MEMORANDUM KEPADA SURUHANJAYA HAK ASASI MANUSIA MALAYSIA (SUHAKAM)Isnin, 23 Mei 2011


MEMORANDUM KEPADA SURUHANJAYA HAK ASASI MANUSIA MALAYSIA (SUHAKAM)Isnin, 23 Mei 2011

PENAHANAN ABDUL MAJID KUNJI MOHAMMAD DI BAWAH ISA SATU KEZALIMAN DAN ABDUL MAJID PERLU DIHANTAR SEMULA KE MALAYSIA!

Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) ingin membawa perhatian Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia (SUHAKAM) kepada kes penahanan terbaru di bawah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) iaitu penahanan Sdr Abdul Majid Kunji Mohamad pada 6 Mei 2011.

Beliau ditahan tanpa bicara di bawah ISA atas tuduhan menyalur bantuan kewangan dan sokongan logistik kepada kumpulan militan di Selatan Filipina dan kemudian dikaitkan dengan Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).

Baru-baru ini, seperti dilaporkan sebuah akhbar tempatan yang memetik satu sumber perisikan serantau yang tidak dinamakan, Sdr Abdul Majid dipercayai diminta untuk membekalkan peralatan kejuruteraan dwi-kegunaan untuk kilang senjata yang berkeupayaan membuat pelbagai jenis senjata termasuk pelancar roket.

Ini merupakan tuduhan yang amat berat tetapi tidak dibicarakan mahupun diberi ruang pembelaan. Penahanan tanpa bicara dan tuduhan berat tanpa bukti ke atas beliau melanggar prinsip asas hak asasi manusia, keadilan, agama dan piawaian antarabangsa berhubung hak asasi.
Terkini iaitu pada anggaran tarikh 19 Mei 2011, Sdr Abdul Majid telah dihantar pulang ke Singapura dan difahamkan ditahan di bawah ISA di sana. Sdr Abd Majid berasal dari Singapura.

GMI serta ahli keluarga Abdul Majid Kunji Mohammad mengecam penangkapan dan penahanan di bawah Seksyen 73 (1) ISA serta penghantaran pulang Abdul Majid ke negara asal iaitu Singapura.Pada Hari ini GMI bersama dengan ahli keluarga Abdul Majid ingin membawa perhatian SUHAKAM berkenaan beberapa pencabulan hak asasi yang berlaku dalam penahanan ini dan memohon perhatian segera dalam isu ini.

1.0       LATAR BELAKANG
Abdul Majid Kunji Mohammad merupakan seorang ahli perniagaan tekstil. Berumur 60 tahun dan berasal dari Singapura, namun beliau telah menetap di Malaysia lebih daripada 10 tahun. Beliau mempunyai 8 orang anak dengan bekas isteri pertamanya. Beliau merupakan seorang yang periang dan seorang yang kuat beragama. Beliau pernah menjadi pensyarah di salah sebuah Universiti di Singapura.

Kini, beliau mengalami masalah yang serius dalam perniagaan kerana sambutan yang kurang memuaskan. Dalam pada itu, beliau dituduh menyalurkan dana kepada kumpulan militan di Selatan Filipina. Tuduhan ini amat meragukan sekiranya Abdul Majid mengalami kesukaran kewangan dan hampir muflis

2.0       KRONOLOGI PENANGKAPAN
2.1 Abdul Majid telah ditangkap pada 6 Mei 2011, pukul 7.00 malam oleh sekumpulan anggota polis yang memperkenalkan diri sebagai polis dari Bukit Aman. Beliau telah ditahan di pejabatnya di Setiawangsa, Kuala Lumpur dan kemudian telah dibawa terus ke rumah beliau di Hulu Kelang, Kuala Lumpur. Pihak polis terus menyerbu masuk ke dalam rumah tanpa sebarang identifikasi dan sebab. Puan Suriati bt Osman, isteri Abdul Majid walaupun berkali-kali bertanya alasan mengapa Abdul Majid digari tangannya dan sebab penahanannya, namun jawapan daripada polis hanyalah mengatakan Abdul Majid ditahan  di bawah ISA. Menurut pihak polis, mereka tidak mempunyai sebarang bukti, cuma mereka bertindak atas laporan yang diterima.

2.2 Menurut  Puan Suriati, semasa berjumpa dengan suami beliau pada kali pertama selepas penahanan, Abdul Majid sentiasa muram dan berkelakuan agak ragu-ragu untuk menceritakan sebarang pertanyaan yang dikemukakan. Manakala, pada kali kedua perjumpaan juga Abdul Majid masih berkelakuan pendiam, muram dan tidak mahu memandang isteri dan berkelakuan aneh serta menasihati isteri agar tidak berbuat apa-apa untuk pembebasan beliau.
2.3 Kelakuan Abdul Majid tidak banyak berbeza dengan mana-mana tahanan ISA yang baru ditahan.         Kami percaya ini semua adalah angkara Special Branch (SB) yang kemungkinan besar telah mengugut Abdul Majid dan menasihatinya untuk tidak membuka mulut jika mahu bebas.
2.4 Pada 19 Mei 2011, Puan Suriati menerima panggilan daripada polis yang menyatakan bahawa, Abdul Majid telah dihantar semula ke Singapura dan juga kini dikatakan ditahan dibawah ISA Singapura. Namun, pihak keluarga dan GMI masih belum dapat memastikan kebenaran berkenaan penahanan Abdul Majid di bawah ISA di Singapura.

Sehingga hari ini peguam belum dibenarkan berjumpa dengan Abdul Majid. Beliau dihantar pulang tanpa mendapat sebarang perbicaraan.

3.0       PENCABULAN YANG BERLAKU
Isu utama dalam undang-undang pencegahan adalah penahanan tanpa bicara. Menahan seseorang di bawah akta-akta yang tidak memberikan peluang untuk perbicaraan dan proses bela diri di mahkamah adalah sesuatu yang menyalahi piagam hak asasi antarabangsa dan hak asasi seorang manusia yang fundamental seperti yang termaktub dalam Fasal 9, 10, 11 dan 13, Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia Sejagat 1948; Fasal 9 dan 12, Kovenan Antarabangsa Hak Sivil dan Politik 1966; Fasal 12, Piagam Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia dan Fasal 5, Perlembagaan Malaysia.
Prinsip tiada seorang pun bersalah sehingga dibuktikan di mahkamah adalah asas utama dalam persoalan penahanan tanpa bicara. Sekiranya ia tidak dihormati dan dengan adanya kuasa yang berlebihan di tangan kerajaan dan polis maka, undang-undang seperti ini sering digunakan untuk mempertahankan kedudukan pihak kerajaan dan polis yang seringkali gagal untuk membuktikan sebarang individu yang ditahan di bawah akta-akta ini.
Penahanan dan penghantaran semula Abdul Majid Kunji Mohammad adalah mala fide kerana polis sendiri mengakui bahawa mereka tidak mempunyai sebarang bukti terhadap Abdul Majid.

4.0       PENDIRIAN GMI
4.1 GMI mengecam keras penahanan dan penghantaran semula Abdul Majid ke Singapura. GMI dan keluarga amat bimbang akan keselamatan dan kesihatan Abdul Majid. Pihak keluarga iaitu isteri dan anak Abdul Majid masih berada di Malaysia. Suami dan ayah mereka dirampas akibat daripada ISA. Ketiadaan perbicaraan dan penghantaran semula (deportation) adalah satu tindakan yang menentang hak asasi manusia.

4.2 GMI menilai tinggi keselamatan negara dan tidak merelakan aktiviti pengganas, tetapi hak seseorang terhadap perbicaraan yang adil tidak boleh dinafikan dalam keadaan apa pun. Sekiranya kerajaan memiliki bukti terhadap suspek, kami menggesa kerajaan untuk mendakwa mereka dalam mahkamah terbuka, sesuai dengan hak mereka untuk membela diri, hak mereka untuk mendapatkan khidmat peguam dan hak  terhadap perbicaraan yang adil. Jika tidak, maka sesiapa pun termasuk Abdul Majid  perlu dibebaskan tanpa tangguh dan tanpa syarat.Penahanan yang dibuat tidak menjustifikasi kepentingan ISA. Penahanan yang dibuat tanpa bukti dan tanpa bicara sebenarnya menjustifikasi pemansuhan akta zalim ISA. Menuduh seseorang melakukan jenayah tanpa mengemukakan bukti yang kredibel adalah fitnah. Menahan seseorang tanpa bicara dan tanpa peluang membela diri adalah tidak bertamadun!

4.3 Malah, pihak polis yang sering  menukar tuduhan atau label yang digunakan ke atas Abdul Majid adalah cukup jelas menunjukkan bahawa pihak polis tidak mempunyai sebarang bukti tehadap beliau. Mereka sebenarnya gagal untuk membawa sebarang bukti terhadap Abdul Majid.

4.4 Cadangan untuk kajisemula ISA dibuat sejak 3 April 2009, lebih dari 2 tahun yang lalu. Tetapi sehingga kini, tiada sesiapa tahu bila sebenarnya kajian tersebut akan siap sedangkan ISA sudah menjadikan puluhan ribu sebagai mangsa samada pengganas atau bukan pengganas sejak 51 tahun lalu. Syor kajisemula ISA pernah disuarakan oleh beberapa orang Menteri dan parti komponen BN sebelum ini. Ada yang mencadangkan penubuhan Jawatankuasa Terpilih Parlimen. Malah ada yang meletakkan jawatan kerana membantah.

4.5 SUHAKAM mencadangkan sejak tahun 2003 supaya ISA dimansuhkan dan diganti dengan sebuah Akta baru, Akta Terrorisme tetapi tidak pernah diteliti oleh kerajaan atau dibentangkan di Parlimen. Pada masa yang sama, sudah ada peruntukan undang-undang sedia ada yang mencukupi untuk menangani keganasan. GMI ingin menegaskan bahawa asas-asas ISA bercanggah dengan hak asasi manusia dan prinsip-prinsip keadilan, kebebasan serta kedaulatan undang-undang. ISA bukan sahaja perlu dikajisemula tetapi perlu dimansuhkan!

Justeru , GMI ingin menggesa SUHAKAM untuk:

1. Mengenalpasti dengan Kerajaan dan pihak Polis status penahanan Abdul Majid di Singapura dengan segera

2. Campur tangan dan memohon agar pihak Polis dan kerajaan Singapura membebaskan Abdul Majid dengan segera atau bicarakan di mahkamah keadilan.

3. Mengadakan sesi dialog dengan pihak polis dan pihak GMI berkenaan perjumpaan keluarga dan pihak peguam semasa seseorang ditahan di bawah ISA kerana hak mendapatkan peguam dan perjumpaan dengan keluarga sering ditolak oleh pihak polis.

4. Menegaskan dan menuntut kepada Kerajaan untuk menghentikan sebarang penahanan terbaru, membebaskan tahanan dan memansuhkan ISA. Mansuhkan ISA!Bebaskan Semua Tahanan!Tutup Kem Tahanan Kamunting!

Yang benar,

SYED IBRAHIM SYED NOH

Pengerusi GMI

Press Statement: 20 May 2011 Deportation of ISA Detainee Abdul Majid Kunji Mohamed: Embarrassment to the country

GERAKAN MANSUHKAN ISA (GMI)
&
SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA (SUARAM)

Press Statement: 20 May 2011

Deportation of ISA Detainee Abdul Majid Kunji Mohamed: Embarrassment to the country!

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) and Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) strongly condemn the deportation of the Abdul Majid Kunji Mohamed alleged of being channeled money and supplying double-purpose engineering equipment to a militant group in the southern Philippines. Abdul Majid was detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) on the 6th May 2011 and he was deported back to his country on the 19 May 2011.

SUARAM and GMI regrets that the Home Minister who controls the Police Department, has made decisions to disallow the detainee from seeing respective legal counsels during his 13 days of detention under the section 73 of the draconian ISA. We do not see any security or diplomacy difficulties in allowing the lawyers to perform their duty. The denial of access to legal assistance and the deportation of the detainee without proper trial are totally uncalled for and embarrassing. The government is not even bothered to provide a reasonable answer for their irresponsible actions. This is a typical case of how arrogant the authorities can be when granted absolute power. We view the authorities’ move to deport the detainee as malicious.

We are very concerned about Abdul Majid’s safety as the Singapore government also has a similar Act in their country and we afraid that Abdul Majid who was deported to his country of origin will experience another round of investigations. This is unfair to the detainee who until now, has failed to be produced before a court.

Furthermore, the wife and the children of Abdul Majid still live in Malaysia. We urge the government to take care of the families’ welfare and their daily needs as the government is responsible for making the family’s life miserable without the husband and the children without their father.

SUARAM and GMI recognize the seriousness of the terrorist activities and are of the view that proper measures should be taken to improve the situation. However, these measures must nevertheless be consistent with international human rights standards and norms. Detaining any individuals without trial under the ISA breaches fundamental human rights that are enshrined in, among others, article 9 and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights –
v “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.” and
v “Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.”

The use of the ISA on the current detainee demonstrates yet again how the state can arbitrarily use this infamous tool on anyone. ISA is a very convenient tool to cover-up real issues and weaknesses of the system.

SUARAM and GMI also reiterate that punishing or detaining people without giving them any opportunity to defend themselves is barbaric. Uncivilized laws that permit detention without trial are a pain of the democratic system and must be abolished. We also demand Abdul Majid to be released immediately or charge him at open court!

Abolish ISA!
Release All the ISA detainees!
Close Down KEMTA!

By,

Nalini.E
GMI Secretariat and SUARAM Coordinator

PRESS STATEMENT: 18 MAY 2011 Detention under the EO is Arbitrary!

PRESS STATEMENT: 18 MAY 2011
Detention under the EO is Arbitrary!

Suaram expresses disappointment and concern over the detention of the three youths under the Restricted Residence Act (RRA) 1933 for 2 years. The detention orders under the RRA were issued by the Home Minister on 17 May 2011. This has made the habeas corpus applications that Suaram has planned to file has been made academic. The three individuals are Muhamad Arif bin Abu Samah (19 years old), Mohamed Ramadan bin Muhamed Ali (22 years old) and Mohamed Rafe bin Mohamed Ali (20 years old). Muhamad Arif was send to Mersing, Johor (for 2 years), Mohamed Ramdan to Chenon, Pahang (2 years) and Mohamed Rafe to Kulim, Kedah for 2 years as well.
The three were arrested by the Gombak District police officers on the 8th of March 2011 allegedly for involvement for possession of a stolen vehicle in their residential area in Selayang. But until today these allegations against them have not been proven in any court. On the other hand, the three of them have also been brought on a ‘remand roadshow’ by the police before being pinned under the Emergency Ordinance (Public Order and Crime Prevention). On 19 March 2011, they were served with detention orders under the EO which allows for detention without trial. The three have been detained for 60 days and they were tortured physically and mentally by the police during the entire duration of their detention. They were severely kicked and beaten with iron pipe, wire and aluminum. Other than that, they were also not allowed to meet with lawyer for nearly two months. Besides that, the family members of Mohamed Ramadan and Mohamed Rafe has also been duped by a man calling himself as an Inspector to extort money of RM 13,000 from them.
SUARAM is appalled at the increasing number of youngsters detained under the EO. SUARAM strongly condemns the Minister’s decision to pursue the detention of the youths under the RRA. Worst still, the detainees will most likely face traumatic experiences and difficulties in their new restricted area. Their rights to move freely, rights to education and more importantly, rights to live a better life with their family have been deprived. This is an outright abuse of power by the Minister who has been blindly signing the detention orders. The gross misuse and abuse of the EO on ordinary citizens of the country does not merely lie with the police but with the slipshod manner of the Home Ministry itself.

As of now, more than 1000 persons were being detained without trial under the EO at Simpang Renggam Detention Centre and other detention centres around the country. This number does not include those detained without trial in other police stations around the country. Going by this number of people detained, the EO can be deemed to be ten times worse than the infamous Internal Security Act (ISA) which also allows for arbitrary detention.

SUARAM recognizes the responsibility of the Malaysian government to curb crime and to deal with criminals, gangs and syndicates. But the government should not resort to means that violates human rights such as the EO in efforts to address criminal activity. Unfortunately in Malaysia, EO has been frequently abused by the police and government to deal with suspects of petty crimes. This is an outright misuse of power by the police and the Home Ministry in dealing with the EO detainees, particularly when they have absolute power and their decision cannot be challenged in court. Detention of any individual without trial is a violation of fundamental human rights.

SUARAM urges the government to withdraw the restricted order that have been served to the three detainees that have been mention above and immediately release them without any further conditions.

Detention without trial is a gross human rights violation. It violates Article 9, 10 and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and Article 8 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Federal Constitution which guarantees due process and security of persons.

Therefore, we call up on the government to:
Immediately repeal the EO, DDA and ISA;
Stop arresting youths and minors under the EO and respect their rights as laid out under CRC;
Stop re-arresting individuals under the same law (or any other preventive laws) especially those released by the courts through habeas corpus applications or through the recommendations of the Advisory Board ; if need be, they should be charged under existing criminal laws;
The police should immediately stop making any further arrests under EO ;
All those who are currently detained or restricted under EO should be released immediately or be charged in open court under existing criminal laws.

Released By,
Nalini.E
Detention without Trial Coordinator,
SUARAM

Sodomy II: The Crumbling Credibility of the Malaysian Judiciary Reaffirmed!

Press Statement: 16 May 2011

Sodomy II: The Crumbling Credibility of the Malaysian Judiciary Reaffirmed!

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) is most concerned with the outcome of the Kuala Lumpur High Court this morning, where trial judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah, has found a prima facie case against Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim and has ordered him to enter his defence.

Anwar is charged with sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at the Desa Damansara condominium on June 26, 2008. If found guilty under section 377B of the Penal Code, Anwar could face a jail term of not less than five years and a maximum of 20 years.

SUARAM has expressed concern during the trial with the apparent bias of the court proceedings; which was demonstrated time and again when Anwar’s defence team was denied access to medical reports and other documents, a defendant’s fundamental right to due process.

This led to the ridiculous scenario of doctors, who were being cross-examined by defence lawyers, but who were unable to refer to notes that they had made during the medical examination of Saiful Bukhari, since access to the notes would also have to be granted to the defence.

SUARAM also disagrees with the judge’s acceptance of the testimony of the three doctors; as it is clear that there are clear contradictions in their testimonies; to be the basis that there was indeed penetration, which requires the defence to call its case. But then again the trial judge himself had shown so much inconsistency by reversing his decision, from initially rejecting to accepting the DNA samples obtained from the lockup room where Anwar was detained.

In delivering his decision, the trial judge was reported to have commented on the credibility and truthfulness of the main witness in the case, Saiful Bukhari Azlan. SUARAM is concerned with the judge’s comments as he appears to have prejudged the case before the defence has presented its case. It is laughable that the trial judge would go out of his way to say that Saiful Bukhari was a “credible and truthful witness” when the said witness has given contradictory statements and was even romantically involved with one of the prosecutors in the case.

It is important to note that that the very basis of Anwar’s defence is that there is a political conspiracy to victimise him and as such, illogical and unlikely claims, loopholes in stories and inconsistencies in the testimonies cannot be disregarded and must be given due consideration. SUARAM feels that the judge, in establishing that there is prima facie, had not taken account of these factors.

This morning’s outcome has reconfirmed what SUARAM has repeatedly warned all along; that the courts have become mere puppets to the government of the day, succumbing to political pressures and making biased political decisions instead of legal decisions based on justice and fair play. The credibility of the Malaysian judiciary is further crumbling, as the ruling powers bend over backwards to hold on to their might and strengthen their grip on power.

Released by,

Hasbeemasputra Abu Bakar
Coordinator

Concerns over the Proposed Australia-Malaysia Refugee Transfer Arrangement

Concerns over the Proposed Australia-Malaysia Refugee Transfer Arrangement

For Release: 12 May 2011

The Migration Working Group is deeply concerned to hear about the possibility of a bilateral agreement between Australia and Malaysia in which 800 asylum seekers arriving by boat to Australia will be transferred to Malaysia for refugee status determination in return for Australia resettling 4,000 UNHCR-recognised refugees over 4 years.

Australia, as a state party to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention) and its 1967 Protocol, should not violate its obligations under the 1951 Convention. It is surprising that Australia would even consider Malaysia as an ally in refugee protection. Malaysia has shown no positive signs of considering accession to the 1951 Convention. Worse still, Malaysia has one of the most appalling records for the abuse, torture and detention of asylum seekers and refugees.

Most asylum seekers and refugees in Malaysia live in squalid conditions, poverty and insecurity. Without the formal right to reside and work in Malaysia, most are forced to obtain jobs in the informal economy, where many suffer from violations of labour rights, including unpaid wages and forced labour. They are in constant danger of arrest, detention, punishment for immigration offences (including whipping) and deportation, leading to refoulement. When arrested, they face months of detention in immigration detention depots, many of which are overcrowded and unhygienic with poor sanitation. Refugee children are not provided with access to education.

We are concerned that the 800 asylum seekers transferred to Malaysia will suffer from the same conditions currently faced by asylum seekers and refugees in Malaysia. What procedural safeguards and measures will Australia and Malaysia put in place to ensure that the rights of asylum seekers and refugees under the 1951 Convention are protected? How will Australia and Malaysia ensure that they will have access to fair refugee status determination procedures and will not be subject to indefinite detention, punishment for immigration offences, and refoulement? While in Malaysia, will they have the right to reside, to work, and, for children, the right to education?

We urge Australia and Malaysia to live up to their existing human rights obligations as members of the United Nations, and for Malaysia to accede to the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol without further delay. Without a domestic legal framework in place for refugee protection that meets the standards of the 1951 Convention, Malaysia should not be considered a safe place for asylum seekers and refugees.

For more information, please contact Daniel Lo, Co-Coordinator of the Migration Working Group at 012 218 6051 (mobile) or [email protected] (email)

Endorsed by the following members of the Migration Working Group:

Building and Woodworkers International (BWI) Asia Pacific
Coalition to Abolish Modern-Day Slavery in Asia (CAMSA)
Coordination of Action Research on AIDS and Mobility (CARAM Asia)
Foreign Spouse Support Group (FFSG)
The National Human Rights Society (HAKAM)
Health Equity Initiatives (HEI)
Justice, Peace & Solidarity In Mission Office, Congregation of the Good Shepherd Sisters, Province of Singapore-Malaysia
Lawyers for Liberty (LFL)
Malaysian Social Research Institute (MSRI)
Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC)
Penang Office for Human Development (POHD)
Pusat Kebajikan Good Shepherd (PKGS)
Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
Tenaganita
Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO)

About the Migration Working Group:

The Migration Working Group (MWG) is a network of Malaysian civil society groups and individuals who advocate for the rights of migrants, refugees, stateless persons, trafficked persons and foreign spouses.