Did Fahmi lie, mislead or 'confuse' people - he says ‘many MPs’, including himself, have declared their assets? WHEN? Was it a Public Asset Declaration after GE15? Or did MACC ask you...

Fahmi, when exactly did you DECLARE YOUR ASSETS - for I certainly have not seen  your asset declarations after GE15, and that is what Malaysians want - or after you were appointed Minister. Tell us where your asset declaration can be found?

The communications minister said “many MPs” have already declared their assets, adding that he had also declared his assets previously.

“So it’s not an issue.

We are talking about PUBLIC Declaration of Assets - where everyone can see what you declared.

WHERE IS IT? 

From what we know, after GE15, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has YET to require a Asset Declaration - and the reason given was that some 'new format' is being developed.

Last we heard in March 2024, 

A new format of asset declaration for members of parliament and administrative members will be implemented soon.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman said this follows the decision of a Special Cabinet Committee on National Governance meeting chaired by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Jan 8.

"Following the meeting, the committee agreed to bring the proposed improvement on asset declaration format for the cabinet's further discussion in the nearest time before the format is enforced," she said in a parliamentary written reply on Monday.

She said this in response to Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan (PN-Kota Bharu) on whether the government has implemented the asset declaration policy for all administrative members. - NST, 25/3/2024

To date, I do not think that this government has yet to make PUBLIC Asset Declaration of members of the Cabinet, MPs, etc - and it has been more that 2 YEARS in power..[wonder how much monies/wealth have been accumulated by corruption and/or abuse of power]

The very OBJECTIVE of Asset Declaration is compromised.

1st PUBLIC Asset DECLARATION - to determine your wealth when you come into power, and this is compared by 2nd/Subsequent PUBLIC ASSET Declaration to make sure that you did not ABUSE Power or Corruptly cause your(or your family) wealth to increase.

PUBLIC ASSET DECLARATION is a means to DETER Corruption, Abuse of Power and to KEEP our Ministers and peoples' representative CLEAN.

It is PUBLIC so that the public will monitor it - and EXPOSE hidden wealth not declared or LIES - hence it how the PUBLIC will participate to ensure CLEAN government and governance.

To date, there has been NO EFFECTIVE PUBLIC ASSET DECLARATION scheme in place yet ...

Fahmi, did the MACC ask you to declare your assets? Does this mean that the MACC  has reasonable ground to believe, based on the investigation carried out by an officer of the Commission, that any property is held or acquired by any person as a result of or in connection with an offence under this Act,?

That is the ONLY reason why MACC can ask anyone to DECLARE their assets? 

Please clarify that  “many MPs” have already declared their assets, adding that he had also declared his assets previously was not because of MACC  who then hadreasonable ground to believe, based on the investigation carried out by an officer of the Commission, that any property is held or acquired by any person as a result of or in connection with an offence under this Act,[sec. 36 MACC ACT]

There is a NEED for a LAW for Public Asset Declarations that makes it MANDATORY - that will criminalize LIES, etc. 

Stop abusing MACC - who already has enough on their plate. I suggest that Parliament should be responsible for the asset declaration of the PM and Cabinet members, and maybe also  MPs/Senators..

MACC have been asked by past governments to vet their election candidates - and that has been used as proof of CLEAN candidates - Did MACC previously also give Najib, Zahid,  such 'clean bills of health'? MACC, as a statutory body, with proper functions as stipulated in the MACC Act should not be further burdened with other matters...

 

See earlier post:-

ASSET DECLARATION - If MACC ask, one suspected of an offence? Investigate LEAK of MACC Data - and how Anwar's aide got access to info?

 

Subang MP’s remarks on asset declaration his personal view, says Fahmi

Elill Easwaran

-08 Dec 2024, 01:54 PM

Government spokesman Fahmi Fadzil says ‘many MPs’, including himself, have declared their assets.

Communications minister Fahmi Fadzil said many MPs had declared their assets previously.

KUALA LUMPUR: 

 

Subang MP Wong Chen’s call for Putrajaya to mandate asset declaration for civil servants before extending the requirement to elected representatives reflects his personal opinion, says government spokesman Fahmi Fadzil.

The communications minister said “many MPs” have already declared their assets, adding that he had also declared his assets previously.

“So it’s not an issue. But in the context of the Subang MP asking for civil servants (to be imposed mandatory asset declaration), perhaps that is his personal view,” he told reporters after attending the Lembah Pantai Peduli Ummah Tour programme today.

Yesterday, Wong called for Putrajaya to make asset declarations mandatory for elected representatives, but admitted that component parties in the unity government may lack the appetite for it.

He said that if it cannot be done for PKR’s coalition partners, then “at least implement it for the civil servants”.

Wong said judges and members of the civil service, including ministry secretaries-general and their deputies, should be required to declare their assets to enhance transparency and inspire confidence.

Earlier today, Cuepacs clarified that civil servants are already required to declare their assets every five years, a practice that will continue under the new Public Service Remuneration System.

Its secretary-general, Abdul Rahman Nordin, said the legal department of each agency is tasked with monitoring the declaration process.

The government had previously spoken of its intention to introduce asset declarations for MPs and administrative officials.

Civil servants are presently required to declare their assets to their heads of department.

In June, law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said said that the revised format of the declaration had not yet been finalised, but she expected the updated version to be presented to the Cabinet “soon”.

However, there have been no updates on the matter since.

Fahmi, who is the Lembah Pantai MP, also said former Bangi MP Ong Kian Ming’s stance on the matter should be viewed as his personal opinion.

Ong had questioned why civil servants, rather than elected politicians, should take the lead in declaring their assets.

“Isn’t transparency something supported by the Madani government?” he asked on Instagram yesterday. - FMT, 8/12/2024

New format for asset declaration for MPs and administrative members to be enforced soon

By Qistina Sallehuddin, Hana Naz Harun - March 25, 2024 @ 9:24pm

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman said this follows the decision of a Special Cabinet Committee on National Governance meeting chaired by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Jan 8. NSTP/FAIZ ANUAR

KUALA LUMPUR: A new format of asset declaration for members of parliament and administrative members will be implemented soon.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman said this follows the decision of a Special Cabinet Committee on National Governance meeting chaired by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Jan 8.

"Following the meeting, the committee agreed to bring the proposed improvement on asset declaration format for the cabinet's further discussion in the nearest time before the format is enforced," she said in a parliamentary written reply on Monday.

She said this in response to Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan (PN-Kota Bharu) on whether the government has implemented the asset declaration policy for all administrative members.

Meanwhile, Azalina said that the 17th Special Cabinet Meeting on Anti-Corruption chaired by the prime minister on July 6, last year, had also agreed that all administrative members declare their assets.

"However, the existing asset declaration format must be improved to ensure that the information provided is accurate and transparent before asset declaration is carried out again.

"Following this decision, the cabinet meeting on July 12, 2023, agreed that a new, more comprehensive asset declaration format should be prepared by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) as an improvement measure."

The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) announced that the Special Cabinet Committee on National Governance in January announced a new guideline to replace the 1998 circular letter (No. 3) in strengthening the governance of Federal Statutory Bodies (FSB).

PMO said the implementation of the guideline is a priority to support the Malaysia Madani agenda through the empowerment of statutory bodies.

It added that the committee also discussed the new format for asset declaration by lawmakers and administrative members to be reinforced, in line with the government's principle of transparency. - NST, 25/3/2024

 

PARDON powers of King/Rulers is not limitless - Limits are set by Malaysians, through Parliament in laws/Constitution? Lacunae or uncertainty require Constitutional Amendment and/or enactment of a Pardon Law.

Of late, there has been a lot of questions as to whether the King, in the exercise of Pardon Powers, can order Najib to spend his remaining term of imprisonment at HOME? 

What exactly are the powers of PARDON?

It does not interfere with CONVICTION - but deals with the sentences. It can commute death penalty into imprisonment. It can reduce prison sentences. It can even do away with WHIPPINGS. Reasonably, it can reduce or even cancel fines imposed.

A royal pardon is an official order from a monarch to stop the punishment of a convicted person, but it does not overturn the conviction. A pardon can be granted in the form of an unconditional release, a commutation, or a reduction of punishment.

When it comes to quashing convictions - that is with the jurisdiction of the Courts, and can be done when NEW Evidence arises that makes conviction wrong, or it can be because of new evidence and/or new challenges to existing evidence which results the maintenance of the conviction dangerous - because on evaluation the Courts may find that NOW with the new evidence, etc - prosecution failed to proof GUILT beyond reasonable doubt.  

Can the King/Ruler, using pardon powers, order a convict to serve his/her remaining prison term at home(house arrest) - the answer ought to be NO > because the present Federal Constitution or State Constitution does not CLEARLY provide for such an ORDER plus there is no such provision in the Constitution or any law that provides for such a sentence. There is talk that Malaysia may be thinking of enacting a law that provides for HOME DETENTION - so, we have to wait for it.

Pardon Powers are DEFINED by Constitution/Law -  the people set the limits of pardon power? The King/Rulers power is LIMITED, not totally limitless.

In Malaysia, does the King/Ruler has the power to act on his/her own? NO - because they must act only as the Pardon Board advises. 

(1) In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet, except as otherwise provided by this Constitution; but shall be entitled, at his request, to any information concerning the government of the Federation which is available to the Cabinet.

(1A) In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law, where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is to act in accordance with advice, on advice, or after considering advice, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall accept and act in accordance with such advice.

So, when the Constitution or Federal Law states that the King/Ruler shall act in accordance to the ADVICE of the Pardons Board - reasonably, the King/Ruler  '..shall act in accordance with the advice of the..' of the Pardons Board.

Herein, lies the problem - Article 42(4) is clear that when it comes to Pardon Powers exercisable by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri, it is CRYSTAL clear that they must 'be exercised on the advice of a Pardons Board' - this means, with reference to Article 40(1A) - that Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri can only Act as advised by the Pardons Board.

However, there is no similar provision in Art 42(4)(a) with regard the Pardon Powers of the King. Does this mean that the KING can act contrary to the advice of the Pardons Board? On the face of it, the King does not have to act as advised by the Pardons Board - this is FLAW in the Federal Constitution, which must be REMEDIED immediately by a Constitutional amendment to include in Art. 42(4)(a) the words 'be exercised on the advice of a Pardons Board' - for now the King is not bound to act as advised by the Pardons Board. 

4) The powers mentioned in this Article—

(a) are, so far as they are exercisable by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, among functions with respect to which federal law may make provision under Clause (3) of Article 40;

(b) shall, so far as they are exercisable by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri of a State, be exercised on the advice of a Pardons Board constituted for that State in accordance with Clause (5).

Art. 42(4)(a) goes on to say '... with respect to which federal law may make provision under Clause (3) of Article 40' - BUT here again is the Problem, as there is now NO FEDERAL LAW that deals with Pardon Powers - THUS, there is a need for Parliament to speedily enact a Federal Law, that will make provisions with regard the Pardon Powers of the King.

Art. 40(3) reads as follows:- 

(3) Federal law may make provision for requiring the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to act after consultation with or on the recommendation of any person or body of persons other than the Cabinet in the exercise of any of his functions other than—

(a) functions exercisable in his discretion;

(b) functions with respect to the exercise of which provision is made in any other Article.

Pardon powers are not 'functions exercisable in his discretion' and thus it falls under Art.40(3)(b) - (b) functions with respect to the exercise of which provision is made in any other Article.

Pardon powers of the King are provided for in 'any other Article' - that is Article 42.

Pardon Powers under Art.42(1) are  ' grant pardons, reprieves and respites' - but the problem is that 'pardons' are NOT DEFINED anywhere? And this is a MAJOR PROBLEM.. There must a DEFINITION of Pardons also in the Federal Constitution to make it clear what exactly does grant pardons mean and entail... is it only restricted to SENTENCES, does it extend to convictions which means that King/Rulers can also QUASH convictions, does it mean that the King has powers to stop prosecution and/or trials, or even investigations?

We need CERTAINTY - and that is why we need amendments to the Constitution and/or a PARDON law in Malaysia.

Some have relied on a Prison Regulation - to imply that pardons powers includes not just sentences, but can also include the overruling or quashing of convictions. But, that REGULATION itself, in my opinion, is ULTRA VIRES the Prison Act itself. Remember that Regulations are Minister created, not law passed by Parliament. There was nothing in the Prison Act that talks about pardon powers include conviction. 

Regulation 113  Petitions, Prison Regulations 2000

(1) A prisoner may, if he wishes, petition the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri, as the case may be, on the subject of his conviction or sentence, once as soon as practicable after his conviction and a second such petition shall be allowed when a prisoner has completed three years from the date of conviction, and thereafter such petitions shall be granted at two yearly intervals, unless there are any special circumstances which the Officer-in-Charge may consider should be brought to the notice of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler or the Yang di-Pertua Negeri, as the case may be.

Power of Minister(not Parliament) to make Regulations in Section 67 -

(1) The Minister may publish in the Gazette such regulations as may be necessary or expedient for the good management and government of prisons, and for carrying our or achieving the objects and purposes of the Act.

The MINISTER Erred when he made the Regulations - when Regulation 113(1) A prisoner may, if he wishes, petition the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri, as the case may be, on the subject of his conviction... On the subject of conviction, the prisoner can file an application to Court to challenge his/her conviction, the King/Rulers can only be petitions on the subject of SENTENCE only.

To date, I believe, that there is no application to Court yet to declare Regulation 113, in respect that a Prisoner's right to petition King/Rulers on the subject of his convictions is ULTRA VIRES the Prison Act 1995 and/or Constitution. This application is needed fast, as it misleads prisoners that the can petition the King/Rulers with regard their CONVICTION.

The Court of Appeal in DATUK SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM v. MOHD KHAIRUL AZAM ABDUL AZIZ & ANOTHER APPEAL, COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA [2023] CLJ (JT1)  ERRED when they relied on this Reg. 113 of the Prisons Regulations 2000, as a basis to say that the powers of mercy and clemency of the YDPA are extensive and encompasses both conviction and sentence. They should have considered first whether this Regulation 113 was ultra vires the parent Prison Act itself - when it tries to extend pardon powers includes quashing convictions.

[22] Our perusal of art. 42 of the Federal Constitution showed that the powers of mercy and clemency of the YDPA are extensive and encompasses both conviction and sentence.

[23] Under reg. 113 of the Prisons Regulations 2000, a person who has been convicted has the right to petition the YDPA for a pardon against conviction and sentence. Further, art. 48(1) and art. 25(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution refer to a "free pardon".

However, the Court of Appeal was right when it said that 'there is nothing in art. 42 of the Federal Constitution which curtails or limits the powers of the YDPA to grant the Pardon to the first appellant. If the intention was to limit it to sentence only, it should have been clearly stated in the Federal Constitution. It is not for the court to add any words. We find that the plain words of the relevant article of the Federal Constitution do not exclude the granting of a pardon in respect of a conviction.' - EXACTLY my point earlier. Parliament must act fast, and amend the Constitution to make clear that pardon powers does not include quashing convictions. That must be left to the Courts, and only the Courts.

There are other points on how the Court of Appeal ERRED - but that maybe for a different post...

Najib's alleged Royal Pardon - Home Detention for remaining term of imprisonment?

If the previous King had ordered, when exercising Pardon powers, home arrest - I am sure that His Majesty would have come out and said so...

If the King had ordered Home Detention - the Prime Minister and current government are at RISK of committing a Sedition Offense...interesting.

Anwar still claims to have no knowledge of any such ORDER - and he met the previous King several times..

“I have met the (previous) Agong several times and never was the addendum issue raised,” he said. 

In Parliament today, the prime minister maintained that the addendum had not been an agenda in the last Pardon Board meeting that he attended after two Opposition MPs requested an explanation.

His Minister and the Attorney General were part of the Pardons Board - it is odd that Anwar does not know. A definite answer from the Prime Minister would have been good.

What is disconcerting is that he is talking about another Pardon Petition for Najib...

“But because the matter has been repeatedly mentioned I have raised this for consideration with the current Agong so when the time is right it can be referred to the Pardon’s Board meeting that the current Agong would chair,” the prime minister added.

Does Anwar not sense that Malaysians were rather UNHAPPY with the 1st Pardon, which slashed the prison term to half, and reduced the fine to more than half

So, PARLIAMENT must speedily amend the Federal Constitution, and also cause the enactment of the PARDONS ACT... 

These are my opinions only...

See earlier posts:- 

PARDON - Discrimination, only for some? Should Shafee's disclosure that could invalidate Najib's pardon be acted on? A law on PARDONS? 

Najib's Pardon - King, not Pardon Board have the power - As the King did not tell us when he was King, is there any consequences?

Pardon reforms needed. The King's pardon - the role of the PM and government of the day? Victim's rights? BERSIH Protest? Prisoner Najib posting on FB?

More about Najib's Pardon - Is the Pardons Board under the Cabinet? What is FULL PARDON? AG must explain and clarify confusions ...?

Najib's Pardon - King, not Pardon Board have the power - As the King did not tell us when he was King, is there any consequences? 

Najib's PARDON now may have serious impact to Malaysia, Malaysian law enforcement, prosecution and courts? 

Ex-PM Najib sentence of 72 years imprisonment, beats ex-DPM Anwar's 1999 corruption conviction and sentence of 24 years?

Anwar Ibrahim's pardon never set aside his conviction - Federal Court. 

Of Najib's Pardon, Pardon REFORMS? Anwar pardoned weeks before his sentence ended, when should one be pardoned?

Anwar Ibrahim - his pardon may be not valid? High Court will decide ...

Anwar, time to investigate, prosecute and fair trial for all false witnesses, bad prosecutors and judges?...travesty or miscarriage of justice?

Anwar Ibrahim - Will this be the 1st 'abuse of power' by new government?

Anwar's Pardon - Meaning, Validity and Matters concerning Attorney General?

 

PM Anwar says he discussed Najib’s pardon with King during Johor visit, cites ‘sub judice’ as case still in court

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak’s pardon was among the issues that were discussed with His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, during his visit to Johor yesterday. — Picture via Facebook/Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar

By Syed Jaymal Zahiid

Tuesday, 10 Dec 2024 11:35 AM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 10 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak’s pardon was among the issues that were discussed with His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, during his visit to Johor yesterday.

Anwar revealed the matter during Question Time in the Dewan Rakyat this morning, where he was asked again about the supposed addendum of a decree from the previous Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri’ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah, to let Najib serve his remaining jail sentence at home.

“I have met the (previous) Agong several times and never was the addendum issue raised,” he said.

“But because the matter has been repeatedly mentioned I have raised this for consideration with the current Agong so when the time is right it can be referred to the Pardon’s Board meeting that the current Agong would chair,” the prime minister added.

Najib lost his bid to compel the government to produce an addendum order reportedly issued by Al-Sultan Abdullah, after the High Court ruled in July that affidavits supporting Najib’s claim were inadmissible as evidence because they were hearsay.

Najib, 71, is currently serving his sentence at Kajang prison in Selangor and has since appealed the decision.

The Court of Appeal is set to hear the former prime minister’s appeal on January 6.

Anwar has not confirmed or denied the existence of the purported addendum.

In Parliament today, the prime minister maintained that the addendum had not been an agenda in the last Pardon Board meeting that he attended after two Opposition MPs requested an explanation.

Kota Baru MP (Perikatan Nasional) Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan accused Anwar of evading the issue, despite repeated calls for the prime minister to confirm or deny the existence of the royal addendum.

The second MP, Ahmad Fadhli Shaari of Pasir Mar (PN), said the affidavits filed by several Umno leaders, claiming they had sighted the addendum, indicate that the decree allowing Najib to serve his remaining jail sentence at home is true.

Anwar brushed off the allegations, saying he is bound by law not to reveal details from the Pardon Board’s meeting.

The Tambun MP also cited Najib’s ongoing appeal as a reason, stating that any disclosure would be sub judice. - Malay Mail, 10/12/2024

 

 

Court of Appeal DENIED chance to determine whether High Court made a mistake in ACQUITTING Zahid Hamidi, when Prosecution Withdraws Appeal?

Sad and disappointed that the government, i.e. the new Attorney General/Public Prosecutor decided suddenly to DROP the Appeal to the Court of Appeal 

I do not think that the previous AG/PP, being Territudin would have dropped the Appeal - and maybe that was why he was 'prematurely replaced'

We now LOSE the Opportunity to know whether the High Court judge whose decision eventually led to the ACQUITAL Zahid Hamidi, was RIGHT or WRONG. This was what the Court of Appeal, if it heard the appeal would have decided. 

If the Court of Appeal decided that the High Court made the correct decision - Zahid will remain Acquitted. However, if the Court of Appeal decided that the HIGH COURT had ERRED, then Court of Appeal would have overturned the decision, and ordered Zahid Hamidi to enter his defence...the trial would continue at the High Court.

If the Appeal proceeded, there was a RISK - the outcome may not be what Zahid or maybe PM Anwar Ibrahim would have hoped for....

THUS, safe course would be that the Court of Appeal is prevented from hearing and deciding > and that will happen if the government(or the AG/PP) withdraw the Appeal..

And, that is what happened...

The prosecution informed the Court of Appeal this morning that they are withdrawing their appeal.

Two years ago, the Shah Alam High Court granted a discharge amounting to an acquittal to Zahid after finding that prosecutors had failed to prove a prima facie case (answerable case)...

On Sept 23 2022, the High Court acquitted Zahid over 40 graft charges linked to VLN.

He claimed trial to 33 counts of receiving bribes amounting to S$13.56 million (RM43.6 million) from Ultra Kirana Sdn Bhd for himself as then home minister to extend the company’s contract as the operator of a one-stop centre service in China and the VLN system, as well as to maintain its contract with the Home Ministry to supply the integrated system.

According to the charges, Zahid was accused of committing the offences at Seri Satria, Precinct 16, Putrajaya and Country Heights, Kajang, between October 2014 and March 2018.

For the remaining seven charges, he was purported to have obtained for himself cash of SG$1,150,000, RM3 million, 15,000 Swiss francs (RM70,000), and US$15,000 (RM68,000) from the same firm, in which prosecutors claimed he knew was related with his official functions.

Zahid was purported to have committed the offences at a house in Country Heights, Kajang, between June 2015 and October 2017.

He also pleaded not guilty to 33 alternative counts under Section 165 of the Penal Code, where he was charged in his capacity as then home minister with receiving bribes of S$13.56 million linked to the VLN system, between 2014 and 2017.

Now, when the Prosecution CHARGED Zahid, they would have done so verily believing that there was sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Zahid was GUILTY ...

But, then the High Court Judge decided otherwise..

Then, the Prosecution APPEALED to the Court of Appeal - with a belief that the High Court Judge ERRED(made a mistake)...a correct move, giving the Court of Appeal the opportunity whether the High Court Judge made a mistake or not..

And, now suddenly, after a NEW Attorney General/Public Prosecutor is appointed - they withdraw the Appeal.

AND the Court of Appeal is DENIED the ability to decide whether the HIgh Court Judge made a correct decision or NOT.

It is TRUE that Anwar Ibrahim would never have become Prime Minister after GE15 when Pakatan Harapan only managed to win 81 seats in Parliament, and since PN REFUSED to form a coalition government with PH, PH had to join hands with BN-UMNO, whose leader was Zahid Hamidi to form government...

If the BN withdraws support, Anwar Ibrahim will no longer be PH..

BUT, is it RIGHT to 'interfere' in the already existing cases of UMNO leaders? In the Najib's Pardon..

If any former Minister committed crimes of corruption, abuse of power, etc - they must be charged and tried in court - and the Court decides on Guilt and Innocence..

Zahid Hamidi, now Deputy Prime Minister, benefited a lot by the actions of the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor..

1) When during the Defence Stage, the AG/PP decided to discontinue the criminal case - DNAA for 47 charges that prosecution had already succeeded to prove PRIMA FACIE case...

AND NOW,

(2) the withdrawal of the Appeal in the VLN case ( 33 counts of receiving bribes amounting to S$13.56 million (RM43.6 million) from Ultra Kirana Sdn Bhd for himself...seven charges, he was purported to have obtained for himself cash of SG$1,150,000, RM3 million, 15,000 Swiss francs (RM70,000), and US$15,000 (RM68,000) from the same firm)...

If PH had won sufficient seats in GE15 to form government, or if PN formed the government after GE15 > it is more than likely, Zahid maybe in prison serving a sentence now or soon.

What is happening in Malaysia under Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is in my opinion BAD - 'friends' of government of the day seem to enjoy a preferential treatment in the administration of criminal justice ...

Since, the decision to discontinue criminal prosecution and APPEALS are in the hands of the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor only - PM Anwar and the government are FREE of Blame..blame only lies with the AG/PP.

But, is that how the Malaysian people perceive it?

However, the appointment of the Attorney General/PP is in the hands of the Prime Minister, and the King only appoints who the PM advises him. The King has no power to appoint some other person to be Attorney General/Public Prosecutor.

Is is time to accord the RIGHT of Malaysians to be able to take DECISIONS of the AG/PP for Judicial Review at the Courts?

For a long time, many Malaysians believed that certain people were above the law - but that changed when Pakatan Harapan came into power after GE14 in 2018 > but now, under PM Anwar Ibrahim of PH, there seems to be a U-TURN...

What is happening sadly is affecting also public perception of PROSECUTION...

The High Court today acquitted Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of taking bribes from Ultra Kirana Sdn Bhd (UKSB), the company awarded a government contract for a foreign visa system (VLN).... Judge Datuk Mohd Yazid Mustafa said the prosecution failed to successfully prove a prima facie case against Ahmad Zahid, who is also Bagan Datuk MP, on all 40 bribery charges. - Malay Mail, 23/9/2022

Bioalpha Holdings Berhad announced that it had appointed former High Court judge Dato’ Haji Mohd Yazid bin Haji Mustafa as its new Independent Non-Executive Chairman, effective 4 September 2023. This appointment follows the retirement of Tan Sri Dato’ Dr. Syed Jalaludin bin Syed Salim as Chairman of Bioalpha on 7 June 2023.  Business Today, 4/9/2023

Really, there must be 'cooling off period' - judges should not be appointed to such positions, until after 3 years after their retirement.

See some related posts:-

Ahmad Terrirudin,56 years old, could not be retiring yet? So, why the AG/PP removed so soon after 13 months? Did the JAC recommend Terrirudin to be appointed Federal Court Judge?

Zahid Hamidi’s Acquittal by High Court Must be Appealed to the Court of Appeal, and Prosecution Failures Must be Investigated - Reforms Needed to Ensure Independence of Deputy Public Prosecutors

Judicial Review Filed by the Malaysian Bar over the Attorney General’s Decision in Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi's case?

Was PM's comments about Zahid Hamidi's case inappropriate? A personal opinion OK - but as PM?

If DPP Raja Rozela Raja Toran continues to prosecute, Zahid Hamidi will likely be convicted and sentenced? Come back and prosecute to the end..

When AG who discontinued Zahid's case gets appointed Chairman of a GLC - A question of public perception?

What happened to Zahid's DNAA Parliamentary Committee? Separation of AG from Public Prosecutor important but the DNAA?

Zahid Hamidi's can always be charged again, the trial reinstated and continued - section 254A CPC? Explaining and concerns?

 Zahid Hamidi’s Acquittal by High Court Must be Appealed to the Court of Appeal, and Prosecution Failures Must be Investigated - Reforms Needed to Ensure Independence of Deputy Public Prosecutors

Prosecution drops appeal in Zahid's VLN case

Hidir Reduan Abdul Rashid

Published:  Dec 12, 2024 9:44 AM

 

Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s acquittal in the Foreign Visa System (VLN) corruption case remains.

The prosecution informed the Court of Appeal this morning that they are withdrawing their appeal.

Two years ago, the Shah Alam High Court granted a discharge amounting to an acquittal to Zahid after finding that prosecutors had failed to prove a prima facie case (answerable case).

Meanwhile, Zahid said “Alhamdulillah” (praise be to God) in a post uploaded to Facebook.

During proceedings before a three-person appellate bench chaired by judge Che Mohd Ruzima Ghazali, the prosecution team told the court they decided to withdraw the appeal after considering Zahid’s representations.

‘Strong basis to leave acquittal be’

The prosecuting team said they found that there is a basis under the law and strong facts to leave undisturbed the trial court ruling of acquittal.

They said there was no evidence in the case to show Zahid had ever used his position to award the related contracts.

They noted the contracts were awarded before the respondent even held the position of home minister, thus showing he did not abuse power.

“Evidence shows that the contracts were awarded before the respondent (Ahmad Zahid) assumed the position of home minister. This negates the existence of opportunities and or space for the respondent to abuse his power,” deputy public prosecutor Yusaini Amer Abdul Karim said.

The bench, also comprised of judges Azman Abdullah and Azmi Ariffin, then struck out the prosecution’s appeal.

40 charges

On Sept 23 2022, the High Court acquitted Zahid over 40 graft charges linked to VLN.

He claimed trial to 33 counts of receiving bribes amounting to S$13.56 million (RM43.6 million) from Ultra Kirana Sdn Bhd for himself as then home minister to extend the company’s contract as the operator of a one-stop centre service in China and the VLN system, as well as to maintain its contract with the Home Ministry to supply the integrated system.

According to the charges, Zahid was accused of committing the offences at Seri Satria, Precinct 16, Putrajaya and Country Heights, Kajang, between October 2014 and March 2018.

For the remaining seven charges, he was purported to have obtained for himself cash of SG$1,150,000, RM3 million, 15,000 Swiss francs (RM70,000), and US$15,000 (RM68,000) from the same firm, in which prosecutors claimed he knew was related with his official functions.

Zahid was purported to have committed the offences at a house in Country Heights, Kajang, between June 2015 and October 2017.

He also pleaded not guilty to 33 alternative counts under Section 165 of the Penal Code, where he was charged in his capacity as then home minister with receiving bribes of S$13.56 million linked to the VLN system, between 2014 and 2017.

In September last year, prosecutors applied to drop the 47 Yayasan Akalbudi graft charges against Zahid, leading to the Kuala Lumpur High Court granting a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.

Deputy public prosecutor Yusaini Amer Abdul Karim led the prosecution team today.

Lawyer Hisyam Teh Poh Teik headed Zahid’s defence team. - Malaysiakini, 12/12/2024

 

 

 

Another 4 not arrested, but SHOT DEAD by Malaysian Police in Sabah? Charge them in Court - and let the Courts decide on GUILT or Innocence...

Another FOUR(4) shot dead by police - when they should be arrested... How many extrajudicial killings have there been in 2024.

Police shot dead a fourth wanted criminal in a shootout at a building on Jalan Undan, near the Inanam Bus Terminal, here early this morning.

Sabah Criminal Investigation Department (CID) head Datuk Azmi Abdul Rahim said the 59-year-old suspect is believed to be connected to the three criminals who were shot dead in Beverly Hill, Bundusan, Penampang on Tuesday night.

What is 'sickening' is how the police/government speedily claim that the deceased were 'bad persons' involved in crimes >> BUT that does not in any way justify the 'KILLING' - when police really only can arrest.

We hear the 'police version' of what happened > but we never hear what the CORONER decided after investigation/inquiry into the death - Did the Coroner find the police(or anyone) CRIMINAL LIABLE for the Deaths.

Since, Police can ONLY ARREST and not KILL - all police officers involved in the killing should be immediately charged in  court for the killing... and, in Court, they can put forward whatever DEFENCE or Justification they have - and it is up to the Court, after TRIAL, to determine GUILT or INNOCENCE... But, then why is the Public Prosecutor not charging these police officers in court... 

on 31/5/2023 that the coroner’s court, presided by Coroner Rasyihah Ghazali, for ‘police shooting that resulted in death of 3, ‘…. concluded that there was abuse of power and elements of a criminal nature in the death of three men who were shot at close range by police three years ago. “The shots were not fired in self-defense. There was abuse of power and (actions in the nature of) criminal elements by police in the death of the men,”… She said police witnesses gave evidence that shots were fired at the men from an upright position but post-mortem reports stated that the bullets pierced their bodies at a downward angle. … “The weapons described by the ballistic expert (Izzuwan Marzuki) and the investigating officer (P Visvanathan) were also in conflict,” (FMT, 31/5/2023) 

REMEMBER, only Court determines after a FAIR Trial whether the police officers are GUILTY or NOT GUILTY. It is not the Police, Minister or even Public Prosecutor that decides.Is it the Malaysian Government policy to 'protect police' and not even charge them if they KILLED someone?

The COURT may at the end of the day find the police officers GUILTY of the crimes of causing death(i.e. Murder, Culpable Homicide Not Amounting To Murder, Unintentional Killing, etc..) - if it was a LEGITIMATE Self Defence, the Court will accept it and the officer may be found not guilty...

HOME MINISTER - tell us what was the CORONER's finding in all the cases of police shooting dead instead of arresting?

HOME MINISTER/PRIME MINISTER - explain WHY were police officers who shot dead persons instead of arresting them CHARGED in Court - It is the Court that will decide whether their 'defence' of SELF DEFENCE is accepted or not..

WE DO NOT WANT POLICE OFFICERS WHO ABUSE THEIR POWERS AND KILL PEOPLE....

See also:-

MERDEKA Extrajudicial killing - Shot dead, not arrested, by Malaysian police on 30/8/2024 

When police shoot and kill - Minister must apologize and Charge the police killers in court - Let Court decide on guilt or defence. Criminalize extrajudicial killing(with deterent sentence) - A Statement of 18 Groups

Police who shot and killed man being investigated for MURDER and Arms Act violations? A step in the right direction 

Another Man Shot Dead By Police, Rather Than Being Arrested – Investigate Police Involved For Murder(MADPET)

Extrajudicial killing by Malaysian police could be murder, and Body-Cams and CCTV could DETER such killings. - Delay in ensuring all police is wearing body-cams, more than a year after budget approved is incompetence of Minister and government

298 persons shot to death by police since 2007 - Demand public inquiry for every case

Police who shot and killed man being investigated for MURDER and Arms Act violations? A step in the right direction

SUHAKAM should have PUBLIC INQUIRY on police shooting where 3 died and 1 women allegedly missing?

Extrajudicial Killings Need Speedy Independent Investigations - 6 Reported Shot To Death By Police After Pakatan Harapan Became Government.

Muhyiddin - What are you doing about recent police shoot..victims die incidents after GE14?

Another man with a machette shot and killed by police? Speedy INDEPENDENT inquiry needed?

Extrajudicial killing by Malaysian Police? Police arrest not KILL - Investigate all police shooting incidents?

5 shot dead by police - now sister and 2 kids in hospital fighting for life..

The police shot dead another 6 in Kedah - no one, except alleged girlfriends survived

So wrong for the government, police and even media to brand the 124 persons shot dead by police as criminals - all are innocent till proven guilty

3 with no firearms shot dead by Malaysian police...

Malaysian police shot dead 279...and another 147 died in police lock-ups [2000-2009]

Cepat tindakan kes bunuh lelaki korea, kenapa lambat tuduh polis/pembunuh Syed Mohd Azlan?

Did the police try to arrest them...or did they just shoot to kill them? Extrajudicial killing must be condemned..

Another 'shoot to kill' incident - 4 killed. Yahoo has this question now that need answers: Do you agree that Malaysian police tends to shoot to kill?

2 more extrajudicial killing by police that need to be investigated HOME Minister?

Good if Hisha­mmuddin expresses similar sentiments when persons are shot dead by police in Malaysia, as he did for Nordin Md Top (alleged terrorist)

Abolition of death penalty, extrajudicial killing and life imprisonment (‘secret death penalty”), improving detention to respect human dignity (MADPET)

 

Sabah police kill fourth suspect in morning shootout in Inanam after Tuesday’s Beverly Hill raid

Police personnel carry the suspect’s body from the building on Jalan Undan, near the Inanam Bus Terminal. — The Borneo Post pic

Thursday, 05 Dec 2024 2:55 PM MYT

KOTA KINABALU, Dec 5 — Police shot dead a fourth wanted criminal in a shootout at a building on Jalan Undan, near the Inanam Bus Terminal, here early this morning.

Sabah Criminal Investigation Department (CID) head Datuk Azmi Abdul Rahim said the 59-year-old suspect is believed to be connected to the three criminals who were shot dead in Beverly Hill, Bundusan, Penampang on Tuesday night.

Azmi said acting on information, police from the D9 Special Investigation Division of the Sabah Police Contingent Headquarters (IPK) raided the building at 1.45am.

“As police raided the building, the suspect opened fire, which prompted the raiding team to return fire in self-defence.

“The suspect was killed at the scene,” Azmi said when met at the site.

He revealed that the wanted suspect was from Sarawak.

“We believe this suspect was also involved in several criminal cases, including murder cases, in Sarawak.

“With the killing of these four suspects, police believe we have eliminated all the wanted suspects,” he said.

However, he added the police are still conducting further investigations.

On Tuesday, police killed three criminals in a shootout at Beverly Hill.

In the incident at 9.13pm, the three criminals from Sarawak, aged between 40 and 50, died at the scene. — The Borneo Post, Malay Mail, 5/12/2024

Asia

Indonesia police involved in 31 extrajudicial killings: rights group

Police officers move in formation during a show of force, ahead of Pope Francis’ visit to the country, at Indonesian Armed Forces headquarters in Jakarta, Indonesia, Monday, Sep 2, 2024. ( Photo: AP/Achmad Ibrahim)

10 Dec 2024 03:46AM

 

JAKARTA: Indonesian police were allegedly involved in dozens of extrajudicial killings resulting in the deaths of 31 people, indicating a lack of progress in police reforms, Amnesty International Indonesia said Monday (Dec 9).

Amnesty recorded at least 116 cases of alleged police violence between January and November this year, including 29 cases of extrajudicial killings resulting in 31 fatalities.

One of the latest cases was in late November when a police officer allegedly shot and killed a student in Semarang, Central Java. An officer has been detained over the case.

The case garnered national attention after local police claimed an officer had taken the action to disperse a student brawl, but Central Java police's head of internal affairs Aris Supriyono told lawmakers in a hearing last week that the shooting was not connected with dispersing a brawl.

Cases of police violence, which include torture, improper use of tear gas and arbitrary arrests, showed the lack of systemic progress in reform of the Indonesian police, said Amnesty Indonesia's executive director Usman Hamid.

"If added with a series of police violence widely discussed by the public, it is clear that this year, 2024, does not show any improvement in the police's system," Usman said.

The National Police did not immediately respond to AFP's request for comment.

Amnesty also recorded other cases of police violence throughout the same period, including, 28 cases of intimidation and physical violence as well as 26 cases of torture.

More than 500 people were subject to police violence including arbitrary arrest, physical violence and improper use of tear gas between August 22 and 29 during demonstrations against changes to election rules in 14 cities across the archipelago, Amnesty recorded.

"This showed how policing currently becomes authoritarian-repressive, not democratic-humanist policing as promised or mandated by law," Usman said.

Rights groups have accused Indonesian security forces of operating in a culture of impunity. - CNA, 10/12/2024

 

20 Groups - Constitutional Right to be FREE from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of children or any persons in Malaysia

 

World Human Rights Day Statement – 10/12/2024(20 Grps)

Towards a Constitutional guarantee that Malaysia will not tolerate torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of children or any persons

On the occasion of the World Human Rights Day (10^th December), we, the 20 undersigned groups calls on Malaysia to recognize the right of persons, including children, to be free from torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This right must be included in the Federal Constitution.

The Malaysian Federal Constitution Article 7(1) now states that, ‘No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law’. Article 8(1) says that ‘No person shall be held in slavery.’ Article 8(2) says that ‘All forms of forced labour are prohibited,…’

The right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is sadly still NOT recognized as a Constitutional Right – and today, it is much needed considering that the fact that this right is being violated in schools, universities, armed forces and even by police and law enforcement.

Teachers have been visiting torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment on students. We recall the incident this year where a teacher ‘punished’ students by making them stand under the hot sun – a 11-year-old student who suffered a heatstroke after being forced to stand in the sun for nearly three hours has since been diagnosed with a nerve condition and is now considered a person with disabilities (PwD).(The Sun, 30/5/2024)

We recall reports how children are being subjected torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. ‘As for nationwide, the SWD[Social Welfare Department] under the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry (WFCDM) reported that 1,055 child abuse cases were recorded for the first six months of 2022 from January to June. The then deputy minister Datuk Siti Zalilah Yusof said physical abuse constituted the highest category at 578 cases (54.8%), followed by sexual abuse at 417 cases (39.6%) and emotional abuse at 60 cases (5.6%).’ (The Sun, 10/1/2023) In September 2024, Malaysian police have rescued 402 children and teenagers that they suspect were physically and sexually abused across 20 care homes.(BBC, 12/9/2024)

We recall the case of ‘Six former students of Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) were sentenced to death by a Malaysian court on Tuesday (Jul 23) for the murder of navy cadet Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain seven years ago… where these students had taken turns pressing a steam iron on the body of the deceased…’ (CNA, 25/7/2024)

We recall how a UiTM Reserve Officer Training Unit (Rotu) cadet died on Nov 13 after allegedly enduring a grueling, unscheduled training session that involved physical abuse.(Malaysiakini, 27/11/2024).  Armed Forces have given five Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) cadets the boot and fined them a total of RM189,240 in compensation for being bullies in three separate cases – one of this University student was tortured by his peer, and have now been charged.

We recall cases of how domestic workers have been tortured and subjected to cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. ‘Beaten and humiliated, forced to shower with the doors open and made to eat from a dog's bowl using only her mouth. These were among the horrors Indonesian domestic worker …had to endure at the hands of her Malaysian employer...’ (NST, 30/7/2024)

We recall how a police officer assaulted a deaf e-hailing driver on end of May.  ‘Ong then rolled down his window to ask in sign language and he was suddenly punched in the face by L/Kpl Taufik.’(Star, 27/11/2024)

We recall also, how in detention, the police tortured people which in some cases ended up in death. Our Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was also a victim of torture whilst in custody, where he was beaten and ended up with a ‘black eye’ – the then Inspector of Police was found guilty of that crime.

In Malaysia, the police and law enforcement whilst carrying out their duties are not permitted to resort to torture or inflict cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment on suspects or persons.

The Right to Be Free From Torture in Constitution

Constitutions in several jurisdiction, provides for the right of persons to be free from torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 17 of the Constitution of Turkey states, ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or mal-treatment; no one shall be subjected to penalties or treatment incompatible with human dignity.’

Article 28G(2) of the Indonesian Constitution states, Every person shall have the right to be free from torture or inhumane and degrading treatment, …

Section 28 of Thailand’s Constitution, amongst others, states ‘Torture, brutal acts or punishment by cruel or inhumane means shall not be permitted.’

Non ratification of CAT not a bar to providing the right in law

Even though Malaysia has yet to ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), Malaysia has the sovereign right to include now in its constitution the right of persons, including children, to be free torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Therefore, we urge Malaysia to amend the Federal Constitution to include the provision that ‘No person shall be subject to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment save in accordance with law’. The inclusion of the words ‘save in accordance with law’ removes the concern that Malaysian law still provides for whipping/caning as a legal sentence.

This will be a pronouncement that Malaysia does not tolerate torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment inflicted by any one on children or persons. The only exception being if it is specifically permitted by law. This will the first step, and a clear indication by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s government that torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment will not be tolerated in Malaysia.

We also urge Malaysia to further consider enactment of laws against torture, and also consider ratifying of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, with or without reservations.

Charles Hector

Ng Yap Hwa

 

For and/on behalf of the following 20 listed groups

ALIRAN

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement (TBH-ADA)

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network(ADPAN)

Centre for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC), Malaysia

German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)

Global Women’s Strike

Hawai'i Institute for Human Rights (HIHR)

Legal Action for Women, UK

North South Initiative

ODHIKAR, Bangladesh

Persatuan Amal Progresif

Sabah Timber Industry Employees Union (STIEU)

Singapore Anti Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC)

United Chinese School Committees’ Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong) 

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

Women Against Rape, UK

Workers' Assistance Center, Philippines

Sarawak Dayak Iban Association(SADIA)

Yaung Chi Oo Workers Association-YCOWA

### The Statement was carried by the Media -

NGOs urge govt to enact laws prohibiting torture, inhumane treatment- Malaysiakini

BFM Radio also reported this issue - Charles Hector spoke about the statement in the 5.30pm News

NGOs urge govt to enact laws prohibiting torture, inhumane treatment

Published:  Dec 10, 2024 10:58 AM

⋅

Updated: 9:58 AM

Eighteen NGOs have urged the government to enact laws to prohibit torture and inhumane treatment against people and ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, with or without reservations.

“We urge the government to amend the Federal Constitution to include the provision that ‘no person shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment save in accordance with law’.

“The inclusion of the words ‘save in accordance with law’ removes concerns that Malaysian law still provides for caning as a legal sentence,” said the NGOs in a statement today in conjunction with International Human Rights Day.

Among the NGOs are Aliran, Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet), Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement (TBH-Ada) and United Chinese School Committees’ Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong).

Past cases

Recalling past abuses, the NGOs pointed out the case where an 11-year-old schoolboy who suffered a heatstroke after being forced to stand under the sun, leaving him with a nerve condition.

The groups also pointed out the murder of navy cadet Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain, whose peers brutally tortured him before passing away.

“And we recall how a police officer assaulted a deaf e-hailing driver in May,” the groups added, referring to the case of Ong Ing Keong who was assaulted by a police officer in the lobby of St Regis Hotel in Kuala Lumpur on May 28.

The officer, Muhammad Taufik Ismail, pleaded guilty to assault and was slapped with a RM1,000 fine for causing hurt to the 47-year-old deaf driver.

Other countries have such laws

On that note, the NGOs reminded the government that although Malaysia has yet to ratify the convention against torture, the administration can still include provisions against torture and inhumane treatment against people in the Federal Constitution.

The groups highlighted that several foreign nations have such provisions in their constitutions such as Turkiye, Indonesia and Thailand.

“Article 17 of the Turkiye Constitution states ‘no one shall be subjected to torture or maltreatment; no one shall be subjected to penalties or treatment incompatible with human dignity’.

“Article 28G (2) of the Indonesian Constitution states ‘every person shall have the right to be free from torture or inhumane and degrading treatment’.

“And Section 28 of Thailand’s Constitution, amongst others, states ‘torture, brutal acts or punishment by cruel or inhumane means shall not be permitted’,” they added. - Malaysiakini, 10/12/2024