Home Ministry KPI must be in line with International Human Rights

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) notes with concern the reported success of the Home Ministry in its Key Performance Index (KPI) in 2017 and call for human rights and civil liberties to be an integral part of the Key Performance Index outlined by the Home Ministry.

Despite the reported success in achieving its KPI, the Home Ministry has repeatedly failed to address key issues of concerns in relation to human rights and civil liberties under the Federal Constitution. In tandem with its key success, the Ministry in 2017 has:

  • Failed to address the cases of enforced disappearances of Amri Che Mat, Raymond Koh, Joshua Hilmy and Ruth Hilmy;
  • Oversaw the sharp increase in arbitrary detention under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA) with 142 minors reportedly detained under POCA;
  • Failed to answer and address for the arrest and detention of Ang Kian Kok despite the Minister’s awareness of his case in Parliament;
  • Failed to address the issue of custodial death with new addition of at least 8 reported death in police custody, 2 in navy detention center and countless more in prisons and immigration detention in 2017;
  • Failed to address the right to health in prison in spite of repeated recommendations by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM);
  • Failed to curb the rampant practice of chain remand where individuals are detained for prolonged period of weeks if not months through legal loopholes;
  • Interfered into The Star and other news agencies and curtailing freedom of expression;
  • Banned more than 50 publications with no good cause;
  • Oversaw and championed the continued existence of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA) in Parliament and failed to implement the working group to provide oversight on SOSMA;
  • Barred the entry of internationally recognized human rights defenders including Han Hui Hui and Adilur Rahman Khan in 2017
  • Failed to address the rising issue of human trafficking in Malaysia;
  • Failed to address the scandal of the Wang Kelian death camp with new allegations of cover up.

With the abovementioned failures and shortcoming in mind, it is difficult for any reasonable and sensible person to describe the Home Ministry as excellent in discharging its duties as the executive body overseeing the enforcement agencies in the country.

SUARAM calls for the Home Minister, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi to take into account the human rights violations perpetrated by the Home Ministry directly or by the enforcement agencies that it has oversight over and rethink the ministry’s KPI in line with international human rights principles and the civil liberties enshrined Federal Constitution. If the Home Minister holds a genuine intent to reform and improve the Ministry, a consultation with civil societies and relevant statutory body should take place before the formulation of any KPI. SUARAM and other stakeholders are willing and happy to engage with the Ministry

SUARAM would also like to remind the Home Minister and the Home Ministry that Malaysia will be up for the 3rd Universal Periodic Review later in 2018 and the failures of the Ministry to uphold human rights in the abovementioned areas would be scrutinized by members states of the United Nations.

In Solidarity
Sevan Doraisamy
Executive Director


Press statement by Kua Kia Soong, SUARAM Adviser 4 Jan 2017

Mahathir has tried in vain to wriggle out of the responsibility for Operation Lalang. Now he is attempting to put the blame for the sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and three other Supreme Court judges on the Agung. As I have pointed out often enough, these two outrages against Malaysian democracy in 1987 and 1988 respectively are inextricably linked. I am surprised that the opportunist politicians and crypto-Mahathiristas in Pakatan Harapan and the lawyers who were outraged in 1988 have so quickly forgotten recent Malaysian history or have lost their tongues. Let me remind them of Lord Denning’s words:

“Silence is not an option when things are ill done.”

We know that 1987 was a time during Dr Mahathir’s term when he was faced with the biggest threat to his rule, with Team B under Tengku Razaleigh challenging the results of the UMNO elections. A Supreme Court decision in Team B’s favour would have meant the end of Mahathir’s grasp on power.

Thus, in the run up to Operation Lalang and before the assault on the judiciary resulting in the sacking of the Lord President and several other Supreme Court judges, the ruling party catalysed a tense situation in the country by creating “sensitive” issues involving the sending of non-Mandarin qualified administrators to the Chinese schools, the conversion of Muslims to Christianity and even threatening to organize a 500,000-people UMNO rally in the capital. All the ensuing tension was to justify unleashing ‘Operation Lalang’ to deal with the so-called “threat to national security”.

The Tunku, at the time in his twilight years had more perception and integrity than Mahathir in his prime and certainly enough political nous to see how Operation Lalang was orchestrated:

“UMNO was facing a break-up. The Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s hold on the party appeared critical when election rigging was alleged to have given him a very narrow victory over Tengku Razaleigh. The case alleging irregularities brought by UMNO members was pending in court. If the judgement went against him he would have no choice but to step down. So, he had to find a way out of his predicament. A national crisis had to be created to bring UMNO together as a united force to fight a common enemy – and the imaginary enemy in this case was the Chinese community.” ( K.Das/ SUARAM: ‘The White paper on the October Affair and the Why? Papers’, SUARAM Petaling Jaya 1989: 10)

In the Foreword to ‘May Day for Justice’ written by Tun Salleh & K. Das after the sacking of the Lord President, the Tunku further wrote:

“I do not know how any honourable government can stay in office after this book has been published. It constitutes a denunciation which cannot be answered without confessing to the most dishonourable conduct in public life…it struck a terrible blow, not only to the independence of the Malaysian Judiciary – and ruined the careers of at least three honourable men – but to national pride itself.”

In another Foreword, the Hon Justice Michael Kirby CMG Commissioner of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) had this to say:

“Singled out for particular mention was the concern of the ICJ about the campaign of attacks on the judiciary by the Prime Minister of Malaysia, the inducements made to the Lord President to resign his office quietly, the apparently biased constitution of the tribunal set up to enquire into his removal, the inclusion in the tribunal, as its chairman, of a judge who succeeded to the Lord President’s office, the unprecedented action of that judge in securing the removal and suspension of Supreme Court judges who provided a stay to allow the constitutionality of the tribunal to be tested in the Malaysian Supreme Court, and the “unpersuasive” report of the tribunal following which the Lord President was removed.”

The highly respected former Lord President Tun Mohamed Suffian Bin Hashim had this to say on the sordid affair and he pointed his finger squarely at PM Mahathir:

“The disgrace brought to Malaysia by the Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad in dismissing the Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas, and two senior Supreme Court judges will long hang round his neck like an albatross. What the PM did astounded the nation and the appalling news was swiftly spread to all four corners of the globe…Tun Salleh has since revealed all the facts leading to, and regarding the so-called inquiry into his alleged misbehaviour. Facts which because of the Prime Minister’s total control of the mass media he was able at the time to keep from public knowledge and which were also kept out of the knowledge of the two foreign members of the Tribunal who came from Sri Lanka and Singapore.” (K. Das, ‘Questionable Conduct over that May day Caper’, 1990)

The Malaysian Bar Council at the time also did not mince their words in a statement:

“From the Prime Minister’s attacks on the Judiciary, it appears that he seriously misconceives the doctrine of the separation of powers…It is not for the Executive to tell the judges how to construe the laws.”

In 1990, when Lim Kit Siang was opposing Mahathir, he had alleged:

“The Prime Minister and the Attorney-General had refused to throw light on this shocking discrepancy, which raised doubts as to whether the Prime Minister ever had an audience with the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong on 1 May 1988…Grave doubts and mystery surround the judicial crisis of 1988…This clearly shows the parentage and background of the book ‘Judicial Misconduct’ – that it is not an independent assessment but an apologia for the Government assault on the Malaysian Judiciary.” (K. Das, ‘Questionable Conduct over that May Day Caper’, 1990)

There were many other eminent jurists from around the world who were aghast at this flagrant assault on one of the vital institutions of any democracy: Geoffrey Robertson QC; Hugo Young; P.N. Bhagwati, Former Chief Justice of India; Prof. Andrew Harding writing for the Commonwealth Judicial Journal; Bernard Levin of The Times, London; Professor F.A. Trinidade of The Law Quarterly Review; Nihal Jayawickkarama of the University of Hong Kong. All of them were quite clear in pointing their fingers at the Prime Minister of the day for the sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas – Dr Mahathir.

In his book ‘May Day For Justice’, Tun Salleh Abas’ denunciation of then Prime Minister Mahathir begins on the first page itself:

“When all else is forgotten, this question alone may remain to haunt us: Did I lie when I said the Prime Minister of Malaysia accused me of being biased in cases involving the political party, UMNO? Did I invent this story that the prime Minister raised the matter when he gave me the reasons why I was found unsuitable to remain Lord President of the Supreme Court of Malaysia and should therefore step down? That because of my speeches about UMNO I was biased as a judge?

“I have no doubt – and few would now disagree – that it was the UMNO saga that led to my destruction as a judge.”

I urge those who have forgotten or were too young to know the truth about Mahathir’s assault on the Malaysian Judiciary to read the two books by Tun Salleh Abas and K. Das. Try as he may, Mahathir will never succeed in changing Malaysian history as long as there are still good men and women ready to defend the truth, justice, democracy and human rights…