Malaysians are now paying the price for what Tun Mahathir did to this country but not surprisingly, he appears to be quite forgetful these days. He only remembers the good times under his regime.

Edmund Bon Tai Soon

Edmund Bon Tai Soon is the chairperson of the Bar Council’s Human Rights Committee and a secretariat member of human rights organisation Suaram. Face to Face gets the opinion of this young lawyer in another no holds barred interview.

*The following are my personal views and do not necessarily represent that of the Bar Council.*

1.    Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Let’s get straight into the issues. Many Muslim/Malay groups have no sympathy for MP Theresa Kok as evidenced by recent events reported in the Malay broadsheets. She has played the race card before…Thus, care to comment on her recent ISA release?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : Of course, I welcome her release. She should not have been detained in the first place. It was not very smart of the Government to detain her particularly when she won with the highest majority of votes. She is a dedicated MP and the people love her. What was the Government thinking? It was a crazy move. But when the Government tries to be seen championing an agenda based on racial lines, it becomes blinded to such considerations.

The bigger picture is that it is fundamentally wrong to detain a person without trial, and the ISA should be repealed. Everyone in Kamunting should be released immediately or prosecuted before a court of law if they are alleged to have committed a crime.  The detentions of Teresa, Tan and RPK merely confirm what civil society has feared all along. The Government is inept in managing popular dissent and race relations. Many people have also told me that these detentions are influencing foreign investors. They are repelled by what is happening and keeping their money in their pockets. Who is the real threat to our national economy?

2.   Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: What about the detention of Raja Petra Kamaruddin (RPK) and popular blogger Sheih Kickdefella (since released)?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : The Government cannot try to control the internet. Don’t try to do the impossible. You close down one site, another ten will spring up. You lock up one blogger, the entire blogging community including Tun Mahathir gets angry. Why wage this type of battle? Deal with the arguments raised, and engage them on the internet. Counter critical speech with more speech. Show why some of the comments you are not happy about are illogical or nonsensical. But surely allow cyberspace to be as free as possible.

3.    Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: A handful of bloggers are getting together to fight against the arrests of RPK and others. There appears to be a measure of unity against this crackdown.  What about the lawyers?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon: Not all bloggers and lawyers think alike. There are many different views in the blogosphere and the legal fraternity. It is a sign of a maturing democracy that we can talk about stuff usually deemed sensitive freely on the net.

The majority of lawyers see the injustices which are going on and feel that we need to do something about it - whether they are sympathisers of BN or PR. Many want to go to the streets again, and I have received many strongly worded statements asking why the Bar is not going out to protest. Do we want to do it? Should we do it?

Lawyers look at the issues and we are issue-centric. That’s why you see so many rising up. It is not something new for the Bar. Our tradition has always been to fight injustice and remedy problems through the legal and judicial process.

4. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: The Bar Council is perceived to be anti-Islam and     pro non-Malay interest. Comment?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : The Malaysian Bar is made up of more than 12,600 lawyers from the Peninsular. About 39% are Malays, 36% Chinese, 23% Indians and 1-2% of other ethnic groups. We have 36 elected members to the Bar Council from the whole country. There is a balanced mix of different ethnic groups and religions. I cannot understand it when people say we are anti-Islam and pro-non Malays. It is deceit of the highest kind. We always look at the problems faced by society then decide a position to adopt based on human rights or humanitarian considerations, and we advocate it fearlessly. This is based on thorough research, and continuous discourse and arguments.

For example, the ISA which we oppose on principle. We have been visiting and representing detainees held in Kamunting for being JI members, and they are as pro-Islam as you can ever get. They can recite the Quran and even preach to the religious officers who come to the camp and try to talk about Islam with them! Would we do it if we were anti-Islam? Is the Government anti-Islam when they detain Muslims?

We have buka puasa events which I believe are the only religious events on our calendar. We have a Syariah Law Committee and Islamic Finance Committee specially to cater for the needs of those who require our assistance and expertise on these matters. We even have a Bahasa Melayu Committee to increase the use of and improve the standard of our national language.

Tell me one instance where we have attacked any ethnic group or religion. When issues in play in the public realm enact suffering on Malaysians, we are duty-bound to speak out and try to stop the suffering. We can justify every statement we have made. Those who attack us in the name of race or religion are the ones who should be questioned. Is there a hidden agenda? 

It is disheartening to hear these allegations against us. But I am really glad that more and more Muslims are speaking out against these attacks. Some usually apathetic members have had enough of this. You will see on our website Malay and Muslim members hitting out strongly at for example, Utusan Malaysia and Malay political leaders as they try to spin the Bar as being anti-Islam and anti-Malay.

The Bar will keep fighting back and correct the misperception. Those who make these allegations should engage us in a debate and support their stand. I am sure they won’t be able to.

Look at our membership on Council. Are you saying that our former Presidents Raja Aziz Addruse, Zainur Zakaria, Hendon Mohamed, Sulaiman Abdullah and Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari are anti-Islam? Are you saying that the current crop of Council members such as Yasmeen Shariff, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, Sukri Mohamed, Shafee Abdullah, Syed Azimal Amir and Anuwar Mohd are also anti-Islam? An attack on the Bar Council is an attack on each of the 36 members of the Council, and on the lawyers we represent.

5.     Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Lee Kuan Yew slammed the Singapore Law Society and diminished its role. Francis Seow – its Past President was eventually detained under the Internal Security Act in a face-off with the government. Today, the Singapore Law Society does not delve into political nor sensitive issues these days. Can’t say the same for the Malaysian Bar Council that seems to be playing politics. Comment?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : The Council does not play politics in the sense of political partisanship. The Bar is always willing to work with the Government, Opposition and others to achieve common aims. As I said before, those who accuse the Bar of political partisanship should justify their stand. The Government and the politicians who fear what we can do and dislike what we say do not address our arguments. It’s far simpler for them to take the populist approach and brand us as being racist, anti-Islam and political. But I don’t think these attacks are working very well any longer. People have matured.

I think part of the problem stems from a misunderstanding of the Bar’s role and the place politics in our lives. We should not confuse political causes with supporting political parties. The aim of politics is to promote the foundation of a good life and its superior end is freedom. Political causes attempt to bring about change by balancing the power equation between the Government and citizens. Agitating for an improvement in the administration of justice, legal reform and human rights is a political cause. Those who advocate these causes do not necessarily become political parties.

Secondly, politics affects every person’s life. Let us not pretend that lawyers and the profession are immune from politics and it effect on our lives and work.
 
So while the Bar always remains neutral in so far as political partisanship is concerned, it cannot be indifferent to issues such as Executive attacks on the rule of law and rights abuses. It just so happens that governments are the biggest violators of human rights, and we have to speak out on these matters. We cannot be quiet. 

6. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: There are grouses that the Bar Council is not doing much for its members and have instead concentrated its efforts on other things. What would you say in defence?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : There is so much that the Bar Council is continuously doing to improve the welfare of lawyers. We just don’t boast about it. There are many who ask us to do more and we try. Members should keep giving constructive recommendations and we always do our best to implement them where possible. The problem is that our resources are stretched in terms of funds and human power, and we encourage members to be part of our 34 committees to effect faster and greater changes.

Members also have the ability to change the Council by electing those who will work in their best interests. If they are not happy, members should exercise their right to vote wisely. Because the Bar Council is only seen and heard on public interest issues frequently, people forget that the Council meets every month with stacks and stacks of documents to consider and make decisions in the interests of the members. Members don’t see this enough.

I understand that our duty is to create better conditions both within the Bar and outside of it for lawyers and the rule of law to prosper, and we are always working towards this.  When the Council speaks about the administration of justice and law reform, surely these issues are equally important to ensure our members are able to practice comfortably and independently in a professional setting where public confidence in our system is high. Isn’t this something we all want?

7.  Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: The definition of human right’s taken from  western/individual centric intellection as opposed to the rights of the many over the individual is not accepted in the rest of the world. What do you believe in? 

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : Should a person who comes from Asia be given less or different rights than a person from Europe? Do human rights depend on where you stay on the globe? Detention without trial in Guantanamo surely is as abhorrent as detention without trial in Kamunting is it not? This argument of cultural relativism cannot be sustained. The strongest proponents of the ‘Asian values’ perspective - Tun Mahathir and Lee Kuan     Yew - have tried to use this rhetoric to cover their misuse and abuse of power.

People aren’t fooled by this anymore. Many Arab states have accepted international rights norms such as evidenced by the Arab Charter on Human Rights in 2004.

Malaysia is a member of the UN, and we sit on the UN Human Rights Council. We are bound by international human rights norms and standards. There are no two ways about it. If we want to be part of this international order, we need to subscribe to the legal principles of the order and actually practice them. All Malaysians have a legitimate expectation that the Government will adhere to principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  

8.    Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: The Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Identification Bill 2008 currently undergoing it’s second reading in Parliament has come under much flack. What’s your stand and tell us about some of these alleged flaws in the said Bill?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : Too many to name. The Human Rights Committee have highlighted many already. Many MPs agree with our views. The intention of the Bill may be good but it comes at a time when our Judiciary and law enforcement agencies are weak. There are justified concerns about their independence and accountability. Not many trust what they hear or read about these institutions, no matter how noble some of the public statements made may sound. There is a danger that the DNA law will be used to lynch the innocent while the hands of the courts are tied.

9. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: It’s clear now that Anwar Ibrahim’s so-called crossover to topple the government has come to naught. Many question his credibility and sincerity. Comment?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : Many people have asked why there has been no change in Government. I don’t know why. But perhaps the people should have voted at the last elections to change the Government. Why did this not happen?

Either way, I understand that the people’s resentment of the present Government is so deep today and its runs across ethnic and religious lines. Many are excited because this is the first time that a change may really happen after 51 years. We cannot blame the people for feeling this way, but as lawyers, we realise that it is not so easy to change the Government. The constitutional and legal process must take its course and be exhausted. If it really happens, it must be a peaceful transition. The monarchy and the military must be comfortable with it.

10. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Pakatan Rakyat is demanding for an ‘emergency session’ to be convened at Parliament to force a no-confidence motion against the PM. What’s the merit in this move?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : It is up to the PM. Wouldn’t it be an avenue to end the political uncertainties for the benefit of the nation?

11. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Speculation is rife about the Prime Minister under pressure from many quarters to resign. What’s your take?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : The PM is probably the best Opposition leader the country has seen. There are many reasons why things happen, and it is not down to only one factor.

12. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: It appears, but may not necessarily be the case that  Najib Razak is on the ascent to the PM’s hot seat. Opinion?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : This is internal to UMNO. Our nation needs to become more civilised quickly. Opportunities are always given to new leaders of UMNO and the BN to step up to the plate. In 2004, the PM had a huge mandate and a huge support. What has happened since? Are we to be taken for another long ride again?

13. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Can UMNO successfully restructure itself?   

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : I don’t know. I just believe that UMNO does not speak for the majority of the Malays anymore, especially the poor and needy ones.

14. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: The Wall Street Journal (18th September 2008, Pak Lah’s Economic Reckoning) pronounced a damning report on the state of Malaysia's economy and gave the thumbs down on PM’s political report card. What’s your assessment?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : There is no doubt that the political uncertainties here are affecting all of us and the economy. But who are the instigators? And who can solve the problems? The Bar has continually cautioned that the weakening of the rule of law and the degeneration of our institutions such as the Judiciary will be bad for business and competition. That is evident.

Malaysians are now paying the price for what Tun Mahathir did to this country but not surprisingly, he appears to be quite forgetful these days. He only remembers the good times under his regime. We should not delude ourselves into thinking as if all this is happening only because of March 8 or the current administration. Long-term but slow retrogressive measures taken to stifle civil liberties have allowed an authoritarian regime to reign, and today the dissatisfaction among the people is at its height. Unfortunately, it will probably get worse before the state of the nation gets better. 

15. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Any message for the Rakyat?

Edmund Bon Tai Soon : The people must realise the important role that they play in the political process. All the years of apathy and self-censorship has led us to this. The generations before us who kept returning a Government which has sought to keep us fearful for our lives must take some blame.

We must continue to fight abuses and injustice, and persevere.

Notes: Face to Face interviews are conducted by way of telephone unless otherwise stated.

Comments (19)

...
written by ahmadneil, September 25, 2008 11:38:37

We the new malays must stand up to this new challenge of the 21st century.We must not be like those NEP malays who depends on handouts.Lets keep the fire of change burning.Release our good muslim RPK now.

report abuse

disagree 1

agree 141

...
written by krising1, September 25, 2008 11:51:31

Great interview! Great mind.

report abuse

disagree 2

agree 70

...
written by sjs, September 25, 2008 11:58:25

RELEASE RAJA PETRA KAMARUDIN
RELEASE OUR HERO FROM THE DUNGEON OF INHUMANITY


CORRUPTION AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL

A DOCTORAL THESIS ON MALAYSIAN CORRUPTION!

(Fellow Malaysians, I have removed the name of the doctor, with due respect to his current appointment)


CAHYA MATA SARAWAK!

Cahya Mata Sarawak, which means "light of Sarawak's eye," begun in 1974 under the name Cement Manufacturers Sarawak Bhd, the company originally produced Portland cement as a state-owned firm. Its transformation has been remarkable, according to a doctoral thesis submitted to the University of London.

"The rapid growth and transformation of CMS since the 1990s has been nothing short of phenomenal, and is due to two main factors, namely the privatisation and restructuring of CMS from a state-owned public-listed company into a private sector public-listed conglomerate owned by the Mahmud family, and the huge amount of state rents CMS secured for itself and its subsidiary companies from 1992 through political patronage," wrote the doctor.

The doctor's study tells the story in voluminous detail. Beginning in the early 1990s, Cement Manufacturers Sarawak Bhd, a state-owned company, bought major stakes in three highly profitable subsidiaries of the Sarawak Economic Development Commission - PPES Quarry, Steel Industries Sarawak and PCMS, for RM117.4 million, RM50 million of that in cash, the rest covered by 13.48 million shares.

For that, CMS got, in addition to the assets, RM30.94 million in cumulative retained profits, according to the company's annual reports. That money proved helpful, allowing CMS to acquire two other companies owned by the Taib Mahmuds, namely Syrakusa Sdn Bhd and Concordance Sdn Bhd, via cash and share swaps. This resulted in the "privatisation to the Mahmud family via a reverse takeover. Bank Utama, Sarawak Securities and Archipelago Shipping - all Mahmud family companies - were subsequently injected into CMS.

The CMS takeover also reflects the politics of New Economic Policy
privatisation exercises in Malaysia, which tend to favour hiving off
profitable public enterprises instead of loss-making ones to well-connected individuals in the private sector, the doctor claims. Apart from cultivating cronyism and promoting rent-seeking, such privatisations deprive the state sector of lucrative sources of income end up raising the tax burden of ordinary taxpayers, he writes.

During the privatisation and restructuring of CMS, numerous public-funded infrastructure projects also were channeled to CMS. These helped CMS maintain an extremely healthy cash flow and high annual turnover. They bolstered its restructuring efforts, hiked up the share price of CMS and helped CMS raise funds easily from banks and other money markets.

Lucrative monopoly

By 1996, the Mahmud family had consolidated the cement business, Bank Utama Sarawak Securities, and Archipelago Shipping, turning the firm, now named Cahya Mata Sarawak, from a publicly-owned cement producer into a private-sector diversified conglomerate involved in stock brokering, road construction, water, quarry operations, steel bar manufacturing, trading, cement production and investment holdings.

"Taib Mahmud's control over the levers of power and resources in Sarawak saw the SEDC (Sarawak Economic Development Commission) privatise profitable state enterprises to his family," the doctor wrote in his thesis.

"Similarly, his position of favour with the federal government meant that his family received various rents, principally a stockbroker licence (to Sarawak Securities) that became a lucrative monopoly, and waivers on mandatory general share offers. Taib Mahmud's powerful political position also meant that the companies linked to his family easily raised loans from the capital market."

Taib Mahmud's 26-year tenure as the chief minister of Sarawak also gave the company at least the appearance of having ready access to government power and favours during a time when the family company had a healthy cash flow and high annual turnover that drove up the share price. The company also got involved in numerous infrastructure projects.

"What is notable about these infrastructure projects is that most of them were secured via negotiated tender from the Sarawak government and its agencies without going through a process of competitive tenders," the doctor wrote.

"Not only were many public sector projects channeled towards CMS but CMS also actively undertook a process of seeking out profitable public sector jobs like the maintenance of federal and state ro*** by the Sarawak Public Works Department estimated at between RM300-RM500 million annually, and negotiated for their being transferred to CMS on a turnkey basis."

report abuse

disagree 1

agree 42

...
written by sjs, September 25, 2008 11:58:57

Bakun Dam

The construction of the dam, which had been under development in fits and starts since the 1960s, began to mesh with Cahya Mata's capabilities in 1994, when construction began, led by a privatised joint-venture consortium called the Bakun Hydroelectric Corporation comprised of Ekran Bhd, the national power company Tenaga Nasional Bhd, the government of Sarawak, Sarawak Electricity Supply Corporation (Sesco) and Malaysian Mining Corporation Bhd (MMC).

The dam project itself is part of a grandiose plan to meet electricity demand in peninsular Malaysia, nearly 700km away, via a high voltage direct current cable, since the entire island of Borneo, where the dam is situated, is unlikely to be able to use the amount of electricity it is projected to produce.

Thus an additional 300km line was also envisioned to feed power throughout peninsular Malaysia. Because of the distance of transmission, the underwater cables are expected to leak more than half of the wattage before the power reaches peninsular Malaysia. Even without Bakun, Sarawak's installed electricity reserve capacity was estimated at 25 percent two years ago. At one point, the massive operation was projected to tie up the world's entire cable-laying capability.

In 1996, Cahya Mata expanded its steel and cement production capacities in response to a massive economic boom in the construction sector. CMS's new steel and cement plants were financed by large short and long-term loans from both local and international offshore money markets.

Major political lifeline

The Asian financial crisis, however, brought the Bakun dam project to a halt and forced the government to assume control from the consortium at an estimated cost of RM1.6 billion to Malaysian taxpayers. It was revived in 2000 through a wholly owned-government company, Sarawak Hidro, along with the Malaysia-China Hydro JV consortium.

(This also isn't Bakun's first flirtation with an aluminum smelter. One was previously proposed for Similajau, to be funded by the international financier Mohamed Ali Alabbar as a joint venture between Dubai Aluminum Co Ltd and Gulf International Investment Group. Those plans collapsed due to construction delays and squabbles over contractual terms. By 2004 most of the minor partners to the consortium posted losses or substantially decreased profits.)

The Asian crisis of 1997-1998 also resulted in a spectacular 439 million ringgit pre-tax loss for Cahya Mata for the year ending December 1998 and a reversal of fortunes to the tune of RM670.7 million, primarily because of severe nonperforming loan losses in the company's banking and financial services arms. By 1999, the company's total debt burden ballooned to RM787.33 million and resulted in a downgrade of its bonds.

Cahya Mata's cumulative debts and financial troubles at the turn of the century meant that Bakun took on added importance. A large portion of its debt was secured by pledges of securities as collateral, the share price of which was tied directly to the terms of its debt. CMS's share price dropped below RM3, the doctor wrote.

The revival of Bakun became an overnight confidence boost to Cahya Mata and strengthened the financial status of its majority owners as well as numerous other shareholders. But Bakun was more than just that.

From a political standpoint, the dam was a major lifeline thrown at a very crucial time to Taib Mahmud, other client businesses having dealings with the conglomerate, and ordinary shareholders in Sarawak. This lifeline was thrown back in the form of a Sarawak majority party that delivered all 28 of its parliamentary seats to offset the federal Barisan Nasional's losses of seats in national elections and helped Mahathir to maintain his critical two-thirds majority in Parliament.

Taib Mahmud himself has faced numerous corruption allegations by critics over his 26-year career as chief minister, most recently earlier this year when Japanese media reported that he had been implicated in a 1.1 billion yen (RM32 million) timber export kickback scheme involving a cartel of nine Japanese timber shipping companies through Hong Kong-based Regent Star, which is linked to Taib Mahmud and his family.

He has not been charged and has publicly denied any wrongdoing. He has filed a lawsuit against Malaysiakini for defamation over articles relating to the case.

When Abdullah Ahmad Badawi came to power in 2003 as Malaysia's prime minister, he vowed to cut back on the number of mega-projects that Mahathir had lumbered the country with, telling delegates to Umno's 57th general assembly that he would turn away from Mahathir's economic strategies.

"That era is over," he told the delegates. But Abdullah has been weakened by a series of missteps and scandals, and meanwhile Bakun dam soldiers on.


Footnote: Ekran Bhd (to know who are the shareholders of Ekran, please refer to Bring Mahathir to Justice!)

report abuse

disagree 1

agree 44

...
written by BORN FREE, September 25, 2008 12:13:28

Very well said ! Speaks with intelligence and guts !
Yes, bring back justice & change to the Nations!
Please help to bring RPK out from Kamunting !!
We want our hero back in MT.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 31

...
written by Kunta Kinte, September 25, 2008 12:28:14

I think its high time for the BAR council to send out a strong signal of PROTEST towards the ISA. Not just condemn and interviews.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 25

...
written by ahmadneil, September 25, 2008 12:51:46

sjs, you should put this on topic so that we all can comment.I hope you can put more of this in MT so that the people of sarawak will know what really happen to all the money.To be born poor is God will but at least you know where the state's money goes. sjs,take a few pictures like cms plant in Pending,Niam Cendera,Swineburne university,etc.Alot of projects are also been given to his own companies.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 18

...
written by truthbespoken, September 25, 2008 13:04:47

Very well said Bon,

The country is indeed paying the price now for what Mahathir has done to the country.

Although a very positive person in most aspects of his political life, when it comes to race relations in the country, he had failed dismally as a former PM.

He was, and still stubbornly is, very off tangent on this account. That is why many Malaysians are still not behaving like Malaysians in the true sense of the word. This is really sad and unfortunate for the country after 51 long years of Independence.

The strong tide of CHANGE has now reached our Malaysian shores and it is earnestly hoped that CHANGE will happen and bring forth good tidings for all Malaysians in the future! Let racists' view be wiped out from Malaysian soil!

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 18

...
written by Arubin, September 25, 2008 13:13:10

Deal with the arguments raised, and engage them on the internet. Counter critical speech with more speech. Show why some of the comments you are not happy about are illogical or nonsensical.

It really makes you wonder doesn't it?

RPK is one man. UMNO is a political party with millions of members.

Millions who cannot even stand up to a single person in an intellectual debate.

Says a lot about their fitness to govern, doesn't it?

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 24

...
written by sjs, September 25, 2008 13:49:40

ahmadneil,

Thanks for your suggestion.

We thought about your suggestions previously. We are not able to it for the following reasons:

1) We do not wish to identify ourselves for the moment, until Anwar takes control of the government.

2) The time frame for the article to be emailed to super admin and get featured as an article for readers to comment, will be much slower than posting it as comments. Some of the postings need to be featured urgently, following the political landscape which is changing speedily.

3)The information providers are top individuals from different countries, we need to protect them only until Anwar takes office.

4) In addition to posting, we also need to compile our defence if challenged by the authorities. Of course, we are not stupid if they want to challenge us in Malaysian courts! Unless headed by Komathy! (just a joke)

We need to convey our special thanks to super admin, for tolerating all our shortcomings. We also thank them for editing our posting on calls to Malaysian Royalties. Splendid job. Please feel free to edit if it offends the readers in any way. Thanks once again

report abuse

disagree 1

agree 16

...
written by Alice, September 25, 2008 13:59:55

Release RPK!!! HE IS INNOCENT ?

WHY DO YOU PUT INNOCENT PEOPLE IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT. SUCH AN INHUMAN ACT

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 9

...
written by cruzeiro, September 25, 2008 14:27:50

This argument of cultural relativism cannot be sustained. The strongest proponents of the ‘Asian values’ perspective - Tun Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew - have tried to use this rhetoric to cover their misuse and abuse of power.

Malaysia is a member of the UN, and we sit on the UN Human Rights Council. We are bound by international human rights norms and standards. There are no two ways about it. If we want to be part of this international order, we need to subscribe to the legal principles of the order and actually practice them


Well said Edmund.

Can anyone verify this:-
International law on Human Rights
In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted as a “common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations”. Today, the UDHR has been supplemented by a vast array of international standards. Of the 25 major international human rights instruments, Malaysia has ratified only five namely [14] :
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
Convention on the Rights of the Child
Convention on the Nationality o married Women
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of GenocideSupplementary
Convention on the Abolishment of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions and Practices similar to Slavery

Malaysia has yet to ratified two important instruments namely
International Covenant on Economic, Social and cultural rights (ICESCR)
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

Both ICESCR and ICCPR have come into effect in the year of 1976. Calls for ratification has been made by numerous quarters including the Parliament opposition leader who moved a Parliament motion in 1976[15] and by Malaysia Human Rights Commission in its year 2000 Annual Report. [16]
As of 1 April 1999, there are 141 countries out of 195 countries in the United Nations ratified ICESCR, 144 for ICCPR [17].
--------------------------------------

The ISA in Malaysia - Pt. II
http://cruzinthots.blogspot.co...pt-ii.html

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 4

...
written by cruzeiro, September 25, 2008 14:28:59

Unrestrained invocation of emergency powers poses a threat to the rule of law and democracy in Malaysia.
In the 1957 Merdeka Constitution, a proclamation of emergency and laws passed during such an Emergency shall cease to be in force at the expiration of two months from the date of proclamation. They would only continue to have force if they have been approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament before the expiry of the specified period. Such sunset provision was meant to prevent abuses by the Executive.
However, the Constitution Amendment Act 1960 removed this highly desirable protective mechanism by providing that neither the Proclamation of Emergency nor the laws passed automatically lapse after two months. Instead, they remain in force indefinitely, until both Houses of Parliament pass annulling resolutions [9]
As the consequences of this 1960 amendment, there are 4 proclamations of Emergency that are still valid and in force today as none of them had been revoked or annulled [10].
The 4 proclamation of Emergency are
1.
1.Indonesian Confrontation (1964)
2.Political crisis in Sarawak only (1966)
3.Racial riot (1969)
4.Political crisis in Kelantan only (1977)
In the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1981, a new Clause ( was inserted to Article 150, which provides that the Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain any application to challenge any State of Emergency proclaimed by His majesty and any laws made there under – thus all questions concerning emergency powers would be left to the absolute discretion of the Executive.
This 1981 amendment effectively places the action to invoke the emergency powers beyond judicial review.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1

...
written by densemy, September 25, 2008 14:35:47

Edmund and the Bar Council respect the law above all else

Its a pity a few more Malaysians couldn't make the same claim

With Malaysians its self, religion, self, race, self and finally the law that is revered

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 4

...
written by clarity, September 25, 2008 14:46:08

How can you expect the people to trust this govt. with the DNA law or any law when an individual can be prevented to have his day in court. If you can just change the ISA section 71 to 8 so quickly and reeking of political intentions, does it look as though the govt. is credible?

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 4

...
written by ahmadneil, September 25, 2008 15:33:35

Tks sjs,I read that with sincere gratitude.Thanks to super admin for his job well done.He deserve a Nobel Peace Prize.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 3

...
written by CJ7, September 25, 2008 15:39:14

WHY HERE WHY THERE WHY STILL NO CHANGE???

ONI CAN SEE VICTIMS NO GLORY

report abuse

disagree 3

agree 1

...
written by skc, September 25, 2008 16:33:05

Dear sjs,
You must be one of RPK's deep throat, right ? Please do be careful, you cannot always predict what a wounded animal will do. Always to be careful at all times, even after a change of government, you can never tell.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 5

...
written by sjs, September 25, 2008 19:07:03

skc,

Thanks for your advice.
We are not afraid of them!

They are not learned individuals, most got admitted through backdoors into reputable institutions, using influence!

Our team are more qualified than them, both academically, intelligence, etc.
We too are holding responsible positions in our respective countries!

Finally, they have to fear, not us, as the wrong-doings are committed by them!
If you imply, thuggery, then, we are beyond their reach.

Our main concerns are as follows:

1) Release of Raja Petra because we believe strongly in his noble cause.
2) Smooth transfer of a new government.
3) To instill confidence and get rid of fear amongst Malaysians, and speak up bravely, as each and everyone of you are talented! It is the government, mainstream media and few civil service machineries have weakened your spirits!

Once we achieve our goals, we will stop posting and retire gracefully.

Once again, thanks for your kind words.

Thanks for your advice.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 12