A
man died after complaining of breathing difficulties while being
detained at the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters lock-up in Kuala Lumpur
last night.
In the 9pm incident, the man had complained of chest
pains before being brought to the Kuala Lumpur Hospital but was
pronounced dead on arrival, said City CID chief Ku Chin Wah.
He
said the 32-year-old man was one of four suspects arrested in connection
with a shooting case in Bandar Tun Razak, Cheras on May 11.
“A post-mortem will be done at HKL,” he told a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today.
In
other developments, Ku said police had been given an extension on the
remand till Monday on the second suspect held in connection with the
murder of Customs deputy director-general (Customs/ Internal Tax)
Shaharuddin Ibrahim.
He said police needed more time to wrap up investigations.
Shaharuddin was shot dead while on his way to work in Putrajaya in April 26.
- Bernama - Malaysiakini, 22/5/2013, Man dies after breathing difficulties at lock-up
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Unabated Deaths in Custody — Will They Ever End? - Malaysian Bar
| Press Release: Unabated Deaths in Custody — Will They Ever End? |
| Wednesday, 29 May 2013 12:46pm | |
 The
Malaysian Bar welcomes the announcement that the Inspector General of
Police, Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Khalid Abu Bakar, will head a special
committee established to take measures to prevent deaths in police
lockups, which will implement frequent visits by doctors and also visits
by Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (“SUHAKAM”) Commissioners. Such
measures provide some assurance of the level of seriousness being
accorded to the grave issue of deaths in police custody.
The
statistics regarding deaths in police custody in Malaysia is a leaf out
of the macabre: 156 persons died in police custody between 2000 and
February 2011,1 and it has been reported that there were at least six such deaths in 2012,2 with this being the fifth one in 2013.3 This data is alarming, as it points to an average of at least one death in police custody per month since 2000.
The
Malaysian Bar is dismayed and saddened by the news of yet another death
in police custody, involving 32-year-old N Dharmendran. He was
reportedly arrested on 11 May 2013, and died on 21 May 2013 whilst in
police remand at the Kuala Lumpur police contingent headquarters.
The
death of N Dharmendran is tragic and inexcusable. It is yet another
incident that raises serious questions about the treatment and safety of
detainees in police custody, and the methods of interrogation used. It
underscores the importance of the requirement for those in police
custody to have immediate access to legal counsel upon arrest.
In
the case of N Dharmendran’s arrest, the protocol prescribed under the
Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (“YBGK”) scheme, which is an
initiative made possible by Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Najib Tun Abdul
Razak, and supported by the Government, does not appear to have been
complied with by the police. The guidelines for enforcement officers
stipulate that as soon as an arrest has been made, and before the
suspect is questioned, the police officer must inform the suspect’s
family (or friend) of the arrest, and must also provide details of the
suspect and the arrest to YBGK, who will then despatch a lawyer to offer
legal representation to the arrested person.
However,
we understand that YBGK did not receive any notification from the
police about N Dharmendran’s arrest. We regret to note that this is the
second occasion that we are aware of where YBGK was not notified of an
arrest, and the detainee later died in police custody. In the first
incident, 32-year-old K Nagarajan had been found dead on 24 Dec 2012 in
the Dang Wangi police station lockup.
The
present state of affairs has led to much public outrage and an erosion
of confidence in the police. The police must be proactive in ensuring
that the wrongful actions of some amongst them do not tarnish the
standing of the whole force. Unless this is addressed, the police force
will unfortunately remain a diminished institution in the eyes of the
public.
The
unabated deaths in police custody reinforce the Malaysian Bar’s
repeated calls for the Government to implement the recommendation of the
Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal
Malaysia Police, in its report published in May 2005, for the setting up
of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (“IPCMC”)
to function as an independent and external oversight body to
investigate complaints about police personnel.
It
is untenable for the Government to continue to ignore the dire need for
the IPCMC, in the face of continuing cases of deaths in police custody.
The
Malaysian Bar takes the view that every death in custody must be
thoroughly and impartially investigated. Although Chapter XXXII of the
Criminal Procedure Code requires that all custodial deaths be
investigated by way of inquest, no inquest is held in most instances.
Thus, the Malaysian Bar calls on the authorities to urgently implement
comprehensive structural reform where inquests are concerned. The few
recent enquiries into deaths of persons that occurred whilst in the
custody of, or in or around the premises of, law enforcement agencies,
have resulted in “open” verdicts. In this regard, the Malaysian Bar
urges the Government to introduce a Coroners’ Act, and establish a
Coroners’ Court with the following features:
In
the meantime, the Malaysian Bar calls for an immediate inquest into N
Dharmendran’s death, as a matter of public interest warranting the
highest level of priority. The police must render every assistance to
the inquest and undertake a prompt and transparent investigation into
the incident. In this regard, we are encouraged by the statement of the
police authorities that they have set up a special task force to
investigate the matter.
Those
responsible for N Dharmendran’s death must be identified and be made to
face the full force of the law immediately. The key question is who
the culprits responsible for this heinous crime are. The police force
owes it to the families of the deceased, the public and itself, to do
all that is required to ensure that such incidents do not occur again.
It is incumbent upon the police to continuously work to establish the
confidence and trust of the public whom they are duty-bound to serve and
protect.
As
stated by the Supreme Court of India, death in police custody is “. . .
one of the worst kinds of crime in a civilised society governed by the
rule of law and poses a serious threat to an orderly civilised society.
Torture in custody flouts the basic rights of the citizens . . . . and
is an affront to human dignity. . . .”4 It is shocking that detainees continue to die under questionable circumstances while in the custody of the police.
The
Malaysian Bar hopes that N Dharmendran’s death will not be relegated to
a mere footnote in the disturbing history of custodial deaths in our
country.
The Malaysian Bar expresses its deepest condolences to the family and friends of N Dharmendran.
Christopher Leong
President
Malaysian Bar
29 May 2013
1 Statistics disclosed by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
3 “Kula flays Waytha’s deafening silence” (Malaysiakini, 27 May 2013).
4 The Supreme Court of India in Pradesh Munshi Gautam (dead) v State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 2005 SC 402.
|
Nancy Shukri new de facto Law Minister? Would she be committed to human rights and justice or...?
Well, looks like we have a new de facto Law Minister - maybe it should be de facto Human Rights Minister.
It is Hajah Nancy Haji Shukri, and she is a Malaysian, a Scottish-Malay-Iban adopted by a Malay family (see below 'Malay? Chinese? Just Nancy!', an article that appeared in Nutgraph)
Would Nancy be guided by principles of human rights and justice? Or would she be cowed by Najib and the BN-UMNO? We have to wait and see.
She certainly needs to immediately ensure the appointment of new SUHAKAM HR Commissioners - and who she chooses would be indicative of how she will perform as a Minister. Would she appoint persons who are committed to human rights and justice, fearless to stand up when it is the government, PM, police, public servants, etc that are the violators, or would be weak personalities 'loyal' to the PM and the BN-UMNO government? Would it be people with a human rights history and background, or just some with an academic background? We shall see...we shall see...
More than a month with no HR Commissioners - Najib appoint good fearless persons who will uphold human rights without fear or favour
No SUHAKAM HR Commissioners since 25th April when the term of the 2010-2013 Commissioners expired
How will she handle death in custody? Will she do the right thing and ensure Sedition Act is abolished?
Personally, would she be like Nazri Aziz, and be a proponent for the abolition of the death penalty?
Nancy gives top priority to Suhakam
PUTRAJAYA: Speeding up the appointment of members of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) will be among the top priorities of newly-appointed Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nancy Shukri.She said that she was fully aware of public expectations, including that of the appointment of Suhakam commissioners.“We will try to bring improvements to our services based on feedback from the public,” she told reporters.
This was after the handover of duties to her by Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz yesterday.Nancy has now taken charge of 11 agencies, including the Public Land Transport Commission, the Prime Minister's Department Advisory Board, the Legal Affairs Division, the Insolvency Department and the Judicial and Legal Services Commission.Suhakam has been without commissioners since the former chairman Tan Sri Hasmy Agam and the six other members ended their three-year tenure on April 25.This is the second time that Suhakam has been left without any commissioners.- Star, 29/5/2013, Nancy gives top priority to Suhakam
Malay? Chinese? Just Nancy!
(All pics below courtesy of Nancy Shukri)
NANCY Shukri is the Member of Parliament for the Batang Sadong constituency in Sarawak and Wanita Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu secretary-general. Formerly the political secretary to Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, she was active in the Sarawak Federation of Women’s Institute
(SFWI) and various non-governmental organisations before she entered
politics. She also owned her own firm, NS Training and Consultancy
Services, before being called to serve public office.
She was one of nine new faces introduced by Sarawak Barisan Nasional
for the March 2008 general elections, and won in the largely
conservative and rural area of Batang Sadong despite not being a local.
She holds a law degree from Hull University and an executive Master of
Business Administration (MBA) from Ohio University, and is married with
three children.
A firm believer in national harmony and development, Nancy told The Nut Graph about her growing and formative years in this 15 Apr 2010 interview in Kuala Lumpur.
When and where were you born?
I was born in Kuching, on 5 Aug 1961, in the kampung where my mom
still lives. We live across the river and we still have our house there.
What was your childhood like, some of your early memories?
Nancy, right, with a school friend, circa age 15I can never forget that I swam across the Sarawak river when I was 14. When I was small I liked to go into the jungle, because we were from the kampung and there were still loads of fruit trees at the time. So on weekends my friends and I would always go swimming or go and look for wild fruit.
I didn’t actually know how to swim at first. My mother didn’t know at
the time, but I was a naughty girl, and when I was supposed to go for
Quran reading, I would take the opportunity to learn how to swim. I
would practise at the back of people’s houses, and in very dirty water (laughs).
But so I learnt, and at age 14 I [wore] the sarong, turned into a
“balloon” of sorts, and then swam across the river. I was the only girl
[along] with the boys in the kampung who did that.
The Sarawak river was huge, and if you ask me to do it again now, I
wouldn’t. It was fun and I was not scared at the time, but I was told
that there were crocodiles in the river.
Can you trace your ancestry?
My mother was adopted by a Malay family during the Japanese
Occupation. My mother’s father was Scottish, under the British
government at that time. My late grandfather was the Resident of
Kuching. He was also the magistrate, and my mother told me he had many
responsibilities. He married an Iban-Chinese.
But when my mother was 11, the Japanese came and were looking for
British children, so my mother and her brother were taken to be hidden
by this Malay family. My grandfather died in a massacre by the Japanese.
My mother was looked after by the Malay family [as she grew up], but
was also well taken care of by the British government.
Nancy’s father (centre) and mother (right) in preparation
for the umrah to MeccaI remember the last Brooke, Anthony Walter Dayrell Brooke, came to Kuching in 1982 and looked for my mother and uncle. He invited all of my family members to Holiday Inn Kuching for a meal.
On my father’s side, there is a big family from Kuching. My paternal
grandfather died when I was a baby. He was a Malay who married a
Melanau, and they came all the way from Rajang.
How has all this shaped your identity as a Malaysian?
As far as I know, to my family and me, everybody is a brother and
sister, regardless of religion. Because that’s the lifestyle we have
been living all these years, with our Chinese and British cousins. We
even forget about so-and-so not being Muslim. In fact, I have a Chinese
Malaysian cousin whom we keep calling Mat — we forget his Chinese name!
In our family, and for most Sarawakians, if a Chinese Malaysian
invites us to their house, we don’t bother asking whether things are
halal or not. We just start eating; that’s us.
But of course, now people are always asking, and you think, what has
happened politically? Suddenly someone starts using racial or religious
issues, and then you realise [that this situation exists], and you start
getting questions like, “Who are you? Are you Malaysian first? Malay
first? Or Chinese first?”
And what do you say when people start asking you that question?
I am just Nancy! Why would it concern you whether I am Malay or
Chinese or what? I am just Nancy and I am a Malaysian, that’s all.
Upon graduating with her Bachelor of Law (Honours)
Are there any stories or advice from your mother or father that you hold dear to your heart?
My mother does not give us advice, actually, she shows by example.
She is a very active woman, in both the NGOs and politics at the ground
level. It’s because of her that I got involved in politics, I guess. She
had a hard life because she had to take care of so many people. She
only studied up to Primary Three, but she does artwork, handicraft and
works with NGOs, [and] teaches people.
Do you often look back now and compare your busy life as a politician with your blissful past?
In the kampung I was also very active and community-orientated as a
child. I played the kompang and zikir as a teenager. I guess because of
my mother’s influence, I was not just a follower, but a leader in
singing and other activities. I followed Saberkas
(the Sarawak National Youth Organisation) from the age of 12. Whenever
there was a kenduri in the kampung, or if people wedded or passed away,
we would all be very much involved in everything.
I thought that all this would be over when I went off to study. I
remember telling myself, perhaps I want to be on my own and lead a
private life. But like it or not, when it comes to these things, people
actually pick and appoint you. And I just didn’t know how to say no.
After my mother admitted she was getting old, people took me into the
NGOs and expected me to be there. They also put me in high positions.
After my term was over, I thought that was it. But then suddenly I was
involved in politics.
With other politicians and administrators in Sarawak
I was running and enjoying my own business already, which revolved
around training. As long as I had fun and could go on holidays with my
family, I did not want to pressure myself. A while later, I was pulled
in to become a political secretary, which I had no experience in. And
then after that, I was asked to stand to become an MP. It was a real
shock to me actually, and something totally out of my plans.
What do you hope for Malaysia?
I want to see a more peaceful Malaysia. Look at Parliament. It is not
too bad now, but in the first three months when I first came in, I
almost gave up. Because this is not my culture — fighting, arguing,
shouting. In fact, if you observe the Sarawakians in Parliament, we do
not shout. To us and to me, it does not do us any good.
At first we were criticised, even by the [deputy speaker] (Datuk Dr Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar),
that we did not speak up. But who said so? We were speaking, but not in
that tone, not that way. However, during recent proceedings, it was the
speaker himself again who gave credit to us. He said, “I’m glad that
you Sarawakians always kept cool and did not participate, or it would
have worsened the situation.”
I want to see men and women moving forward, instead of talking about
the past. I want to see people become more advanced in their thinking,
and realise that we don’t have to kill each other in order to reach
somewhere.
With her mother (left) and other relatives during her wedding
ceremony in Kuching. She wore several different traditional
dresses that day, including this kimono
As in the debates on race and religion?
Like it or not, we have sentimental values as Malay or Chinese
[Malaysians] for example, but that does not make us different from [one
another].
It spoils the whole country, the whole nation, when we talk about racial and religious issues. On the “Allah” issue,
for example, Sarawak did not comment on it. I led the hymns for
Christian songs in my school and I treated it as a singing activity.
That is you and this is us, and it doesn’t turn me into a Christian.
There is a difference in how we handle things in Sarawak. Once, I
said in Parliament: “We don’t want anyone from outside Sarawak to come
and teach us about harmony or peace or living in unity!” I think we are
the ones who can become the model, for we are the ones who have been
living in a very peaceful surrounding. - The Nut Graph, 6/5/2010, Malay? Chinese? Just Nancy!
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
More than a month with no HR Commissioners - Najib appoint good fearless persons who will uphold human rights without fear or favour
When Malaysians needed the Human Rights Commission(SUHAKAM), Najib's Barisan Nasional-UMNO government saw fit to ensure that there will be no HR Commissioners when so many rights to a free and fair election were allegedly being violated. Yes, as of 25th April, no HR Commissioners - why could the term of the old HR Commissioners be extended, or a new batch appointed to ensure that Malaysians will still have SUHAKAM to be yet another avenue where persons in Malaysia to go to complaint about rights violations.
The last batch of SUHAKAM HR Commissioners did fare well taking up a lot of issues, and promptly making necessary statements on issues of human rights including the freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, police brutality, etc ... most like was a 'thorn in Najib's back' - unlike many previous batches of HR Commissioners, filled with a majority of 'fearful', passive persons sufficient to ensure that they never came out much against the government and/or actions of public servants...In the last batch, being of much smaller number, there were fortunately many who truly were 'human rights defenders', who were able to ensure that SUHAKAM behaved not like a 'government entity' but more like a National Human Rights Institution. The result was that more and more persons lodged complaints believing that there is hope...not just a futile exercise of complaining to 'toothless' tigers.
I would not be surprised if Najib now appoints a bunch of more passive...'less brave', less true HR Defnders as HR Commissioners - and SUHAKAM may once again end up being a 'toothless', pro-government body - and human rights once again is forgoten.
My hope, though, is that Najib and this BN government does the needful and appoint true HR Defenders to be HR Commissioners... persons with a history of upholding the cause of justice and human rights without fear or favour...and this should be done soonest...
The BN government, sadly have been eroding democratic space....freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
The Peaceful Assembly Act, as we all see now, is most draconian and erodes away the right to peaceful assembly even further.... Now, the need for 10 days notice(when people have something to express, it certainly is done immediately - not after 10 days). Then, there is that additional requirement of getting explicit permission from the people that own/control the place where the assembly is to be held. In 1998, the REFORMASI protest/s in KL really did not have any 'organisers' - now, the new Act requires some person to 'organize' it, when in reality many peaceful assembly are impromptu response of the people with really no 'organisers' per se. Word goes around - and people gather and protest...
There has been so much more erosion of rights and freedoms during the BN-UMNO rule of Malaysia, and I need not elaborate for we all know this.
Now, what we need to do is to call Najib to immediately appoint SUHAKAM HR Commissioners and make sure they are people with a history of standing for Human Rights, not a bunch of fearful 'yes-persons' who would be very slow to act against the government, the police, etc....
See also:- No SUHAKAM HR Commissioners since 25th April when the term of the 2010-2013 Commissioners expired
Wednesday May 22, 2013
79 complaints lodged but zero Suhakam commissioners
By SHAILA KOSHY
koshy@thestar.com.my
KUALA LUMPUR: The number of complaints lodged with Suhakam is piling up but no inquiries can be held as Suhakam is still without commissioners.Suhakam secretary Rodziah Abdul said the Complaints and Inquiries Division had received 79 complaints between April 26 and May 20.Of the 79, 59 pertained to the 13th general election and the remaining 20 were split up as follows – freedom of expression (1), education (2), migrant workers (2), unrelated to infringement of human rights (10), and others (5).“The operational machinery of Suhakam continues even without the commissioners, including communicating with the agencies involved,” said Rodziah in an interview.“However, only commissioners can decide whether an inquiry is necessary as they are the governing body of Suhakam.”Of the 59 complaints on GE13, she said 22 related to indelible ink.“We will communicate with the Election Commission after we have assessed whether there are merits to the complaints.”Asked whether commissioners could be expected soon, she replied: “To date, we haven’t been informed about any new appointments or re-appointments.”It has been 26 days since chairman Tan Sri Hasmy Agam and six commissioners ended their three-year tenure on April 25.This is the second time Suhakam has been left without commissioners.The last time, there was a 45-day gap between the leaving of the Suhakam team led by Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman on April 23, 2010, and the appointment of the team led by Hasmy.While the appointments are made by the Prime Minister under the Suhakam Act, he does so from a list of candidates proposed by the Suhakam Selection Committee chaired by Chief Secretary Datuk Seri Dr Ali Hamsa.It is understood that the committee has met twice and shortlisted candidates for the Prime Minister to consider.- Star, 22/5/2013, 79 complaints lodged but zero Suhakam commissioners
Dharmendran - dead in police custody - classified as murder - but apparently still no police officer arrested..
"I [N Surendran] have been allowed to view Dharmendran's body with lawyer Latheefa Koya and the family members of the deceased after the pathologist had allowed us to view it at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL) mortuary."
"There were physical evidence of beatings and torture to the front of his thighs, and at the back of his body, there were beating marks on his back (severe to the point that) it had swelled up.
"The ears are stapled and there are staples left intact, which could be (clearly) seen on the ears. - Death in Police Custody - N Dharmendran (21 May 2013?)
There is really no reason whatsoever to beat up suspects. As of 2007, whatever confessions or things that are told by the suspect to the police cannot be used in cases to ensure conviction of the suspects. So why beat up suspects? There has just been too many deaths in police custody.
Death In Police Custody
A report by Bernama is attached below but I am not sure whether it is about N Dharmendran or a different case. For more about the Dharmendra case, visit MADPET Blog or just follow this link Death in Police Custody - N Dharmendran (21 May 2013?)
Things have moved on and it has been classified as 'murder'Man dies after breathing difficulties at lock-up
Autopsy done, ‘evidence points to murder’
The preliminary post-mortem findings reveal that N Dharmendran died of multiple blunt force trauma.PETALING JAYA: The preliminary post-mortem conducted at Hospital Kuala Lumpur has revealed that police detainee N Darmindran had died to severe blunt force trauma.
HKL pathologist Dr Siew Sheue Feng’s report, which was given to the deceased’s family last night, ruled out heart attack or asthma as the cause of death as claimed by the police.Darmindran, 32, an Indah Water employee, had been in police detention since May 11.Lawyer G Sivamalar, who accompanied the family to retrieve the post-mortem report, said that the pathologist had struck out all natural causes.“So far, the evidence points to murder, at least that would be a fair claim.“Now it’s all up to the investigating officer at Dang Wangi police station ASP Kamarul Rizal to give the final verdict,” she said.“The police can’t use the excuse that the injuries were caused during the fight Darmindran was involved in on May 11 as the pathologist confirmed that the injuries were ‘fresh’,” she added.After speaking to the pathologist, Sivamalar also said that Darmindran’s back and buttocks were also severely injured along with another two staples found on his legs.“The pathologist said that that his back and buttocks were severely injured, also his thighs and legs were badly swollen due to injuries,” said Sivamalar.“On top of that, they found another two staples – one on each ankle. Four staples were found on the body of the deceased, including the two on his ears,” she added.Mock funeral at IPK KLSivamalar said that the family was willing to fight till the end in order to seek justice for Darmindran.“The family is staying strong, they want the police to be honest and for once provide justice for the people,” she said.“They want Darmindran’s case to be the last of its kind and hoped that police brutality would cease for good,” she added.The family’s lawyers, who include PKR MP for Padang Serai, N Surendran and PKR lawyer Latheefa Koya would discuss further with the family of Darmindran on their next plan of action.The funeral would be held today at Darmindran’s residence in Taman Mulia, Bandar Tun Razak in Cheras.The family would also be holding a mock funeral outside the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters, where the deceased was detained.Following the post-mortem report, the police have reclassified the probe as a murder investigation. - FMT News, 23/5/2013, Autopsy done, ‘evidence points to murder’
Sunday May 26, 2013
Leave no stone unturned in latest death in lock-up case
The Star Says
THE new IGP surely isn't having it easy. Just days into his appointment, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar has had his hands full dealing with Opposition rallies, arrests of people for sedition and cracking down on gun violence.
But perhaps the most difficult and sensitive matter before him is the death of yet another police detainee.
Although police initially said N. Dharmendran died from “breathing difficulties”, a post-mortem revealed he died from “multiple blunt force trauma”. Bluntly put, he was most likely beaten to death and the case has swiftly been reclassified as murder.
City police chief Deputy Comm Datuk Mohmad Salleh also announced the setting up of a task force to investigate.
So far, the police have responded to this new crisis quite well. Perhaps they have learned from the public relations nightmare involving the 2009 death of A. Kugan in the Subang Jaya police station.
In that case, public anger was fanned by conflicting reports from two post-mortems on the cause of death of the suspected car thief. But photos of Kugan's body with incriminating wounds and bruises went viral, leading to widespread belief of police brutality. Eventually, police constable V. Navindran was charged and convicted of causing hurt to Kugan.
Navindran subsequently claimed he was made the scapegoat. Through the whole messy case, the police image took a severe beating as accusations of cover-up and brutality and torture being commonplace in lock-ups swirled.
Kugan's death at the hands of the police remains an angry, sore point with the public, especially the Indian community. If Dharmendran's death is not handled properly and satisfactorily, it could explode with similarly nasty consequences.
Dharmendran, 32, was detained on May 12 along with three others after they were suspected to have been involved in a shooting case in Bandar Tun Razak two weeks earlier.
DCP Mohamad, while saying Dharmendran might have been murdered while in custody at the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters, declined to elaborate on the nature of the deceased's injuries.
He also urged the public not to speculate and to allow the police time to conduct a full investigation.
The problem is people will speculate as long as police continue to withhold information like the deceased's injuries. It has already been widely reported that there were signs of bruises and staple marks on his body.
Granted, the police have promised to investigate, but it is perhaps better for an independent body to do so. This will give the public confidence that there is transparency and no cover-up.
What Khalid must also do immediately is to review the protocol on how detainees are interrogated and treated. Again, how this is conducted will also affect public perception of the force.
It may also be timely for him to consider supporting the implementation of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission as proposed by the royal commission of inquiry in the police in 2007.
A young father has been murdered. His family and the public are demanding answers. No stone must be left unturned, even if it means revealing ugly truths, so that Dharmendran's murderers can be brought to justice and safeguards are in place to prevent custody deaths from happening again.- Star, 26/5/2013, Leave no stone unturned in latest death in lock-up case
But, I believe, still no police officer has been arrested.....only saw reports about the wife being called in for investigations...Tell us how many witnesses have been investigated. What has happened to the suspected police personnel? Have they been suspended at the very least?
Now, if the victim was tortured to death by the police, then we hope that criminal action [not some disciplinary action] be taken against all the police officers involved in physically torturing the victim, all police officers that 'knew about it' and did nothing - for they should also be punished as 'accomplices'.
The Officer in Charge of the said police station, if he is a person of honour, should immediately tender his resignation for his gross failings as OIC that has resulted in the torture and 'murder' of a suspect...What do you think?
Have the Prime Minister, the Home Minister and/or the IGP visited the family of Dharmendran to extend at the very least their condolence - for after all the death happened in the custody of the police...or they have just not bothered.
The SUHAKAM also cannot act - because there are no Human Rights Commissioners since April 25th...that is if one is wondering why SUHAKAM has not made a statement with regard this case....
Friday, May 24, 2013
Recent Arrests and Actions by the Authorities are a Closing of Democratic Space - Malaysian Bar
Press Release
Recent Arrests and Actions by the Authorities are a Closing of Democratic Space
The Malaysian Bar is appalled by the recent arrests of several
individuals pursuant to the Sedition Act 1948. The Sedition Act, as
with its predecessor the Sedition Ordinance, was conceived and designed
by a colonial government to stifle fundamental rights and liberties,
oppress the rakyat and deny them democratic space. Its sole purpose was
to suppress and persecute the citizenry. The Sedition Act has no place
in our modern democratic society and should have been discarded at
Merdeka. The time for it to be dumped into the dustbin of history is
long overdue.
It has been reported that Adam Adli, Tian Chua, Tamrin Ghafar and
Haris Ibrahim were arrested for purportedly making seditious statements
at a forum held on 13 May 2013. The continued use of the Sedition Act
by the authorities directly contradicts the promise made less than a
year ago by Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak in July
2012, that the 64-year-old law will be repealed and replaced in 2013 by a
National Harmony Act. This was a clear admission and recognition by
the Government that the Sedition Act was an anachronistic and repressive
colonial law. The Prime Minister further stated that the new law will
not prevent members of the public from criticising the government,
quoting John Locke who said, “…the end of law is not to abolish or
restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom.”
The decision to arrest Adam Adli, Tian Chua, Tamrin Ghafar and Haris
Ibrahim is therefore an unacceptable repudiation of the promise made by
the Prime Minister. It further raises questions over the Government’s
sincerity in pursuing transformation and greater civil liberties through
legislative reforms.
The test of a genuine democracy is to allow words to be said even
when we disagree with them. As much as one may not agree with the calls
for public demonstrations to oppose the Government and question its
electoral legitimacy, citizens nevertheless have a fundamental right to
express themselves in such manner so long as they do so peacefully and
there is no call for the use of violence. The authorities would be
wrong to assume that a call to overthrow the government must necessarily
be only by violent means. Time and again, the rakyat have shown that
they can gather in public assembly in large numbers, yet peacefully. It
is therefore unjustifiable and premature to preempt the exercise of
fundamental rights and freedoms with assumptions or postulations of the
use of violence. As much as dissent and opposition may be unpalatable,
these must not be criminalised and silenced, but countered with open and
healthy debate, reforms and concrete changes.
The Malaysian Bar is equally troubled by the arrest of 18 persons
holding a peaceful candlelight vigil outside the Jinjang Police
Detention Centre on 22 May 2013. The Malaysian Bar is disappointed that
the police have said that they can no longer tolerate such candlelight
vigils. It is not the role of the police to tolerate or otherwise, but
it is their duty to facilitate the exercise of democratic freedoms. The
police must bring themselves into the 21st century and cease
suppressing the rights of the rakyat. The Malaysian Bar is concerned
that these incidents may also signal a lurch towards greater
authoritarianism, fascism and persecution of those whose viewpoints
differ from those of the Government. It feeds an already widely held
belief that there is an unhealthy symbiotic relationship between the
police on the one hand, and Government on the other. In simple terms,
“You protect me, I defend you”.
This may be seen from the failure of the authorities to take similar
action in other obvious cases that more clearly evidence utterances and
publications exhibiting seditious tendencies. It is inexplicable that
there has been no similar prosecution against the likes of:
(a) Ibrahim Ali, for allegedly inciting the burning of Malay language bibles;
(b) Ridhuan Tee Abdullah and Zulkifli Noordin, for allegedly disparaging the Hindu religion and insulting adherents of the religion;
(c) The racial rhetoric of the Prime Minister in his allegation of a “Chinese tsunami”, followed by the Utusan Malaysia article entitled “Apa lagi orang Cina mahu?”; and
(d) Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah, a former Court of Appeal judge, for allegedly accusing a racial group of treason and warning of retribution by another racial group.
While
the Malaysian Bar is not advocating the use of the Sedition Act against
these individuals, we abhor the discrepancies in treatment and the
selective prosecution by the authorities in this regard. Further, the
police should not have made an application for the remand of Tian Chua,
Tamrin Ghafar and Haris Ibrahim, because it was an abuse of the process
of the law. Given that the alleged incident occurred 11 days ago, the
police should already have evidence of what was allegedly said. We
commend the Magistrate for having refused the application for remand.
The Malaysian Bar strongly urges the authorities to withdraw the
charge against Adam Adli, and not to prosecute Tian Chua, Tamrin Ghafar,
Haris Ibrahim and the 18 individuals arrested at the candlelight vigil.
We urge them to respect the freedom of speech and assembly as
enshrined in the Federal Constitution. The Malaysian Bar also urges the
Government to resist the temptation to quell dissenting voices by
resorting to archaic and oppressive legislation. Otherwise, the promise
of freedoms made by the Prime Minister will be nothing more than a mere
platitude.
The Malaysian Bar deplores the seizure of copies of Harakah, Suara Keadilan and The Rocket,
the newspapers of political parties PAS, PKR and DAP, respectively. We
reiterate that the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 should be
abolished. The condition imposed by the authorities on these three
publications — prohibiting their sale and distribution to members of the
public at large — is unconstitutional, as it breaches the right of the
publishers to the freedom of expression. It is also a breach of the
constitutional rights of the public to receive such information.
The recent arrests, prosecutions and confiscations by the authorities
are manifestations of regressive and undemocratic conduct. The current
environment is not reflective of a government aspiring to achieve
world-class democracy. Rather than bringing about a society that is at
ease with itself, it is instead creating an environment of grave
concern.
The Malaysian Bar calls upon the newly elected Government to
demonstrate its commitment to a continuing course of transformation and
democratic reforms, not by rhetoric alone but by sincere and genuine
action.
To promote greater democracy, the Government should welcome
diversity of opinion, not close democratic space.
Christopher Leong
President
Malaysian Bar
24 May 2013
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Is it the royalty or some elements in PR behind this 'crisis' about Exco appointments in Selangor?
I am a bit concerned about what is happening in Selangor with the Exco list. It is a bit hard to believe that it is because of HRH Sultan of Selangor, that seem to be blamed now, as being the party exerting 'pressure' with regard the composition of the State Exco. What if HRH Sultan said he preferred someone from UMNO as the Menteri Besar? What if HRH Sultan said that he wanted persons from the BN in the State Exco?
Personally, I do not believe that HRH Sultan of Selangor is the one exerting such pressure in Selangor, it may be just some elements within the Pakatan Rakyat itself. If the later is what is happening, many Malaysians may want to re-think their preference for Pakatan Rakyat - now seen to be as divisive (or even worse than the BN) when ethnicity and religion becomes a bigger concern than the best 'Malaysian' with the required ability, capacity and skills to serve the people. [I never heard of any Sultan's preferences with regard the Exco composition when BN ruled..., or was it there and we were not told...]
Personally, I do not believe that HRH Sultan of Selangor is the one exerting such pressure in Selangor, it may be just some elements within the Pakatan Rakyat itself. If the later is what is happening, many Malaysians may want to re-think their preference for Pakatan Rakyat - now seen to be as divisive (or even worse than the BN) when ethnicity and religion becomes a bigger concern than the best 'Malaysian' with the required ability, capacity and skills to serve the people. [I never heard of any Sultan's preferences with regard the Exco composition when BN ruled..., or was it there and we were not told...]
The delay in finalising the Selangor state executive council list is to comply with the Selangor Sultan's request to change the racial composition of the line-up, says Selangor PAS deputy commissioner Khalid Samad.
"We understand that his royal highness wants to see an exco made up of six Malays and four non-Malays.
"This is different from the exco in 2008, which was made up of five Malays and five non-Malays," Khalid, the MP for Shah Alam, said in a blog posting yesterday.
He explained that this was to match the increase in Malay majority seats won by Pakatan Rakyat in the 13th general election. - Malaysiakini, 21/5/2013, Exco list held up to accommodate S'gor sultan
With reference to this report, I have concerns.
First concern, is the word '...understand that his royal...' - Where is this understanding coming from? I do not recall seeing any statement made by HRH Sultan of Selangor.
First concern, is the word '...understand that his royal...' - Where is this understanding coming from? I do not recall seeing any statement made by HRH Sultan of Selangor.
Second, the changes of ethnic/religious composition certainly should not have anything to do with Pakatan winning more Malay majority seats for after all we are talking about the governance of Selangor State and its people - and how many Malay majority seats won is a reason more likely being raised by elements in Pakatan Rakyat - not HRH Sultan of Selangor who reasonably would be concerned for all people in Selangor, and not how many Malay majority seats won by PR. As such, this reasoning is absurd. The people voted in their reps, and they did not consider ethnicity, religion, gender... these factors are arguments raised by political parties or potential candidates when lobbying to be chosen as candidates or party seats during elections.{Furthermore, if we were to look at popular ethnic support, it may very well paint a different picture...}.
DAP 15, PAS 15 and PKR 14 - still they agreed to an MB from PKR, and I hope it was because he was the best available candidate for the MB position.
Remember restrictions based on ethnicity and/or religion is a problem for multiracial parties like PKR and DAP, and also PAS now since they too are fielding non-Muslim candidates...moving towards becoming a truly Malaysian party.
I hope that Pakatan Rakyat would stand up against all these ethnic/religious considerations. Remember that you have the people's mandate...and do not cow down to such pressures based on ethnicity and religion...or 'Party shares'.
Wherever Pakatan won, it matters not whether the candidate came from PAS, PKR or DAP, or was a Malay, Chinese, Indian, Sri Lankan, Thai, Iban, Kadazan... the Pakatan Rakyat would have still won no matter who the candidate. People voted for the PR...not so much the candidates. [Of course, if it was an incumbent, then performance during the last tenure would also be considered by the voters..]
DAP 15, PAS 15 and PKR 14 - still they agreed to an MB from PKR, and I hope it was because he was the best available candidate for the MB position.
Remember restrictions based on ethnicity and/or religion is a problem for multiracial parties like PKR and DAP, and also PAS now since they too are fielding non-Muslim candidates...moving towards becoming a truly Malaysian party.
I hope that Pakatan Rakyat would stand up against all these ethnic/religious considerations. Remember that you have the people's mandate...and do not cow down to such pressures based on ethnicity and religion...or 'Party shares'.
Wherever Pakatan won, it matters not whether the candidate came from PAS, PKR or DAP, or was a Malay, Chinese, Indian, Sri Lankan, Thai, Iban, Kadazan... the Pakatan Rakyat would have still won no matter who the candidate. People voted for the PR...not so much the candidates. [Of course, if it was an incumbent, then performance during the last tenure would also be considered by the voters..]
I believe that the composition of the State cabinet(State Executive Council) should be merely on the consideration of the best person available for the portfolio without consideration about which party, ethnicity, religion, gender,...This would be best for the people.
But alas, Pakatan Rakyat also, seems to be like the BN, bickering about this and that. First, there was bickering about the seats...now, the number of Exco positions? We had the PKR reps fighting about the MB position and candidate...See also
But alas, Pakatan Rakyat also, seems to be like the BN, bickering about this and that. First, there was bickering about the seats...now, the number of Exco positions? We had the PKR reps fighting about the MB position and candidate...See also
Selangor ADUNs - serve the people - and do not be distracted by desires for personal enrichment, power, etc...
We have to remember that the Pakatan Rakyat has the two third majority in Selangor, and that means that there should be no problem to now amend the Selangor Constitution, to bring in in line with the Federal Constitution. This would mean removing the ethnic and religious condition when it comes to appointing the Menteri Besar - making the Menteri Besar(as is the case with the Prime Minister of Malaysia) a member of the Legislative Assembly who ...command the confidence of the majority of the
members of the Assembly. Surely Malaysians would want the best person who enjoys the confidence of the majority appointed as the Menteri Besar irrespective of gender, ethnicity and/or religion, and for the chosen Menteri Besar to then chose the best of the elected representatives as members of his/her cabinet(State Executive Council). Would not a person like Lim Guan Eng make a good Menteri Besar of Selangor?
51 Appointment of Menteri Besar [LAWS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SELANGOR, 1959]
(1) His Highness shall appoint by Instrument under His Sign Manual and the State Seal, a Menteri Besar, in accordance with paragraph (a) of Clause (2) of Article 53.
(1A) His Royal Highness shall appoint by Instrument under His Sign Manual and the State Seal a Deputy Menteri Besar in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (c) of Clause (2) of Article 53.
(2) Subject to the provision of Clause (4) of Article 53 no person shall be appointed to be Menteri Besar unless he is of the Malay Race and professes the Muslim Religion.
Article 51(2) would exclude also Muslims of all other ethnicities in Malaysia, including other Bumiputra Muslims. An Orang Asli also could not be the MB. This provision certainly need to be repealed.
Yes, Pakatan Rakyat has the ability and the capacity to make the needful amendments of the Selangor Constitution - a failure to do so in this term would show us a glimpse of the true nature of Pakatan Rakyat...53 The Executive Council
(1) His Highness shall appoint a Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan to be called in English the State Executive Council.
(2) The State Executive Council shall be appointed as follows, that is to say-
(a) His Highness shall first appoint as Menteri Besar to preside over the State Executive Council, a member of the Legislative Assembly who in His judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assembly;
(b) He shall on the advice of the Menteri Besar appoint not more than ten nor less than four other members from among the members of the Legislative Assembly; and
(c) He shall, if the Menteri Besar so advises, appoint a member of the State Executive Council to be the Deputy Menteri Besar who shall assist the Menteri Besar in the exercise of his powers, the performance of his duties and the carrying out of his functions, and on the directions of the Menteri Besar, he shall exercise such powers, perform such duties and carry out such functions of the Menteri Besar,...
98 Amendments of the Constitution
(1) The following provisions of this Article shall have effect with respect to the amendments of this Constitution.
(2) The provisions of the First Part of this Constitution except Articles 3 and 38 (b) may be amended by His Highness by proclamation issued with the advice and concurrence of the Dewan di-Raja established under Article 23 but may not be amended by the State Legislature or by any other means.
(3) The provisions of Article 38 (b) and Articles 47, 48 and 93 may, subject to Clause (5), be amended by Bills passed by the Legislative Assembly and approved by the Dewan di-Raja established under Article 23 and assented to by His Highness, but may not be amended by any other means.
(4) The provisions of the Second Part except Articles 47, 48 and 93 and the provisions of Articles 1, 2 and 3 may, subject to Clause (5), be amended by an enactment of the State Legislature but may not be amended by any other means.
(5) A Bill for making an amendment to this Constitution shall not be passed by the Legislative Assembly unless it has been supported on Second and Third Readings by the votes of not less than two thirds of the total number of members thereof.
(5A) The following amendments are excepted from the provisions of Clause (5), that is to say-
(a) any amendment to the definition of the territory of the State which is made in consequence of the passing of a law altering the boundaries of the State under Article 2 of the Federal Constitution to which the Legislative Assembly and the Conference of Rulers have consented under the said Article; and(6) In this Article "amendment" includes addition and repeal.
(b) any amendment the effect of which is to bring this Constitution into accord with any of the provisions of the Eighth Schedule to the Federal Constitution, but only if it is made after the Legislative Assembly has been elected in accordance with Article 62.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
