We refer to the news report today that a farmer was charged for allegedly circulating WhatsApp messages surrounding the Forest City casino discussions. This is a witch hunt with the sole aim of cracking down on discourse that tarnishes the government’s reputation in the eyes of the public. Through such systematic targeting of members of the public, it could not be more blatant that the government has completely failed in upholding not only the fundamental right to freedom of expression, but also the supreme law of the land, the Federal Constitution, that enshrines this fundamental right. In the process of doing so, the state incites further self-censorship and fear among the greater populace, effectively curtailing public participation in nation-building. Whilst wasting police resources that are already limited, we also see streaks of authoritarian policing at play, whereby the police is deployed by the state to serve their interests instead of those of the public, via arbitrary application of draconian laws for which they could not be held accountable. Such systematic crackdown is unfortunately not new. In fact, this tactic was employed by the Perikatan Nasional administration to clamp down on public dissent – both the Sedition Act and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act were used to investigate 14 activists for their plans to organise the #Lawan rally in 2021. Freedom of expression has thus regressed to levels seen during the pandemic. This is also highly concerning, as it can set the precedent for increasingly draconian measures by the state against the public in the name of ‘restoring order’ or ‘upholding truth’. We are a democratic nation, not an authoritarian regime. Stop this farcical crackdown immediately and we repeat, repeal the Sedition Act.

The arrest and remand of Badrul Hisham Shaharin are acts of repressive intimidation. It demonstrates that the unity government is no different from previous administrations in continuing to arbitrarily weaponise the Sedition Act against its dissenters, especially the political opposition. Even the commitment made in July last year by Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim to only limit use of the Sedition Act to criticisms involving the Rulers’ position has been reneged at least seven times to date, with investigations and charges on statements that are about the Pardons Board’s authorisation, Malaysia-Israeli relations, the judiciary, and also notably the unity government’s establishment and Anwar himself. Let us not forget that repealing the Sedition Act was also the promise made by the Pakatan Harapan coalition in their election manifesto – which was then broken. Prohibition of ‘insults’ to public figures because of their status fundamentally contradicts the principle that government should by right be subject to public scrutiny and criticism. This principle is also especially crucial in cases of unelected heads of state including monarchs, who cannot otherwise be held accountable by citizens. Thus, by continuing to enforce the Sedition Act, the government is also actively hindering Malaysia from progressing to not only become a true democracy, but also fully live up to transparency and accountability standards which many Malaysians have demanded for. The public will never be able to enjoy the basic right of having free, diverse and meaningful discourse on various issues of public interest as stipulated in Article 10 of the Federal Constitution, as long as criminalisation via the Sedition Act in the name of claiming ownership of truth remains the status quo. Repeal the Sedition Act.

2023 constituted a disconcerting picture of the state of human rights and reform in the country, marked simultaneously by positive strides and limited progress in key areas, as well as persistent violations of rights of vulnerable groups. Laws that violate the right to fair trial continue to be applied. SUARAM documented 3220 cases of arrests, detention and charges related to human trafficking under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). For the first time since its inception, SOSMA was used to arrest and detain drug syndicate members, which is concerning when existing laws such as the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 are adequate. The protracted wait of at least two years by detainees in prison for trial persists, though this is cut short by a year for 23 detainees in the Geng 08 GST case. 1012 arrests were made under the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 (DD(SPM)A) in 2023. Despite longstanding calls for amendments and repeal to SOSMA, progress on that front remains slow. Though the government is receptive to amending SOSMA, no explicit timeline is yet given. Tarrying further only results in continued violation of the fundamental right to fair trial, and most importantly, the fulfilment of social and economic rights of families of detainees. Whilst death in custody cases in 2023 may have reduced by 48% compared to the previous year, the issue of lacking data transparency persists. Access to justice for families of the deceased is also challenging and protracted. SUARAM noted six past DIC cases of which final court proceedings took place in 2023, with families pursuing justice for as long as 10 years. There is no commitment by the current administration to improve the Independent Police Conduct Commission Act 2022 (IPCC) - one of the pledges by the Pakatan Harapan coalition in its election manifesto in 2022. Significant regression was seen in freedom of expression. Key laws such as the Sedition Act 1948 and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 continue to be enforced. More explicit measures such as warnings by members in government and the setup of an investigation task force were implemented to exert more restrictive control over discourse related to race, religion and royalty. Five bans were enacted under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, comprising four books and the Swatch Pride watch. Raids on two bookstores were conducted, confiscating 10 books that were not on the banned book list. Threats to student autonomy in universities and artistic freedom remain palpable. Restrictions to exercise freedom of peaceful assembly persisted. Investigations against organisers and/or participants after, and in some cases, before public assemblies, persist. SUARAM documented the number of individuals investigated to be at least 91 this year. Tactics seen in previous years such as police barricade, arrest and detention of individuals and pre-rally warnings are still used in public assemblies organised by the political opposition or held in significant public spaces such as Parliament. SUARAM documents a case of state intimidation and reprisal, in which an activist was charged in court despite being the victim of use of force by an enforcement official during the protest. Amendments to the National Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) Act were passed in 2023, marking a significant step forward in strengthening the NHRI. This is especially needed when the institution’s credibility was undermined by the former Chairperson’s allegations of racial discrimination in staff appointment and subsequent defamation suit filed against a whistleblower for lodging an internal complaint on the matter. One of the biggest milestones Malaysia achieved in 2023 is the passing of the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Bill 2023 (DR7) and the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Bill 2023. With the resentencing of death row inmates in progress, gaps such as inadequate time to gather relevant mitigation evidence and insufficient consideration given to mitigating circumstances such as the inmate’s mental health condition need to be swiftly addressed. On institutional reforms, there were commendable actions, namely the passing of the Public Finance and Fiscal Responsibility Act 2023, ongoing drafting of the Ombudsman Bill as well as empowerment of the Parliamentary Special Select Committees in function and resources. Nevertheless, other crucial reforms, such as separation of the offices of the Attorney-General and the Public Prosecutor, malapportionment, constituency development fund for the political opposition, political appointments in government-linked companies and the reinstatement of local government elections, remain pending. Discrimination and fear continued dominating the lives of vulnerable groups. The increased prevalence of investigations and raids on migrants overshadow positive preliminary efforts by the government to improve their welfare, such as the launch of forced labour guidelines. Realisation of the right to work for refugees and self-determination for the Orang Asli remain to be seen. Basic rights of LGBTIQ and gender-diverse people regressed in 2023, as evidenced by spikes in censorship of LGBTIQ expressions, introduction of anti-LGBT Syariah laws and expansion of conversion practices. Impingements of freedom of religion and belief of religious minorities persisted. Amendments to the Federal Constitution that will worsen statelessness were proposed. As the unity government trudges through its second year, it is crucial that it anchors all laws and policies to the Madani values that prioritise inclusivity, equal respect for all, and trust from transparency and accountability.

Tahun 2023 membentuk gambaran kurang menyenangkan bagi keadaan hak asasi manusia dan reformasi di negara ini, sekaligus menandakan kemajuan positif dan kemunduran dalam bidang-bidang utama, termasuklah pelanggaran hak secara berterusan terhadap kumpulan rentan. Undang-undang yang melanggar hak kepada perbicaraan yang adil terus digunakan. SUARAM mendokumenkan 3,220 kes penangkapan, penahanan dan pertuduhan berkaitan pemerdagangan manusia di bawah Akta Kesalahan Keselamatan (Langkah-Langkah Khas) 2012 (dikenali sebagai SOSMA). Buat pertama kali sejak penguatkuasaanya, SOSMA digunakan untuk menangkap dan menahan ahli sindiket dadah. Perkara ini merisaukan apabila undang-undang seperti Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 sememangnya tersedia. Inilah yang dihadapi 23 orang tahanan di dalam kes Geng 08 GST - penahanan berpanjangan sekurang-kurangnya dua tahun di penjara (dan kemudian dikurangkan kepada setahun). Tahun 2023 juga memperlihat 1,012 tangkapan telah dilakukan di bawah Akta Dadah Berbahaya (Langkah-langkah Pencegahan Khas) 1985 (DDA 85). Walaupun terdapat desakan yang berpanjangan untuk meminda SOSMA, namun tiada garis masa yang jelas diberikan. Penangguhan lebih lama akan menyebabkan pelanggaran hak asasi untuk perbicaraan yang adil. Tunjang kepada isu ini adalah penunaian hak sosial dan ekonomi keluarga tahanan. Walaupun kematian dalam kes tahanan (DIC) pada 2023 mungkin berkurangan sebanyak 48% berbanding tahun sebelumnya, isu kekurangan ketelusan data masih berterusan. Akses kepada keadilan untuk keluarga si mati juga amat mencabar dan kekal berlarutan. SUARAM mencatatkan enam kes DIC yang lama, di mana prosiding mahkamah terakhir telah berlangsung pada tahun lalu. Keluarga-keluarga yang menuntut keadilan ini telah berjuang selama 10 tahun. Namun, tiada komitmen dalam pentadbiran semasa untuk menambah baik Akta Suruhanjaya Bebas Tatakelakuan Polis 2022 (IPCC) - salah satu ikrar oleh gabungan Pakatan Harapan dalam manifesto pilihan raya pada 2022. Pemerosotan paling ketara dapat dilihat dalam kebebasan bersuara. Undang-undang utama seperti Akta Hasutan 1948 dan Seksyen 233 Akta Komunikasi dan Multimedia 1998 terus dikuatkuasakan. Langkah yang lebih eksplisit, misalnya amaran-amaran oleh ahli dalam kerajaan dan penubuhan pasukan siasatan khas diwujudkan bagi melaksanakan kawalan lebih ketat ke atas wacana berkaitan kaum, agama dan Raja-raja Melayu. Lima larangan telah digubal di bawah Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan 1984 - antaranya empat buku dan satu jam tangan jenama Swatch Pride. Serbuan ke atas dua kedai buku telah dijalankan dimana 10 buah buku yang tiada dalam senarai buku terlarang turut dirampas. Ancaman terhadap autonomi pelajar di universiti dan kebebasan artistik kekal ketara dikekang. Sekatan untuk kebebasan berhimpun secara aman masih berterusan. Siasatan terhadap penganjur dan/atau peserta selepas perhimpunan malah dalam sesetengah kes, sebelum perhimpunan berlangsung, turut berlanjutan. SUARAM mendokumenkan sebilangan individu yang disiasat sekurang-kurangnya 91 orang bagi tahun ini. Antara taktik yang dilihat kerap digunakan beberapa tahun kebelakangan ini adalah penghadang polis, penangkapan dan penahanan individu-individu. Ini termasuklah amaran yang dikeluarkan sebelum perhimpunan sama ada anjuran pembangkang politik atau himpunan di ruang awam yang penting seperti Parlimen. SUARAM turut mendokumenkan kes ugutan dan tindakan balas. Seorang aktivis didakwa di mahkamah walaupun menjadi mangsa penggunaan kekerasan oleh pegawai penguatkuasa semasa protes. Pindaan Akta Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (SUHAKAM) telah diluluskan pada tahun 2023 menandakan satu langkah penting ke hadapan dalam memperkukuhkan institusi berkenaan. Ia amat diperlukan apabila kredibiliti institusi tersebut terjejas berikutan dakwaan mantan Pengerusi SUHAKAM mengenai diskriminasi kaum dalam pelantikan kakitangan. Susulan peristiwa berkenaan, saman fitnah difailkan terhadap pemberi maklumat berkenaan kerana membuat aduan dalaman mengenai perihal itu. Salah satu pencapaian terbesar yang dicapai Malaysia pada tahun lalu adalah kelulusan RUU Pemansuhan Hukuman Mati Mandatori 2023 dan RUU Semakan Hukuman Mati dan Pemenjaraan Sepanjang Hayat (Bidang Kuasa Sementara Mahkamah Persekutuan) 2023. Kini, proses penghukuman semula banduan akhir sedang rancak dilakukan. Walau bagaimanapun, timbul jurang semasa rayuan mitigasi, antaranya ketidakcukupan masa dalam mengumpul bahan bukti yang relevan serta kurang pertimbangan diberikan kepada masalah kesihatan mental banduan yang perlu ditangani dengan segera. Mengenai reformasi institusi, terdapat beberapa tindakan yang boleh dipuji. Antaranya adalah kelulusan Akta Kewangan Awam dan Tanggungjawab Fiskal (FRA) 2023, penggubalan RUU Ombudsman yang masih berjalan serta pemberdayaan fungsi dan sumber bagi Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Parlimen. Namun begitu, reformasi lain yang turut penting seperti pengasingan pejabat Peguam Negara dan Pendakwa Raya, salah pembahagian (malapportionment), dana pembangunan kawasan pilihan raya untuk pembangkang, lantikan politik dalam syarikat berkaitan kerajaan dan pengembalian semula pilihan raya kerajaan tempatan masih belum selesai. Diskriminasi dan ketakutan terus menguasai kehidupan kumpulan minoriti yang terpinggir. Peningkatan siasatan dan kekerapan serbuan ke atas migran mengaburi usaha awal yang positif oleh kerajaan untuk menambah baik kebajikan mereka iaitu pelancaran garis panduan buruh paksa. Kesedaran hak untuk bekerja bagi pelarian dan penentuan diri (self-determination) bagi Orang Asli masih belum dapat dilihat. Hak asasi golongan LGBTIQ dan orang pelbagai jantina semakin mundur pada tahun 2023. Buktinya dapat dilihat apabila ada peningkatan dalam penapisan ekspresi LGBTIQ, pengenalan undang-undang syariah anti-LGBT dan pengembangan amalan pemulihan (conversion therapy practices). Perlanggaran hak kepada kebebasan beragama dan kepercayaan bagi agama minoriti berterusan berlaku. Pindaan kepada Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang dicadangkan juga akan memburukkan lagi masalah tanpa kewarganegaraan. Ketika kerajaan perpaduan bergerak memasuki tahun kedua, adalah penting untuk menambat semua undang-undang dan dasar kepada nilai-nilai Madani yang mengutamakan keterangkuman, penghormatan yang sama untuk semua dan kepercayaan daripada ketelusan dan akauntabiliti.

[KENYATAAN MEDIA KLUSTER AKAUNTABILITI POLIS] Pertubuhan masyarakat sivil (Civil society organization – CSO) daripada Kluster Akauntabiliti Polis yang tertulis di bawah mengecam sekeras-kerasnya langkah Kerajaan Madani yang membentang dan meluluskan Rang Undang-undang Polis (Pindaan) 2024 dengan tergesa-gesa tanpa sebarang sesi libat urus bersama pemegang taruh. Kami berasa kecewa kerana modus operandi kerajaan meluluskan RUU ini serupa dengan kerajaan pemerintahan terdahulu. Amalan buruk ini bukan sahaja tidak demokratik, malah membelakangi prinsip reformasi dan ketelusan yang sering ditekankan oleh Kerajaan Madani. Malah, tindakan ini tidak konsisten dengan kenyataan YAB Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, selepas perjumpaan bersama pemimpin Bersih pada 28 Februari 2024. Perdana Menteri pernah menyatakan kepentingan dialog dan ruang bertukar pandangan serta pendekatan yang lebih inklusif dalam mendengar pandangan masyarakat sivil. Usaha sebegini mampu meningkatkan sinergi masyarakat sivil dengan kerajaan dalam proses demokrasi negara. Setiap RUU patut digubal dan dibahaskan dengan penglibatan setiap lapisan masyarakat secara komprehensif, terutamanya apabila isi kandungan RUU tersebut melibatkan isu kepentingan awam. Oleh sebab Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) adalah badan penguatkuasa terbesar di Malaysia, serta apabila diambil kira kes-kes penyalahgunaan kuasa melibatkan pihak polis yang sering dilaporkan, amat penting bagi pandangan awam diambil kira dalam proses pindaan Akta Polis 1967. Namun, sampai hari ini, pertubuhan-pertubuhan masyarakat sivil, mahupun Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (SUHAKAM) serta Majlis Peguam Malaysia masih tidak menerima sebarang maklumat asas mengenai RUU ini. Persoalan-persoalan mengenai kedaulatan undang-undang (rule of law), ketelusan, hukuman yang tidak seimbang dengan kesalahan, penyalahgunaan kuasa polis atau rasuah turut tertimbul dalam pindaan kali ini. Kami dengan segera menuntut perundingan dan penjelasan terutamannya mengenai perkara-perkara berikut: 1. Pindaan seksyen 21 berkenaan tugas di jalan awam Akta Polis 1967 Pindaan seksyen 21 Akta Polis 1967 telah menaikkan denda maksimum daripada RM 200 kepada RM 10,000 dan tempoh pemenjaraan daripada tiga bulan kepada dua tahun bagi kesalahan di bawah peruntukan itu yang berkaitan dengan mana-mana orang yang menghalang, membangkang atau ingkar menurut apa-apa arahan yang munasabah yang diberi oleh mana-mana pegawai polis. Persoalannya, bagaimanakah seorang pegawai polis menentukan sama ada suatu arahan adalah munasabah atau tidak? Memandangkan mekanisme penyeliaan pengawasan polis sedia ada adalah kurang efektif, adakah pindaan ini membuka ruang kepada penyalahgunaan kuasa dan rasuah? Kami khuatir “Little Napoleon” sebaliknya yang akan bermaharajalela selepas ini. Selain itu, adakah peruntukan ini menjadi ‘perundangan berlebihan’ (legal redundancy) kepada seksyen 186 Kanun Keseksaan (menghalang penjawat awam pada menjalankan kerja-kerja jawatannya)? 2. Pertindihan dengan Akta Perhimpunan Aman 2012 Kerajaan juga perlu memberi penjelasan sama ada perhimpunan aman atau demonstrasi di bawah Akta Perhimpunan Aman 2012 tertakluk kepada seksyen 21 dan seksyen 26 (tidak mematuhi isyarat pegawai polis sewaktu sekatan jalan raya) Akta Polis 1967. Jikalau tidak, maka kerajaan harus memperhalusi definisi dan penggunaan peruntukan-peruntukan undang tersebut. 3. Pindaan berkaitan bidang kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong Rakyat juga memerlukan penjelasan lebih mendalam mengenai rasional pelantikan Yang di-Pertuan Agong selaku Pesuruhjaya Yang di-Pertuan Kehormat PDRM. Apakah penambahan kewajipan, fungsi, peranan, tugas dan bidang kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong susulan pelantikan baginda sebagai Pesuruhjaya Yang Dipertua Kehormat PDRM? Bagaimanakah kerajaan memastikan pelantikan ini selaras dan tidak bercanggah dengan prinsip Raja Berperlembagaan yang merupakan batu asas utama kepada demokrasi negara kita? Memandangkan kekurangan ketelusan dan perundingan, kami menyeru para Ahli Dewan Negara agar menangguh RUU Polis (Pindaan) 2024 sementara menunggu kerajaan memberi penjelasan selanjutnya. Manakala, kerajaan pula harus mengambil kesempatan untuk bertemu dengan pihak-pihak berkepentingan dan menerima cadangan penambahbaikan RUU. Kami juga menekankan bahawa pihak Kerajaan terutamanya Kementerian Dalam Negeri wajib mengambil pendekatan berasaskan hak asasi manusia (human rights based approach) ketika membuat dasar-dasar atau pindaan undang-undang yang berkaitan dengan rakyat jelata. Tidak kira Pindaan Perlembagaan berkaitan isu kewarganegaraan, pindaan Akta Hasutan atau RUU Polis (Pindaan) 2024 ini, menteri berkenaan harus mendengar dan menerima pandangan dan suara bantahan rakyat Malaysia. Beliau harus berhenti melaksanakan sesuatu mengikut kehendak hati dan kepentingan politik diri sendiri atau melawan kehendak dan kepentingan rakyat jelata. Disokong oleh: 1. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) 2. Liga Rakyat Demokratik (LRD) 3. Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) 4. Justice for Sisters 5. Hayat 6. Amnesty International Malaysia 7. The Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4) 8. Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances (CAGED) 9. Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) 10. Malaysian Action for Justice and Unity (MAJU) 11. All Women's Action Society (AWAM)

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mengalu-alukan keterbukaan Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) untuk menerima cadangan memperkemas prosedur dalam mengendalikan “permohonan permit perhimpunan”. Penambahbaikan kepada prosedur polis berhubung perhimpunan awam sudah lama tertangguh. Terdapat jurang yang kritikal dalam keadaan tidak konsisten dikenakan apabila penganjur telah memaklumkan kepada polis tentang perhimpunan awam, surat rasmi pula ‘diperlukan’ bagi Perarakan Hari Wanita, dimana kandungan maklumatnya sama seperti serahan dalam borang pemberitahuan. Penganjur perhimpunan aman di ruang awam seperti di Dataran Merdeka juga turut menghadapi keperluan yang tidak munasabah, iaitu mendapatkan persetujuan daripada Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL). Ini adalah suatu halangan birokrasi yang tidak berasas apabila DBKL bukanlah pemilik mahupun penghuni ruang awam. Tambahan pula, siasatan pasca perhimpunan terhadap penganjur, terutama mereka yang telah memaklumkan kepada polis mengenai perhimpunan awam juga masih berterusan. Tindakan ini juga bukan sahaja membazirkan sumber polis, taktik intimidasi sebegini turut menghalang rakyat daripada menggunakan hak mereka secara sah untuk menyatakan pendapat secara kolektif dan penyertaan politik. Jurang ini perlu ditangani dalam pindaan prosedur. Namun begitu, perubahan prosedur sahaja mungkin tidak mencukupi, melainkan disertai dengan pembaharuan menyeluruh dalam akar isu - pendekatan polis dalam menguruskan perhimpunan awam. Walaupun 11 tahun lalu terdapat pindaan kepada Seksyen 27 Akta Polis 1967 dan juga baru-baru ini penjelasan daripada Ketua Polis Negara, kesan pemikiran ‘tiada permit, perhimpunan haram’ masih kekal. Ini terbukti dengan penggunaan berterusan perkataan 'permit' dari semasa ke semasa oleh jurucakap polis, dan semalam (4 Mac 2024) oleh Menteri Dalam Negeri. Timbangtara tidak wajar oleh pegawai polis mengenai perhimpunan awam dilihat masih mengecewakan, khususnya melalui 'nasihat' kepada penganjur untuk tidak mengadakan perhimpunan awam dalam mesyuarat pemudah cara sebelum perhimpunan. Tujuan utama pemberitahuan dan mesyuarat sebelum perhimpunan adalah untuk membolehkan polis memudahkan perhimpunan awam berlangsung - dan bukan menghalang seseorang untuk menggunakan hak perlembagaan bagi berhimpun secara aman. Sehubungan itu, membolehkan mekanisme ini diakses dalam talian dapat memperkemas proses untuk kedua-dua pihak (penganjur dan polis) dan mengatur dan memudahkan perhimpunan aman dilakukan. Selain itu, kami mengulangi cadangan dari 25 Februari 2024 lalu bahawa penangkapan dan penahanan aktivis Harmit Singh di GegarAmerika - keperluan anggota polis untuk peka dengan peranan mereka dan amalan baik dalam mengendalikan perhimpunan awam, memandangkan terdapat jurang dalam pemahaman berkaitan dengan prosedur tersebut. SUARAM berharap dapat berhubung secara langsung dengan Kementerian Dalam Negeri mengenai prosedur sedia ada untuk perhimpunan awam. Kami juga menggesa KDN untuk menganjurkan perundingan dengan organisasi masyarakat sivil untuk mengumpulkan input mengenai pengalaman dan cadangan mereka dalam menambah baik prosedur ini.

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) welcomes the Home Ministry’s openness to receiving proposals for ‘streamlin(ing) procedures in handling applications for assembly permits’. Much-needed improvements to police procedures regarding public assemblies are long overdue. A critical gap exists in the inconsistent conditions imposed when organisers notify the police about public assemblies, exemplified by the formal letter 'required' for the Women's March, duplicating information already submitted in the notification form. Organisers of peaceful assemblies at public spaces like Dataran Merdeka also face the unnecessary requirement of obtaining consent from City Hall, a bureaucratic barrier that is also unfounded when the City Hall is neither the owner nor the occupier of the public space. Furthermore, post-assembly investigations against organisers, especially those who have already notified the police about the public assembly, still persist. Whilst wasting police resources, this tactic of intimidation also disincentivises the Rakyat from legitimately exercising their right to express themselves collectively and on a wider level, political participation. These gaps need to be addressed in the procedural amendments. Nevertheless, procedural changes alone may not suffice, unless accompanied by a thorough reform in the root of the issue – the police’s approach to managing public assemblies. Despite amendments to Section 27 of the Police Act 1967 11 years ago and the Inspector-General of Police’s clarifications just two days ago, vestiges of the ‘no permit, illegal assembly’ mindset persist. This is evident in the continued use of ‘permit’ from time to time by police spokespersons, and just yesterday (4 March 2024), the Home Minister. Unwarranted arbitration by police officers on public assemblies is still disappointingly seen, specifically via ‘advice’ to organisers to not hold public assemblies in pre-assembly facilitation meetings. The primary purpose of the notification and pre-assembly meeting should be to enable the police to facilitate public assemblies – and not to gatekeep who can and cannot exercise the constitutional right to peaceful assembly. On that note, making both mechanisms accessible online streamlines the process for both organisers and the police in organising and facilitating the public assembly respectively. Additionally, we reiterate our recommendation from 25 February 2024 following the arrest and detention of activist Harmit Singh in GegarAmerika – to fully sensitise all police officers to their role and best practices in facilitating public assemblies - given the ongoing gap in understanding among police officers of corresponding procedures. SUARAM hopes to directly engage with the Home Ministry on the existing procedures for public assemblies. We also urge the Ministry to organise consultations with civil society to gather input on their experiences and suggestions for improving these procedures.

Though just for one hour, the arrest and detention of activist Harmit Singh outside the Embassy of the United States of America in Kuala Lumpur on 24 February was a dark one. This deprivation of liberty took place even before the protest began, signifying in plain sight criminalisation of the activist for participating in the Gegar Amerika rally. ‘Disobedience’ as alleged by the police for Harmit’s arrest is highly problematic, when the restriction issued by the police to not go past where the officers stood is neither necessary nor legitimate. There was no basis to presume that the rally would become violent, given full compliance by organisers with peaceful assembly procedures. A notice was submitted as per the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 (PAA), and a facilitation meeting with the police took place before the rally, hence the police were already fully aware of the rally purpose, which was to submit a memorandum to the Embassy. It is also noteworthy that non-violence has been unwaveringly observed by multiple rallies held outside the Embassy gates since October 2023, with the six-day Demi Kepung Palestin in December last year the most recent one. In addition, there was no traffic obstruction or threat to safety of other civilians involved, with the small scale of the rally and assembly participants gathering along the same side of the road as the Embassy. Instead of arresting Harmit, the police should have facilitated the rally, allowing him to peacefully protest alongside other participants. This criminalisation tramples on laws that safeguard that right, namely Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution and the PAA. It also has a chilling effect on the exercise of right to freedom of expression overall, which can only deter constructive democratic participation including by Malaysians. Our civic space is still far from being a safe and enabling one for all to speak up on critical issues without fear and reprisals despite legal safeguards, and attitudes and/or actions by law enforcement remained a longstanding barrier hindering substantial progress on that front. This is a stark reality that is also highlighted by member states last month when Malaysia’s human rights performance was reviewed in the Universal Periodic Review process. It is high time that the government acknowledges and addresses this issue. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) calls for a thorough review of police procedures regarding public assembly facilitation. Prohibition of tactics of intimidation should be prioritised, and grounds in which restrictions can be applied based on principles of necessity, proportionality and legitimacy specified. Full sensitisation of police officers via training of their role is crucial in ensuring that policing of public assemblies is done in a human rights-compliant manner.

Translation in Malay is provided at the end of the statement. On the morning of 8 February 2024, UNHCR-registered Bangladeshi refugee MA Quayum was granted a temporary pass pending court procedures, leading to his release from immigration detention. Quayum was detained by the police for six days from 12 to 17 January 2024, and subsequently by the Immigration Department from 18 January 2024 till his temporary release. This action commendably demonstrates the Home Ministry’s efforts to recognise Quayum’s status as a UNHCR-registered refugee, and at a broader level, adherence to the commitment made to comply with the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s order of stay of Quayum’s deportation. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) also deeply appreciates the tireless efforts undertaken by Quayum’s lawyers to ensure his safety within Malaysia, without which today’s highly encouraging outcome would not have been possible. SUARAM is hopeful that the Government will continue to uphold its commitment to respect the rule of law and protect the integrity of our judicial system, by actively refraining from harassment, intimidation and any arbitrary arrests or detention of Quayum. In particular, we hope the Government will continue to respect and operationalise the principle of non-refoulement as we have seen recently, and not deport him back to his home country where his life will be in grave danger. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUARAM: QUAYUM BEBAS DARIPADA TAHANAN IMIGRESEN MEMBUKTIKAN USAHA POSITIF KERAJAAN MENGIKTIRAF STATUS UNHCR Pada pagi 8 Februari 2024, pelarian berdaftar UNCHR dari Bangladesh bernama MA Quayum telah diberikan pas sementara, memandangkan prosedur di mahkamah bagi kesnya masih berjalan. Kini, beliau telah dibebaskan daripada tahanan imigresen. Quayum telah ditahan oleh pihak polis selama enam hari dari 12 hingga 17 Januari 2024 dan seterusnya oleh pihak Jabatan Imigresen dari 18 Januari hinggalah tempoh beliau dibebaskan hari ini. Tindakan membanggakan ini membuktikan usaha Kementerian Dalam Negeri mengiktiraf status Quayum sebagai pelarian berdaftar di bawah UNHCR dan berpegang teguh kepada komitmen untuk mematuhi perintah Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur bagi penangguhan pengusiran beliau. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) juga amat menghargai usaha gigih peguam Quayum bagi memastikan keselamatannya di Malaysia. Tanpa beliau, usaha yang sangat memberangsangkan hari ini tidak mungkin akan tercapai. SUARAM berharap kerajaan akan terus mengekalkan komitmennya untuk menghormati kedaulatan undang-undang dan melindungi integriti sistem kehakiman negara ini, dengan secara aktif menahan diri daripada gangguan, ugutan dan sebarang penangkapan atau penahanan sewenang-wenangnya terhadap Quayum. Kami berharap Kerajaan akan terusmenghormati dan melaksanakan prinsip tiada penghantaran pulang paksa (non-refoulement) seperti yang dilihat baru-baru ini dan tidak menghantar Quayum pulang ke negara asalnya dimana nyawa beliau berada dalam ancaman.

Translation in Malay is provided at the end of the statement. Ten police officers, two police trucks and a number of police motorcycles stationed outside Bersih’s office for a mere press conference calling for faithful implementation of the long-promised reform agenda. This is not upholding public order – on the contrary, it is sheer, condemnable intimidation. Does this mean that netizens criticising the Pardons Board decision will follow suit, by having their posts deleted, social media accounts monitored or even worse, investigated under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998? Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) questions whether the Home Minister or the Prime Minister himself is aware of the police’s act of monitoring the press conference, which adds another layer of concern to the situation. Bersih, and also very recently Tony Pua, were clearly targeted by the government for exercising their legitimate right to freedom of expression. These actions demonstrate the state’s incapability of accepting constructive criticism, dissent or even discontent. They can also perpetuate censorship, which regresses current painstaking efforts by various stakeholders in fostering accountability for violations, including those of human rights. Equally importantly, through these tactics, the government has committed a triple betrayal: on top of failing to defend its fight against corruption and justice, it has also contravened its duty to uphold the basic human rights of all, especially those seeking public transparency and accountability. This derailment from the values and spirit of reformasi has gone far enough and should be immediately rectified. On this note, SUARAM unequivocally demands the government to fully protect the right to freedom of expression and actively refrain from intimidation, harassment and any form of reprisal against all persons who exercise this fundamental freedom. A group of police outside of Bersih's office. Credit: Bersih's Facebook -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUARAM: Mengapa Perlu Mengerahkan Pasukan Polis Semasa Sidang Media Bersih? Sepuluh anggota polis, dua trak dan sebilangan polis bermotosikal telah berada di luar pejabat Bersih hanya kerana sidang media yang dilakukan. Walhal sidang media tersebut hanya menggesa pelaksanaan agenda reformasi yang telah lama dijanjikan. Tindakan tersebut tidaklah menegakkan ketenteraman awam, sebaliknya ia adalah intimidasi semata-mata dan wajar dikecam. Perihal sebegini menimbulkan persoalan adakah apabila rakyat mempersoalkan keputusan Lembaga Pengampunan akan dikenakan tindakan saman, siaran mereka diturunkan, akaun media sosial dipantau atau lebih teruk – disiasat di bawah Seksyen 233 Akta Komunikasi dan Multimedia 1998? Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mempersoalkan sama ada Menteri Dalam Negeri atau Perdana Menteri sendiri sedar tindakan polis memantau sidang media itu akan menambahkan lagi kebimbangan kepada keadaan tersebut. Baru-baru ini kita melihat Bersih dan juga Tony Pua jelas menjadi sasaran pihak kerajaan hanya kerana menggunakan hak mereka yang sah – iaitu kebebasan bersuara. Tindakan seperti ini memperlihatkan ketidakupayaan negara untuk menerima kritikan membina, perbezaan berpendapat atau rasa tidak berpuas hati. Pihak kerajaan berterusan melakukan penapisan dimana mengundurkan usaha gigih oleh pelbagai pihak berkepentingan dalam memupuk akauntabiliti bagi sebarang perlanggaran, termasuk hak asasi manusia. Perkara yang sama penting, melalui taktik sebegini, kerajaan telah melakukan penganiayaan sebanyak tiga kali: selain gagal mempertahankan perjuangannya menentang rasuah dan keadilan, ia juga telah melanggar kewajipannya untuk menegakkan hak asasi manusia buat semua, terutamanya mereka yang mencari ketelusan dan akauntabiliti awam. Kegelinciran nilai dan semangat reformasi ini sudah cukup jauh dan harus segera diperbetulkan. Sehubungan itu, SUARAM dengan tegas menuntut kerajaan untuk melindungi sepenuhnya hak kebebasan bersuara dan secara aktif menahan diri daripada ugutan, gangguan dan sebarang bentuk tindakan balas terhadap semua orang yang menggunakan kebebasan asasi ini. Reference / Rujukan: https://www.facebook.com/BERSIH2.0/posts/pfbid02mJUBBeDPSsnVjN9hX4eLCfSGKYAUhZ7wDZKU7QtAQsWmyNmNKrziJt48KKCw4xdZl Watch SUARAM's stand Najib's Pardon issues / Tonton pendirian SUARAM terhadap isu pengampunan Najib: https://www.instagram.com/p/C3CgDnqpKJY/

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) refers to the deportation order issued by the Immigration Department on 24 January 2024 for UNHCR-registered Bangladeshi refugee, MA Quayum¹. Quayum’s lawyers were only informed of this development six days later. Whether Quayum is still within or has been deported from Malaysia is uncertain. We strongly condemn this deportation order, as this is in defiance of the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s court decision on 18 January to stay Quayum’s deportation until the conclusion of proceedings of Quayum’s habeas corpus application. Our demand from 18 January still stands: the Immigration Department must fully comply with this court order and immediately cease any subsequent plans to deport Quayum. In addition, we urge that the Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution swiftly intervenes and ensure that this deportation does not take place. This court order violation ironically belies the claims of provision of “humanitarian assistance” to refugees and asylum seekers propounded by the Malaysian delegation in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) session last Friday, whilst reinforcing Malaysia’s notorious reputation in treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, which include arbitrary arrests, detention and deportation. It is also noteworthy that Malaysia’s longstanding lack of a national policy framework for protection of this marginalised group has come under the spotlight for the first time since the first UPR cycle, with corresponding or similar recommendations given by at least eight countries from Europe, South America, Western Africa and South Asia. Violation of the principle of non-refoulement contravenes the fundamental human rights principles of freedom, justice and security for all that the MADANI government has so fervently propounded to 131 countries at the international stage on 25 January 2024. As Malaysia seeks to cooperate with other countries, United Nations agencies and other key partners to “further improve efforts to aid refugees and asylum seekers”, it is imperative that the MADANI government also respects and protects the rights of refugees, including refraining from forcibly returning them to a country where they may face harm. ¹MA Quayum, a member of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), was apprehended in a joint operation conducted by the Malaysian police and the National Security Intelligence (NSI) of Bangladesh on 12 January at his residence in Ampang. He was first detained at the Ampang Jaya District Police Headquarters for six days, and subsequently transferred to the immigration depot in Semenyih. Quayum’s arrest and detention are unwarranted, as Quayum is a UNHCR-recognised refugee and has an active UNHCR card.

Translation in Malay is provided at the end of the statement. CSO: Empower IPCC To Remedy the Public Trust Deficit in PDRM We, the undersigned, are deeply concerned by the escalating trend of police misconduct cases in recent months. These cases include a police officer having allegedly extorted and raped an Uzbek teenager in a patrol car, a police officer slapping a civilian, and a senior police officer being implicated in a hit-and-run accident that led to the death of a high school student, the arrest of a police inspector on alleged abduction of a Bangladeshi man, among others. As the largest enforcement agency in the country, the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) is tasked with the mandate of protecting the public. In these instances of misconduct, however, the officers have become perpetrators that pose a threat to public safety. These incidents cannot and should not be viewed as isolated crimes committed by individual actors; rather, they encapsulate a broader phenomenon within the police force perpetuated by a culture of impunity and a deficiency in implementing robust preventive measures. Moreover, this prevailing trend underscores the inadequacies inherent in the existing police oversight mechanism. We are of the opinion that the Unity Government has missed the golden opportunity to strengthen the Independent Police Conduct Commission (IPCC), which was crucial in addressing this systemic issue. Overdue since August 2023, the announcement of the appointment of five IPCC members was made by Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution about two weeks ago. This development took place after the announcement by the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission that it would cease accepting complaints concerning PDRM personnel starting July 2023. Notably, the IPCC appointments were made without engaging with non-governmental stakeholders, particularly civil society organisations (CSOs). Upon scrutiny of the Independent Police Conduct Commission Act and the jurisdiction of the Commission, it becomes evident that the Unity Government has failed to improve the said legislation in line with input from CSOs. It is noteworthy that content in the current Act diverges from the Pakatan Harapan coalition’s stance, which rejected the IPCC Bill in 2022. The scope of IPCC is a far cry from that in the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) proposed by the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) in 2005. The IPCC is clearly less effective as an oversight mechanism than the already inadequate EAIC. We are concerned that Inherent structural deficiencies within the IPCC will render the oversight mechanism to be a ‘toothless tiger’, irrespective of the competence and experience of the Commission’s members. The IPCC is unable to conduct searches and seizures and make unannounced visits to police lockups. Devoid of the authority to take direct disciplinary action against offending police officers, the Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to providing recommendations to the Police Force Commission for subsequent action. Given these limitations, we harbour reservations about the IPCC’s efficacy in addressing misconduct, as its jurisdiction for investigation and enforcement of penalties is significantly restricted. Nevertheless, our commitment to work with the government to improve the Commission remains unwavering. We propose arranging a meeting between CSOs and members of IPCC at the earliest to explore avenues in ensuring effective functioning of the Commission. Concurrently, we also call on the government to implement an open and transparent selection process for the remaining two Commission member vacancies, whilst ensuring that the composition of IPCC reflects current societal diversity. It is also imperative that a periodic review of the Commission’s performance and effectiveness once every two years, with review findings presented in Parliament. Legal amendments and policy improvements must be pursued as soon as possible, in order to ensure that IPCMC’s essence, best practices and international standards are upheld. An independent and effective police oversight entity is crucial for not just the public but also the police force. The role of IPCC assumes heightened significance in light of the decline in PDRM’s reputation and subsequent widening of trust deficit by the public towards the police. We urge that transparent and impartial investigations be conducted on instances of police misconduct, so that PDRM’s integrity will be upheld and safeguarded. We also seek to work together for the public and the police force’s benefit - to help build a police force that is accountable, and trusted and respected by the public. Endorsed by: 1. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) 2. Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) 3. All Women's Action Society (AWAM) 4. Justice for Sisters 5. Gabungan Pilihan Raya Bersih dan Adil (BERSIH) 6. Undi18 7. North South Initiative 8. Liga Rakyat Demokratik 9. University of Malaya Association for New Youth (UMANY) 10. EMPOWER 11. Sisters in Islam 12. Tenaganita 13. Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM) 14. Aliran 15. Movement for Change, Sarawak (MoCS) 16. Persatuan Pemangkin Daya Masyarakat (ROSE) 17. Pusat KOMAS 18. KLSCAH Youth 19. Malaysian Action for Justice and Unity (MAJU) 20. Pergerakan Tenaga Akademik Malaysia (GERAK) 21. Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement 22. Gabungan Marhaen 23. Persatuan Amal Progresif Selangor 24. Persatuan Komuniti Prihatin Selangor dan KL 25. Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center) 26. JERIT – Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas 27. Gerak Malaysia 28. Borneo Komrad 29. Mamas Bersih 30. Serikat Malaysia 31. Sabah AIDS Support Services Association (KASIH) 32. ⁠Advocates for Non-discrimination and Access to Knowledge (ANAK) 33. Lawyer Kamek 34. Penan Empowerment Networking Association (PENA) 35. Independent Coalition Of Natives (ICON) 36. KLSCAH Civil Rights Committee (KLSCAH CRC) 37. Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) 38. Jentayu 39. Persatuan Wanita Maju Selangor & KL 40. Agora Society 41. ICON LEGEND, Sarawak 42. Parti Sosialis Malaysia - PSM 43. Rahman Student League 44. Rahman Solidarity League 45. Persatuan Bertutur Bahasa Mandarin Malaysia Negeri Johor 46. Student Progressive Front UUM 北大前进阵线 47. Suara Siswa UUM 北大学声阵线 48. Gerakan Mahasiswa Maju UPM 49. Persatuan Bahasa Tionghua USM 理大华文学会 50. Suara Siswa UM 51. Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA) 52. Sarawak AIDS Concern Society (SACS) 53. Persatuan Aktivis Sahabat Alam (KUASA) 54. Global Bersih 55. Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC) 56. Amnesty International Malaysia 57. Transparency International Malaysia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- KENYATAAN BERSAMA MASYARAKAT SIVIL MENGENAI KES SALAH LAKU POLIS DAN PEMBENTUKAN IPCC CSO: PERKASAKAN IPCC UNTUK PULIHKAN KRISIS KEPERCAYAAN PDRM Pertubuhan masyarakat sivil (Civil society organisation - CSO) yang tertulis di bawah mengambil serius terhadap trend kes salah laku polis yang kian meningkat baru-baru ini. Ini termasuk kes anggota polis yang didakwa memeras ugut dan rogol remaja Uzbekistan dalam kereta peronda polis, anggota polis menampar orang awam, pegawai kanan polis terbabit kes langgar sehingga menyebabkan kematian seorang pelajar, inspektor polis ditahan disyaki terlibat melarikan seorang warga Bangladesh, dan lain-lain lagi. Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) sebagai agensi penguatkuasaan terbesar di Malaysia sepatutnya menjadi pelindung kepada masyarakat, sebaliknya dalam kes-kes sebegini, pegawai-pegawainya malah menjadi si pelaku yang mengancam keselamatan awam. Kes-kes ini tidak boleh dilihat sebagai jenayah individu tetapi suatu fenomena yang didorong budaya bebas daripada hukuman dalam pasukan polis serta kekurangan langkah-langkah pencegahan yang efektif. Trend ini juga menunjukkan mekanisme pengawasan polis sedia ada yang kurang berkesan. Kami berpendapat bahawa Kerajaan Perpaduan telah terlepas peluang keemasan untuk memulihkan fenomena ini dengan memperkasakan institusi Suruhanjaya Bebas Tatakelakuan Polis (IPCC). Setelah tertangguh sejak Ogos 2023, lebih kurang dua minggu yang lalu Menteri Dalam Negeri Saifuddin Nasution telah mengumumkan pelantikan lima orang ahli IPCC. Ini berlaku selepas Suruhanjaya Integriti Agensi Penguatkuasaan (EAIC) membuat pengumuman tidak lagi menerima aduan berhubung PDRM bermula Julai 2023. Pelantikan-pelantikan ini juga dilakukan tanpa sesi libat urus bersama pihak berkepentingan terutamanya CSO. Jika diteliti akta dan bidang kuasa IPCC sekarang, Kerajaan Perpaduan bukan sahaja tidak menambah baik mengikut pandangan CSO, malah ia tidak sehaluan dengan pendirian Pakatan Harapan sendiri yang menolak RUU IPCC pada tahun 2022. Bidang kuasa IPCC adalah jauh berbeza dengan Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan dan Salah Laku Polis (IPCMC) yang dicadangkan oleh Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja (RCI) pada tahun 2005, jelas IPCC lebih tidak efektif berbanding EAIC yang sememangnya sedia lemah. Tidak kira betapa cekap dan berpengalaman ahli Suruhanjaya, kami khuatir kekurangan IPCC secara struktural hanya akan menjadikan ‘Suruhanjaya Rujukan’ (Referral Commission), ibarat ‘harimau tidak bertaring’. IPCC tiada kuasa untuk menggeledah atau menyita, tidak boleh melawat lokap polis tanpa notis awal, malah tidak boleh mengambil tindakan disiplin terhadap pesalah laku dan hanya mampu memberi cadangan kepada Suruhanjaya Pasukan Polis untuk tindakan lanjut. Kami sangsi bahawa IPCC dapat menangani isu salah laku polis secara efektif memandangkan bidang kuasanya untuk menyiasat dan menguatkuasakan hukuman adalah amat terhad. Namun begitu, kami masih bersedia untuk bekerjasama. Kami mencadangkan satu mesyuarat antara CSO dan IPCC untuk diadakan dalam masa terdekat bagi mencari jalan dalam memastikan institusi in dapat sekurang-kurangnya berfungsi secara efektif. Kami juga menyeru kerajaan untuk memastikan pemilihan baki dua orang ahli Suruhanjaya dijalankan secara terbuka dan telus. Selain itu, komposisi IPCC juga perlu mencerminkan masyarakat yang berkepelbagaian. Penilaian berkala (periodic review) terhadap prestasi dan keberkesanan IPCC perlu dilaksanakan setiap dua tahun dan dibentangkan di Parlimen. Pindaan undang-undang dan penambahbaikan dasar perlu diusahakan secepat mungkin agar ia mencapai semangat asal IPCMC, amalan baik dan piawaian antarabangsa. Satu badan pengawasan polis yang bebas dan efektif bukan sahaja penting untuk pihak awam tetapi juga kepada pihak polis. Tugas IPCC adalah kritikal terutamanya semasa reputasi dan imej PDRM semakin merosot serta defisit kepercayaan terhadap PDRM semakin melebar. Kami menyeru agar sebarang siasatan terhadap kes-kes salah laku polis dijalankan secara telus dan adil supaya integriti PDRM terpelihara. Kami juga bersedia bekerjasama bagi membina satu pasukan polis yang berakaunbiliti, dipercayai serta dihormati oleh rakyat jelata. Disokong oleh: Lihat senarai di atas. Turut hadir rakan-rakan seperjuangan daripada organisasi masyarakat sivil (CSO). More in the media: https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/693931 https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/693942 https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/693933 https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/693947 https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/693958 https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/693964 https://www.bharian.com.my/berita/nasional/2024/01/1203334/ipcc-ibarat-harimau-tak-bertaring-suaram https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2024/01/22/independent-police-conduct-commission-needs-more-transparency-says-civil-society https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2024/01/22/csos-want-periodic-review-of-ipcc-tabled-in-parliament/ https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2024/01/22/suaram-calls-for-strengthening-of-ipcc-to-address-escalating-police-misconduct/113854