawful society - how can you charge them for being a member of an unlawful society before it was so gazetted.
...an alternative charge, with becoming members of GISBH, which is an unlawful organisation. They are charged with committing the offence at a premises in Bandar Country Homes, Rawang, between October 2020 and Sept 11, 2024. The charge is framed under Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966 (Act 335) and is punishable with a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment or a fine not exceeding RM5,000 or both, if convicted.
If it was gazetted that GISBH was an unlawful society or association on October 2024 - then they cannot be charged of being a member of an unlawful society for periods before that - it was not yet a CRIME in 2020, 2021, 2023,....
Now, in Malaysia, the law is that you cannot charge anyone for any crime UNLESS the prosecution had already secured sufficient evidence which they believe they can prove to the court a prima facie case that they were a member of an organized criminal group - if they charged before that ...then it is an ABUSE OF POWER and wrong. So, were they PREMATURELY charged for being members of an unlawful organisation ?
The principle is that a person should not be charged in Court until the investigation into the case against him has been completed and there is prima facie evidence to prosecute him of the charge. In other words, a person should not be put in peril of a criminal trial unless the prosecution is able to prove the case against him. To do otherwise is an injustice. The legal principle as to when one should be CHARGED, Arrested and released on Police Bail - The Case of PP v Tan Kim San, judgement of late Supreme Court Judge Harun Mahmud Hashim
In the GISBH case, rightly they should never have been charged under that being member of an organised criminal group charge > they should heve been charged for specific crimes, and others could be charged as accomplices - that is the NORM - but wonder where the intention was to detain them without BAIL, so charge them under a SOSMA listed offence? The trial should have started immediately in 2024 as this was a serious case in the eyes of the Malaysian public - but trial never started, and more than a year charged CHANGED so much...
Again they are using 'Letters of Representation' - so, did the Public Prosecutor make a SERIOUS MISTAKE - the consequence of which is that they had to suffer 'remand detention' for more that a year since they were first charged on 23/10/2024 - and arrested and held in the remand some time before.
In this case., it is again NOT the Court that amended the charge after listening or considering evidence > IT was again the Public Prosecutor? Maybe the Public Prosecutor Dusuki Mokhtar should TRANSPARENTLY explain his decision...
In light of these concerns, SUHAKAM calls on the AGC to provide a clear and public explanation of its prosecutorial decisions and to disclose details of the cases related to the alleged acts of sexual abuse, violence, and exploitation, in order to uphold public confidence in the administration of justice.
ALL in all, it looks MOST SUSPICIOUS - did they 'threaten' indefinite detention because they can always delay the starting and proceedings of trial for a long time. WAS it a deal 'just plead to this 'new' charge, and court will sentence you to time spend in detention, so you can then walk free??? Will we get answers from our Public Prosecutor...I was eager to see whether prosecution would have been able to prove that they were members of an 'organized criminal group' which I doubted very much...
2 - The 2nd Problem would have been proving GISBH was an 'organised criminal group' involved in SERIOUS crimes - that means prove that they had committed SERIOUS CRIMES... what serious crimes did GISBH commit...all kinds of allegations surfaced when the government did a 'CRACKDOWN' on GISBH - all kinds of wild allegations - and more than a year later, there is still NO EVIDENCE of this - no convictions after a FAIR TRIAL YET? So, what serious crime evidence made the Prosecutor charge them for being members of an 'organised criminal group'?
WERE ALL THEM ALLEGATIONS AGAINST GISBH FALSE?
...have raised serious public alarm regarding the protection of children’s rights in Malaysia...failure of GISBH’s leadership and owners to safeguard the children under their care, and instead exposing them to exploitation and harm,....police reports alleging violence and ill-treatment of vulnerable children..., SUHAKAM calls on the AGC to provide a clear and public explanation of its prosecutorial decisions and to disclose details of the cases related to the alleged acts of sexual abuse, violence, and exploitation, in order to uphold public confidence in the administration of justice. Where prosecutions have commenced, complainants and the affected children must be kept informed of the progress and next steps.
'SUHAKAM reiterates its call for the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to investigate the alleged abuses and examine the governance of welfare institutions entrusted with the care of children.' Was PM Anwar afraid that an RCI may reveal a TRUTH different from what the government publicly alleged?
Was there at the very least a WHITE PAPER providing the MADANI governments reasons for the crackdown on GISBH? A WHITE PAPER is a document by government, usually also submitted to Parliament, explaining some controversy or issue in detail like was done after the MEMALI incident...
The "government white paper on the Memali incident" refers to an official document published by the Malaysian government to explain the events of November 19, 1985, in which a police siege on a village led to a violent confrontation . The white paper outlines the government's position, detailing how the confrontation began with a police attempt to apprehend Ibrahim Mahmud, resulting in the deaths of 14 villagers and 4 police officers. It justifies the police's use of force, which it states was a response to being shot at and attacked by the villagers,...
SO, one major QUESTION that remains in my mind, and possibly others, is why did the MADANI government under Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim 'CRACKDOWN' on GISBH - a Bumiputra Company/Corporation that has successfully expanded its business portfolio, and also expanded beyond the borders of Malaysia..
What happened in the GISBH itself, which included the shutting down of business premises, freezing of bank accounts, etc - WAS it RIGHT or was it wrong - did it not ignore the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE Until proven guilty in Court, after a FAIR TRIAL. Government or Prime Minister may make 'allegations' only - it is only the Courts that can determine whether it is TRUE or whether it violated any laws.
Has GISBH, a registered corporate entity been DE-REGISTERED - there was news that the government was looking into it - BUT could not find any news report stating that it was de-registered ...
The Ministry of Domestic Trade and Cost of Living (KPDN) is currently reviewing the registration of GISB Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH) and its subsidiary companies, said Datuk Armizan Mohd Ali. The minister said the review was being conducted by the Companies Commission of Malaysia (SSM), focusing on compliance with the submission of annual reports, financial statements, and other related matters. He added that the company could face deregistration if it was found to have violated public interest or current regulations. - Malay Mail, 24/9/2024
What happened to GISBH naturally caused fear to ALL business entities in Malaysia - the worry may also happen to them - accounts frozen, etc...
With the recent change of charges from being member of an organised criminal group to just a member of an unlawful or illegal society is also concerning? Is Malaysia capable of acting in such a draconian way on any company simply because the government of the day 'feels' like it....?
That is WHY we need a WHITE PAPER - and an explanation? Will the GISBH and related accounts be 'unfrozen' - can GISBH business open again and do business?
The only fault with GISBH may be an issue of practicing a 'deviant Islam' - but this is within the jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts - and the maximum penalty is about 3 years imprisonment for the most serious offences? BUT, how many owners/employees and associates of GISBH have even been charged and found guilty for this offence since the crackdown that began on or about September 2024?
The fact that some employees in child care facilities may have committed crimes against children - means the perpetrator must be charged and accorded a fair trial.
It should never be translated as a CRIME of the Employer or the Organisation that ran that facility...
The failure to report a crime is an 'offence' - but not a serious offence or makes the employer or management ACCOMPLICES of the perpetrator? Was this what happened to GISBH..
Some say that past governments, and maybe even the present government was angry with ARQAM then, and GISBH then was because this was a Malay-Muslim company that succeeded without Government help/assistance - and breaks the NORM that Malays cannot succceed without UMNO or PH/PKR help and assistance. The success of GISBH may change the mindset of other Malays and even Malaysians that you can succeed in business WITHOUT UMNO or PKR/PH support ..
Many political parties all over the world want to keep their constituent weak believing that they need the HELP and SUPPORT of the Political Party to succeed in business and life - but if constituents do not believe that anymore, will they support such political parties with such strategy...
Will they now, not look at ethnicity and race, and look at the more important principles and policies of these parties - maybe their stance of Public Healthcare, their stance on Education(providing free education until university), the position on social protection(how will they take care of the elderly, the disabled and sick...), their stance on Public Transport and maybe even removing TOL, their stance on restoring Local Council Elections -Senatorial elections - starting democratic elections for kampungs, taman, ..., provision of FREE clean water, provision of cheap electricity... YES, the REAL ISSUES of the people...
Malaysian political parties generally lack in this aspect - compared to political parties in US and Europe > In Malaysia, even if go to parties website - one is UNCLEAR about what the party's position is on worker rights, human rights, environmental rights > They then to use ethnicity and religion - and the 'failings' of incumbent governments without actually making a clear stand on most issues. Is this party LEFT, RIGHT, CENTRIST, Progressive, - and even if we state that position, sadly most Malaysians will not even understand such terminologies.
GISBH seem to have some relationship with Mahathir - did they now AGREE to support Anwar and his MADANI government with votes, monies, etc --- was this the reason for the amended charges and the release now agreement? What happened and WHY the crackdown - and now an obvious shift in position towards GISBH?
Was there an ABUSE of the Administration of Criminal Justice persons/entities - the police, prosecution, the courts > or where they all INDEPENDENT decisions not affected by PM or MADANI governments influence, orders or policy changes?
We have the 3rd Public Prosecutor during the Premiership of Anwar Ibrahim > we definitely have make the Public Prosecutor INDEPENDENT - now the PM can appoint anyone, and can also remove them anytime, Should Public Prosecutor have SECURITY OF TENURE, a needed safeguard to ensure INDEPENDENCE..
Should the Police Chief, the MACC chief, the MCMC Chief....be made more INDEPENDENT - and remove the power of the PM to decide who be appointed, or removed?
If they act professionally and independently, will we be avoid things like the 'GISBH Scandal'?
GISBH CEO, 21 others plead guilty to being members of unlawful organisation
KAJANG, Nov 7 — GISB Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH) chief executive officer Nasiruddin Mohd Ali and 21 other individuals today pleaded guilty to an alternative charge of becoming members of GISBH, which is an unlawful organisation.
Besides Nasiruddin, 66, the others include his wife Azura Md Yusof, 58; Mohammad Adib At-Tamimi, 33, who is the son of former Al-Arqam founder, Ashaari Muhammad; Mohd Shukri Mohd Noor, 54; Muhammad Afdaluddin Latif, 35; Mohamad Sayuti Omar, 36; Mohd Fazil Md Jasin, 58; Mohd Dhirar Fakhrur Razi, 35; Mokhtar Tajuddin, 61; Muhammad Fajrul Islam Khalid, 29; Abu Ubaidah Ahmad Shukri, 35; Shuhaimi Mohamed, 57; Hasnan Abd Hamid, 54; and Muhammad Zahid Azhar @ Nadzri, 52.
The others are women, comprising Khalilatul-Zalifah Mohammad Jamil, 28; Nur Jannah Omar, 33; Hamimah Yakub, 72; Asmat@Asmanira Muhammad Ramly, 45; Nurul Jannah Idris, 29; Siti Salmiah Ismail, 58; Siti Hajar Ismail, 52; and Mahani Kasim, 55.
They made the guilty plea before Shah Alam High Court Judge Datuk Seri Latifah Mohd Tahar, at a proceeding held at the Kajang Prison Complex today.
The court is currently hearing the defence’s mitigation plea and the prosecution’s submission for a heavier sentence before passing its judgment.
They were previously charged with being members of an organised criminal group under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code, which provides imprisonment of not less than five years and a maximum of 20 years upon conviction.
However, following a representation from all the accused, the Attorney General’s Chambers offered them an alternative charge, with becoming members of GISBH, which is an unlawful organisation.
They are charged with committing the offence at a premises in Bandar Country Homes, Rawang, between October 2020 and Sept 11, 2024.
The charge is framed under Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966 (Act 335) and is punishable with a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment or a fine not exceeding RM5,000 or both, if convicted.
The prosecution is handled by Deputy Public Prosecutors Shafiq Hasim, Mohammad Fakhrurrazi, Ahmad Salim and Norinna Bahadun, while lawyer Datuk Rosli Kamaruddin represented all the accused. — Bernama, Malay Mail, 7/11/2025
GISBH CEO, 21 others plead guilty to involvement in unlawful society
Nasiruddin Ali and 12 other men were sentenced to 15 months’ jail while his wife and eight other women were fined RM4,500.
All 22 pleaded guilty after the charge was read before judge Latifah Tahar during proceedings at the Kajang prison court complex today, reported Berita Harian.
Nasiruddin, 66, and 12 other men were sentenced to 15 months’ jail. His wife Azura Md Yusof, 58, and eight other women were fined RM4,500 each.
They were previously charged with being members of an organised crime group under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code, which provides for imprisonment of between five and 20 years upon conviction.
Last Thursday, the Attorney-General’s Chambers accepted their representations to face an alternative charge of being members of an unlawful organisation under the Societies Act 1966.
Under the alternative charge, the accused were charged with being members of GISBH, an unlawful organisation, at a premises in Bandar Country Homes, Rawang, between October 2020 and Sept 11, 2024.
The charge was brought under Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966 which carries a maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment, a fine not exceeding RM5,000, or both, upon conviction.
The prosecution was led by deputy public prosecutors Shafiq Hasim, Fakhrurrazi Ahmad Salim and Norinna Bahadun, while Rosli Kamaruddin represented the accused.- FMT, 7/11/2025
Media Statement No. 51-2025_ SUHAKAM Expresses Concern Over Alleged Ill-Treatment Of Children And Prosecution Outcomes in GISBH Case
KUALA LUMPUR (13 NOVEMBER 2025) – The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) expresses its deep concern over recent prosecutorial developments linked to Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings (GISBH), which have raised serious public alarm regarding the protection of children’s rights in Malaysia.
SUHAKAM notes that more than 400 children, including infants, were rescued from homes operated by GISBH following coordinated enforcement actions in late 2024. Allegations of physical abuse, neglect, sexual violence, and economic exploitation constitute grave violations of the children’s fundamental rights and dignity.
SUHAKAM underscores that the failure of GISBH’s leadership and owners to safeguard the children under their care, and instead exposing them to exploitation and harm, represents a serious breach of both legal and moral obligations. Public concern has been further intensified by reports that certain GISBH leaders were released or faced lesser charges, despite hundreds of police reports alleging violence and ill-treatment of vulnerable children. These developments have prompted renewed calls for transparency and accountability from the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC).
As Malaysia is a State Party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), SUHAKAM reminds that national laws must be fully enforced to protect children from all forms of violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation, particularly offences under the Child Act 2001 and the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017. Decisions relating to the prosecution of such offences must prioritise justice, protection, and deterrence, and be guided at all times by the best interests of the child.
In light of these concerns, SUHAKAM calls on the AGC to provide a clear and public explanation of its prosecutorial decisions and to disclose details of the cases related to the alleged acts of sexual abuse, violence, and exploitation, in order to uphold public confidence in the administration of justice. Where prosecutions have commenced, complainants and the affected children must be kept informed of the progress and next steps.
The Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development (KPWKM) and the Department of Social Welfare (JKM) must urgently review and strengthen the regulation and monitoring of all welfare and faith-based homes. Enforcement agencies must also ensure that investigations are conducted promptly, professionally, and with due sensitivity to child victims. Private children’s homes must be properly regulated and held accountable to care and protection standards.
With Malaysia due for review before the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child next year, this is an important opportunity for the Government to demonstrate meaningful commitment to upholding children’s rights through accountability, enforcement, and the effective prosecution of crimes against children.
To ensure systemic accountability and reform, SUHAKAM reiterates its call for the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to investigate the alleged abuses and examine the governance of welfare institutions entrusted with the care of children. SUHAKAM further urges all relevant authorities to ensure that all rescued children, including those who have been reintegrated or returned to their families, are continuously monitored and provided with psychosocial support, safe accommodation, and access to justice, in line with Malaysia’s international human rights obligations. Such measures are essential to guarantee the sustained safety, recovery, and overall well-being of every child.
-END-
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
Date: 13 November 2025 - SUHAKAM WEBSITE
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment