Search Results

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) condemns the police investigation of political artist and activist Fahmi Reza under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act over his “Kelas Demokrasi” video. The criminalisation of non-partisan civic education—here, on the functions of the state executive and legislature and how Sabahans can participate meaningfully in the political process—underscores what civil society has warned all along: even after amendment, Section 233 remains overbroad and vague, inviting arbitrary enforcement. This investigation sends a chilling message to educators and their audiences, effectively denying the right to seek, receive and impart information needed to understand our political system. When political literacy is policed, meaningful political participation erodes: people are less able to scrutinise authority, demand transparency, and engage in policy debate. It also, ironically, jars with Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s remarks in Ethiopia just four days ago that youth must be “equal participants” in politics, that Gen-Z energy for “good governance” should be harnessed, and that digital-native engagement should drive “participatory democracy,” “transparency,” and “accountability.” Investigating Kelas Demokrasi under Section 233 cuts against those commitments and deepens the very “declining trust in institutions” and “digital misinformation” the government says it wants to remedy. We call on the police to immediately drop the Section 233 probe against Fahmi. In the context of the Sabah state elections, authorities must not chill civic discourse: voters especially youth—need unimpeded access to non-partisan civic education to make informed choices. In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director at SUARAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUARAM: PENDIDIKAN SIVIK BUKAN JENAYAH - HENTIKAN SIASATAN SEKSYEN 233  Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mengecam tindakan siasatan pihak polis terhadap pereka grafik dan aktivis, Fahmi Reza di bawah Seksyen 233 Akta Komunikasi dan Multimedia berikutan video ‘Kelas Demokrasi’. Menjenayahkan pendidikan sivik yang bukan partisan - melihat kepada fungsi eksekutif dan perundangan di peringkat negeri serta bagaimana keterlibatan warga Sabah dapat mengambil bahagian dalam proses politik yang bermakna - mengukuhkan apa yang telah lama ditegaskan oleh masyarakat sivil bahawa meskipun peruntukan tersebut dipinda, Seksyen 233 tetap terlalu luas dan kabur, lalu membuka ruang kepada penguatkuasaan sewenang-wenangnya.  Siasatan ini menghantar mesej yang menggerunkan kepada para pendidik dan khalayak mereka, sekali gus menafikan hak untuk mencari, menerima dan menyampaikan maklumat yang diperlukan untuk memahami sistem politik kita. Apabila literasi politik dikawal, penyertaan politik yang bermakna akan terhakis: rakyat menjadi kurang berupaya untuk meneliti pihak berkuasa, menuntut ketelusan, dan terlibat dalam perbahasan dasar.  Ironinya, tindakan ini juga bercanggah dengan kenyataan Perdana Menteri Anwar Ibrahim di Ethiopia empat hari lalu bahawa anak muda mesti menjadi “peserta yang setara” dalam politik, bahawa tenaga Gen-Z untuk “tadbir urus yang baik” harus dimanfaatkan serta penglibatan generasi digital-native  harus menggerakkan “demokrasi penyertaan”, “ketelusan” dan “akauntabiliti.” Menyiasat Kelas Demokrasi di bawah Seksyen 233 bercanggah dengan komitmen tersebut dan hanya memperdalam “penurunan kepercayaan terhadap institusi” dan “maklumat salah digital” yang kononnya ingin ditangani oleh kerajaan. Kami menggesa pihak polis untuk serta-merta menggugurkan siasatan Seksyen 233 terhadap Fahmi. Dalam konteks pilihan raya negeri Sabah, pihak berkuasa tidak boleh mengekang wacana sivik: pengundi—terutamanya anak muda—memerlukan akses tanpa halangan kepada pendidikan sivik bukan partisan untuk membuat keputusan yang bermaklumat. Dalam solidariti, Azura Nasron  Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. We, the undersigned organisations, condemn the arrests of activists S. Arutchelvan and Mythreyar, as well as resident Logeswaran at around 4.00pm on 12 November 2025 under Section 186 of the Penal Code. These arrests were unwarranted. Together with Kampung Papan residents, they clearly informed the police that the Selangor Menteri Besar had authorised that occupied houses are not to be demolished. This directive was issued via the 23 October press statement titled “Kerajaan Negeri Cakna Isu Penempatan Peneroka Jalan Papan”, which affirmed: “Kerajaan Negeri menegaskan bahawa kerja-kerja perobohan hendaklah dihadkan kepada rumah dan premis perniagaan yang kosong serta tidak mempunyai penghuni sahaja selaras dengan arahan dan semangat penyelesaian secara berhemah yang telah dipersetujui bersama melalui perundingan semua pihak berkepentingan yang dipengerusikan YAB Dato Menteri Besar sendiri pada Selasa, 21hb Oktober yang lepas”. Yet today, homes still occupied by residents were forcefully cleared —belongings removed and residents physically pushed out—directly contravening the Menteri Besar’s statement and the state’s directives. The three individuals arrested were acting on the Selangor State Government’s directive that occupied houses should not be demolished until an amicable solution is achieved. Instead, officers of IPD Klang Selatan, including the OCPD, defied the Menteri Besar’s directive by assisting the developer, Melati Ehsan, to forcibly evict occupants. The arrests are therefore unnecessary and unlawful, as the three acted in accordance with the advice and directive of the Menteri Besar and the state government. We demand the immediate and unconditional release of S. Arutchelvan, Mythreyar and Logeswaran. We further call on the Selangor state government to intervene and ensure that the demolition is halted, with no further forced evictions undertaken until all residents receive adequate alternative housing. Endorsed by: 1.      Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) 2.      Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement (TBH-ADA) 3.      Ruang Kongsi 4.      Karunjattai 5.      Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Swasta Perkhidmatan Sokongan Di Hospital-Hospital Kerajaan dan Jabatan-Jabatan Kerajaan Semenanjung Malaysia 6.      Pertubuhan Persaudaraan Pesawah Malaysia (PeSAWAH) 7.      Forum Kedaulatan Makanan Malaysia (FKMM) 8.      Parti Sosialis Malaysia 9.      Gabungan MARHAEN 10. Pemuda Sosialis 11. Third World Network 12. Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC) 13. Alliance of River Three 14. Agora Society Malaysia 15. Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM) 16. Aliran 17. Freedom Film Network 18. Pusat Pelajar Marhaen (PPM) 19. Pertubuhan SiraguGal 20. GEGAR 21. Jaringan Pekerja Kontrak Kerajaan (JPKK) 22. Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (EMPOWER) 23. Angkatan Kesatuan Siswa Sosialis (AKSI) 24. Jaringan Kampung Orang Asli Semenanjung Malaysia (JKOASM) 25. Jaringan Orang ASLI Negeri Sembilan (JOAN) 26. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor 27. Association of Women Lawyers (AWL) 28. People Like Us Support Ourselves (PLUsos) 29. Women's Aid Organisation (WAO) 30. Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) 31. Hindu Youth’s Organisation Port Klang 32. Ikatan Demokratik Malaysia (MUDA) 33. Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) 34. Cahaya Society 35. Filsufi. & Co 36. Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4) 37. Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances (CAGED) 38. Justice For Sisters 39. SIS Forum Malaysia 40. ARTICLE 19 41. KLSCAH Youth 42. BERSIH 43. Liga Mahasiswa Malaysia 44. Liga Mahasiswa Universiti Malaya 45. Gerakan Perempuan Melawan 46. Liga Rakyat Demokratik 47. Federasi Pemuda Kebangsaan 48. MANDIRI 49. MAJU 50. Pro-Siswa Kolej Komuniti 51. Projek Ruang Lawan Malaysia 52. HAYAT 53. Amnesty International Malaysia 54. TENAGANITA 55. North South Initiative (NSI) 56. Community Action Network (CAN) 57. Klima Action Malaysia (KAMY) 58. Persatuan Martabat Untuk Semua Petaling Jaya (Martabat PJ) 59. Pusat KOMAS   Individuals: 1.      Dr Aaron Denison Deivasagayam 2.      Mayna Ramesh Patel 3.      Thilaga Sulathireh 4.      Beverly Joeman --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Penahanan Tidak Sah dan Pengusiran Paksa yang Melanggar Arahan Menteri Besar Selangor Kami, organisasi yang bertandatangan di bawah, mengecam penangkapan aktivis S.Arutchelvan dan Mythreyar, serta penduduk bernama Logeswaran sekitar jam 4.00 petang pada 11 November 2025 di bawah Seksyen 186 Kanun Keseksaan. Penangkapan ini tidak berasas. Mereka bertiga bersama-sama penduduk Kampung Papan dengan jelas telah memaklumkan kepada pihak polis bahawa Menteri Besar Selangor telah mengarahkan agar rumah yang masih didiami tidak dirobohkan. Arahan ini telah dikeluarkan melalui Kenyataan Media bertarikh 23 Oktober dengan tajuk: ‘Kerajaan Negeri Cakna Isu Penempatan Peneroka Jalan Papan’ yang menegaskan: “ Kerajaan Negeri menegaskan bahawa kerja-kerja perobohan hendaklah dihadkan kepada rumah dan premis perniagaan yang kosong serta tidak mempunyai penghuni sahaja selaras dengan arahan dan semangat penyelesaian secara berhemah yang telah dipersetujui bersama melalui perundingan semua pihak berkepentingan yang dipengerusikan YAB Dato Menteri Besar sendiri pada Selasa, 21hb Oktober yang lepas ”.  Namun hari ini, rumah-rumah yang dihuni penduduk telah dirobohkan secara paksa– barangan dikeluarkan dan penduduk ditolak keluar secara fizikal. Hal ini jelas sekali bertentangan dengan kenyataan Menteri Besar dan arahan kerajaan negeri. Tiga individu ditahan bertindak mengikut arahan Kerajaan Negeri Selangor bahawa rumah yang dihuni sepatutnya tidak dimusnahkan sehingga satu penyelesaian berhemah dicapai. Sebaliknya, pegawai-pegawai dari IPD Klang Selatan termasuk OCPD melanggar arahan Menteri Besar dengan membantu pemaju, Melati Ehsan untuk melaksanakan pengusiran paksa terhadap penduduk. Penangkapan tersebut adalah tidak diperlu dan tidak sah kerana ketiga-tiga mereka hanya bertindak selaras dengan nasihat dan arahan daripada Menteri Besar dan kerajaan negeri. Kami menuntut S.Arutchelvan, Mythrayer dan Logeswaran dibebaskan serta-merta tanpa syarat. Kami juga menggesa kerajaan negeri Selangor untuk campur tangan dan memastikan kerja-kerja perobohan dihentikan sehingga tiada lagi pengusiran paksa dilakukan sehingga semua penduduk menerima perumahan alternatif yang mencukupi. Penduduk Kg Papan menuntut rumah alternatif. Gambar dari: Sosialis.net

The ambush arrest of student activist Sudirman Arshad under the Sedition Act and Section 509 of the Penal Code —despite a prior arrangement to present himself for questioning on 1 November—is not only an abuse of power but a breach of due process that undermines the rule of law. He was released at approximately 5.15pm. While police denied that the “arrest” occurred, the material fact is that Sudirman’s liberty was arrested for sedition questioning without basic safeguards being upheld, including access to legal counsel. The police’s sustained disregard for the rule of law is evident. In just four months, six student activists—including Sudirman—have been arrested in circumstances marked by due-process breaches or disproportionate tactics. These include closed-door attempts by Special Branch to extract unlawful “intelligence statements” after 112 statements were taken, when the activists had voluntarily attended under CPC Section 111 for other investigations; and arrests at homes or workplaces without demonstrated necessity. These arrests, alongside Sudirman’s, discredit the government’s reformist claims to a facilitative approach to peaceful assemblies. In five of the six cases, speech offences—most notably the Sedition Act—have been deployed to police peaceful assemblies by the back door, criminalising assembly-related expression while disregarding due process. The posture risks chilling the people’s exercise of the right to peaceful assembly—the constitutional harm the Federal Court underscored when it struck down Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA)—and it is incompatible with the government’s stated post-ruling commitment to review the PAA and move toward facilitative policing. Whilst we note Sudirman’s release, we demand that that the Sedition Act and Section 509 investigation be dropped immediately. The police must also cease using the Sedition Act and relevant Penal Code provisions to police assembly-related expression. In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director at SUARAM

We, the undersigned civil society organisations, express serious concerns over the violations of privacy, dignity, and due process of two human rights defenders (HRD)  who were arrested at a Palestine solidarity protest outside the US embassy on 2 October 2025.  Following their release on police bail, the Kuala Lumpur police released a video on their Facebook page, which shows the investigating officer lecturing the two HRDs as they are given their bail sheets. In the video, the officer is seen 'advising' them not to repeat their actions—even before any investigation had been completed—despite other video evidence and eyewitness accounts suggesting that plainclothes police officers provoked the protesters. This act undermines the presumption of innocence of the HRDs.  The police, as enforcers of rule of law, must always maintain a non-prejudicial position and refrain from presuming guilt before it is established in a court of law. This is critical in ensuring separation of powers, as well as in ensuring the independence, impartiality, and integrity in the delivery of justice.  While the police replaced their first post with a second version that blurred the HRDs’ faces, both posts breach the HRDs’ privacy, security and dignity, safeguarded under Article 5  of the Federal Constitution. These actions reinforce negative public perception and prejudice, damaging their employment and livelihoods; perpetuate a chilling effect on civic participation.  According to international human rights standards , all persons under detention must be treated in a humane manner and with respect for their inherent dignity, which includes their privacy. By recording and posting the footage of the two HRDs, the police effectively breached these rights.  In the absence of   a clear, documented operational or evidentiary need, the recording and dissemination of the footage on official channels fail the requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality that govern police processing of personal data.  The EU’s Practical Guide On The Use Of Personal Data In The Police Sector  states that “the collection of personal data for police purposes should be limited to what is necessary and proportionate for the prevention of a real danger or the prevention, investigation and prosecution of a specific criminal offence. Any exception to this provision should be the subject of specific national legislation.” This is further affirmed by the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)  which clearly states that collection and use of personal data must be “purpose specific” and not further “processed in ways incompatible with those purposes”. It must be respectful of individual rights and provide for “appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjec t”.     Similarly, the Checklist on 10 principles for the proper management of assemblies  by the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and Association underscores that “legislation and policies regulating the collection and processing of information relating to assemblies or their organizers and participants must incorporate legality, necessity, and proportionality tests.”  In line with protecting the privacy of detainees, the police must also obtain consent from the detainees before recording and publicly disseminating such footage. In this case, no such consent was obtained. The police must also clearly state the purpose of such recordings, especially if it is outside of the context of an investigation or prosecution of a crime.  The overall conduct of the police in this case neither inspires public confidence nor addresses the existing trust deficit  in the police force - especially following a series of missteps  and unprofessional statements  by the police.  Further, the police conduct during the protest highlights a broader structural issue: amendments to the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA). Presently, the role of the police in facilitating assembly is not explicitly outlined under Section 8 of the PAA. This legal ambiguity may result in the continued misuse of Section 186 of the Penal Code, which penalizes obstruction of any public servant in the discharge of their public functions .  Finally, we urge the police to remove all social media posts related to the two HRDs, with no further delays. In addition, we make the following recommendations  The Ministry of Home Affairs to  a. Amend Section 8 of the PAA to explicitly outline the role of the police in facilitating public assemblies, in line with international good practices and the UN SR's Checklist of 10 Principles. b. Develop guidelines to ensure safeguards against the arbitrary use of Section 186 of the Penal Code during peaceful assembly. SUHAKAM in collaboration with the police and civil society organisations to  a. Develop guidelines to strengthen privacy and data protection in police action and practices, including on prohibiting unauthorised recording and public dissemination of detainees' images and personal data without their consent, unless it is strictly necessary and meets the lawful proportionality requirements for investigations and prosecution purposes.  b. Strengthen training on proper management of assemblies and protection of human rights.  Social media platforms to  ensure that their practices adhere to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) as well as their own community standards.  Establish transparent processes for assessing and removing state-generated content that violates privacy, security and dignity of the individuals. Endorsed by: Justice for Sisters  MANDIRI Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) SIS Forum (Malaysia) Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) Sisters United JEJAKA KL Queer Space Association of Women Lawyers (AWL) Amnesty International Malaysia (AIM) Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (EMPOWER) Gegar

We, the undersigned organisations, strongly condemn the arrest of two protesters during a spontaneous, peaceful protest held outside the US Embassy at noon today in response to Israel’s interception of the Global Sumud Flotilla and the detention of hundreds of activists, including 23 Malaysians. As a spontaneous assembly responding to unfolding events, the protest was entitled to adaptive facilitation—not punitive policing. Police had a positive obligation to facilitate the assembly; instead, their conduct was marked by unlawful and disproportionate force and clear breaches of due-process guarantees. These arrests—reportedly for obstruction of civil servants from performing their duties (Section 186 of the Penal Code)—are unjustifiable when the police themselves actively obstructed the protesters’ constitutional right to peacefully assemble. Instead of enabling safe use of the pedestrian walkway outside the U.S. Embassy, officers blocked access and displaced protesters onto the roadway, manufacturing the very disruption later cited. Contrary to media reports, police are seen provoking the scuffle: a plainclothes Special Branch officer feigns being pushed by one of the arrestees while blocking him from rejoining fellow protesters. The second protester—seen attempting to de-escalate—was arrested nonetheless. The force used by the police was unwarranted—arising from conditions the police themselves created. Both protesters were dragged and restrained by multiple police officers, held by both arms and around the neck, before being handcuffed. Other protesters who were attempting to defuse the situation were also manhandled without warning—shoved, pushed and forcibly restrained—needlessly endangering participants’ physical safety. Both active provocation and use of excessive force mark a clear deterioration from the already restrictive approach seen at recent assemblies outside Parliament. For four hours after the arrests, the authorities did not disclose where the two protesters were held. At the point of arrest, they were not informed where they would be taken and have been denied access to legal counsel, in breach of basic rights for arrested persons. It also remains unclear whether they have been given access to medical examination and treatment for the injuries sustained. We demand for the immediate and unconditional release of both protesters. We also call on the Home Ministry to review police protocols and ensure that all officers adopt a facilitative, rights-based approach to managing assemblies. Amidst ongoing amendments to the Peaceful Assembly Act, the Madani government must ensure that assembly policing practices reflect—not undermine its stated commitment to reform. Endorsed Organisations: Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) Amnesty International Malaysia Justice for Sisters GEGAR Malaysian Protest 4 Palestine (MP4P) Angkatan Kesatuan Siswa Sosialis (AKSI) JEJAKA Students Against Genocide Malaysia (SAGM) Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO) Reproductive Rights Advocacy Alliance Malaysia (RRAAM) SIUMAN Collective Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) Artivist

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) condemns the police handling of student activist Aliefah as an abuse of power and a breach of due process.  Aliefah's arrest was wholly unnecessary. A summons to appear voluntarily for questioning would have sufficed. Instead, like student activist Abdul Qayyum who was also arrested under similar circumstances ten days ago, Aliefah was taken to IPD Tawau and denied access to exercise her right to legal counsel. In contrast, UMNO Youth Chief Akmal Saleh - under investigation last month under the Sedition Act, Section 506 of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act - was allowed to present himself at a scheduled time with his lawyer and provide his statement. The unequal treatment raises legitimate concerns about selective enforcement and compromise of procedural fairness.    After completing her 112 statement, Aliefah was confined alone in a room and further questioned by a group of special branch (SB) officers. This is not the first time this has happened — just two months ago, three youth activists in Sabah, including university students Muhammad Fadhil Kasim and Aliff Danial Badrul Akmal, were subjected to the same treatment after the Gempur Rasuah Sabah 2.0 protest. Under the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), only a Section 112 statement is allowed in routine criminal investigations. Forcing a second “intelligence statement” outside this process an unlawful and coercive tactic that undermines the basic protections CPC provides to witnesses and suspects — including the right to be questioned lawfully, clearly, and fairly.  SUARAM calls for the immediate and unconditional release of Aliefah. We demand an immediate explanation from the Royal Malaysian Police as to why due process was violated, blatantly contravening Aliefah's constitutional guarantee of personal liberty under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution.  In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director at SUARAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUARAM: SIASATAN OLEH CAWANGAN KHAS SELEPAS RAKAMAN KENYATAAN 112 ADALAH PENYALAHGUNAAN KUASA POLIS Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mengecam tindakan pihak polis terhadap aktivis mahasiswa Aliefah sebagai satu penyalahgunaan kuasa dan pelanggaran proses hak. Penahanan Aliefah jelas tidak perlu. Satu arahan untuk hadir secara sukarela bagi tujuan soal siasat sudah memadai. Walau bagaimanapun, Aliefah dibawa ke IPD Tawau dan dinafikan hak untuk mendapatkan khidmat guaman – sama seperti aktivis mahasiswa Abdul Qayyum yang turut ditahan sepuluh hari lalu. Sebaliknya, Ketua Pemuda UMNO Akmal Saleh — yang disiasat bulan lalu di bawah Akta Hasutan, Seksyen 506 Kanun Keseksaan dan Seksyen 233 Akta Komunikasi dan Multimedia — dibenarkan hadir pada waktu yang dijadualkan bersama peguamnya untuk memberikan kenyataan. Layanan yang berat sebelah ini menimbulkan persoalan mengenai penguatkuasaan terpilih serta menjejaskan keadilan prosedur sedia ada. Setelah menyelesaikan kenyataan 112, Aliefah telah dikurung seorang diri dalam sebuah bilik dan disoal siasat lagi oleh sekumpulan pegawai cawangan khas (SB). Ini bukan kali pertama perkara sebegini berlaku — hanya dua bulan lalu, tiga aktivis belia di Sabah termasuk mahasiswa universiti Muhammad Fadhil Kasim dan Aliff Danial Badrul Akmal turut dikenakan layanan sama selepas protes Gempur Rasuah Sabah 2.0. Di bawah Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (CPC), hanya kenyataan Seksyen 112 dibenarkan dalam siasatan jenayah rutin. Memaksa kenyataan “risikan” kedua di luar proses ini adalah tidak sah dan bersifat paksaan yang meruntuhkan perlindungan asas yang tersedia dalam CPC kepada saksi dan suspek — termasuk hak untuk disoal secara sah, jelas, dan adil. SUARAM menggesa agar Aliefah segera dibebaskan tanpa syarat. Kami menuntut penjelasan segera daripada Polis Diraja Malaysia mengapa proses hak telah dicabuli secara terang-terangan, sekali gus bercanggah dengan jaminan di bawah Perkara 5 Perlembagaan Persekutuan terhadap kebebasan diri.   Dalam solidariti, Azura Nasron Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mengalu-alukan penegasan Perdana Menteri bahawa orang awam mempunyai hak untuk berhimpun secara aman di hadapan Parlimen. Pendiran yang jelas ini menegaskan bahawa perhimpunan aman adalah satu hak perlembagaan — bukan satu kesulitan logistik — dan mengukuhkan kepentingan akses orang awam kepada institusi kuasa. Namun begitu, kami bimbang dengan penekanan terhadap isu trafik dan koordinasi sebagai syarat untuk melaksanakan hak perlembagaan ini. Kedua-dua perhimpunan aman pada 22 Julai dan 13 Ogos menyaksikan pihak polis menggunakan langkah-langkah sekatan seperti rantai dan halangan fizikal, ketika para peserta cuba mencabar sekatan pencegahan menyeluruh yang dilaksanakan sejak pandemik. Di bawah sekatan ini, kumpulan hanya dibenarkan berkumpul di kaki bukit dengan pintu Parlimen kekal tidak boleh diakses — sekali gus menafikan keterlihatan dan jarak dekat yang diperlukan bagi menyampaikan suara mereka kepada ahli parlimen. Gangguan trafik diiktiraf di peringkat antarabangsa sebagai satu akibat biasa, malah tidak dapat dielakkan, daripada perhimpunan berhampiran institusi politik. Ambang untuk menyekat perhimpunan kerana isu trafik oleh itu adalah tinggi: hanya apabila kesesakan menimbulkan risiko jelas terhadap keselamatan awam, atau apabila gangguan adalah tidak seimbang dengan tujuan protes, barulah sekatan boleh dibenarkan. Menghalang akses ke pintu Parlimen atau mengalihkan semua protes ke kaki bukit jelas sekali gagal memenuhi piawaian ini. Tanggungjawab negara adalah untuk secara aktif memudah dan membolehkan perhimpunan diadakan dalam jarak bermakna kepada sasaran mereka, bukan menundukkan hak untuk berhimpun kepada keselesaan trafik atau koordinasi birokrasi. SUARAM menggesa pihak polis dan Kementerian Dalam Negeri untuk segera menyemak dan menyelaraskan semula protokol penguatkuasaan agar mencerminkan pendirian Perdana Menteri, dengan memastikan perhimpunan difasilitasi melalui langkah yang berpatutan — seperti pengalihan trafik secara berunding atau akses berperingkat — dan bukannya sekatan menyeluruh. Pendekatan sebegini akan melengkapi usaha kerajaan yang dinyatakan untuk meminda Akta Perhimpunan Aman, memastikan bahawa reformasi bukan sahaja pada tahap legislatif tetapi turut tercermin dalam amalan penguatkuasaan yang menegakkan hak perlembagaan serta mengukuhkan akauntabiliti demokratik. Dalam solidariti, Azura Nasron  Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) strongly condemns the arrest of Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) Deputy Chairperson S. Arutchelvan (“Arul”) under Sections 353 and 427 of the Penal Code. This arrest amounts to a clear abuse of police powers and process and reflects a longstanding pattern of intimidation against activists for exercising their constitutional right to peaceful assembly.  Arul had already fully cooperated with the police, having presented himself at IPD Dang Wangi last Thursday (14 August) for questioning. The arrest was thus wholly disproportionate, as there are no justifiable grounds to believe that Arul would not comply with any further police summons. Moreover, there is no basis to continue the investigation, when publicly available footage of the 13 August assembly shows no use of criminal force, and when the police themselves imposed unnecessary restrictions that obstructed protesters from submitting the proposed Estate Workers Housing Scheme Act directly to lawmakers outside the Parliament gates. Arul’s arrest marks at least the third case this year in which activists have been arrested for exercising the constitutional right to peacefully assemble – following the arrests of SUARAM’s former Executive Director Sevan Doraisamy in February under the Protected Areas and Protected Places Act, as well as of Fadhil Kasim, Aliff Danial and Sabir Syarifuddin in June under the Sedition Act. These incidents form part of an alarming trend where outdated and draconian laws are repeatedly weaponised to silence dissent, stifle legitimate advocacy, and instill fear among those who speak truth to power. It is deeply concerning that the Madani government continues to repeat the very repressive practices of past administrations, despite its promises of reform and commitment to democratic values. SUARAM calls for the immediate and unconditional release of S. Arutchelvan, and reiterates that investigations under Sections 353 and 427 of the Penal Code must be dropped without delay. We further urge the government and the police to respect the constitutional right to peaceful assembly, and to immediately end the cycle of arbitrary arrests and investigations against activists.  In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director at SUARAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HENTIKAN SALAH GUNA KUASA POLIS TERHADAP PEMBELA HAK ASASI MANUSIA Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mengecam sekeras-kerasnya penahanan Timbalan Pengerusi Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM), S. Arutchelvan (“Arul”), di bawah Seksyen 353 dan 427 Kanun Keseksaan. Penahanan ini merupakan satu penyalahgunaan kuasa serta proses polis yang jelas mencerminkan pola intimidasi berpanjangan terhadap aktivis yang melaksanakan hak perlembagaan mereka untuk berhimpun secara aman. Arul telah memberikan kerjasama sepenuhnya kepada pihak polis dengan menghadirkan diri ke IPD Dang Wangi pada Khamis lalu (14 Ogos) untuk disoal siasat. Justeru, penahanan tersebut adalah sama sekali tidak seimbang kerana tiada asas munasabah untuk mempercayai bahawa Arul tidak akan mematuhi sebarang arahan lanjut daripada polis. Tambahan pula, tiada asas untuk meneruskan siasatan apabila rakaman perhimpunan pada 13 Ogos menunjukkan tiada sebarang penggunaan kekerasan jenayah, sedangkan pihak polis sendiri telah mengenakan sekatan tidak wajar yang menghalang peserta protes daripada menyerahkan cadangan Rang Undang-Undang Skim Perumahan Pekerja Estet secara langsung kepada Ahli Parlimen di pintu pagar Parlimen. Penahanan Arul menandakan sekurang-kurangnya kes ketiga tahun ini di mana aktivis ditahan kerana melaksanakan hak perlembagaan mereka untuk berhimpun secara aman – selepas penahanan bekas Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM, Sevan Doraisamy, pada Februari di bawah Akta Kawasan Larangan dan Tempat Larangan, serta penahanan Fadhil Kasim, Aliff Danial dan Sabir Syarifuddin pada Jun di bawah Akta Hasutan. Insiden-insiden ini adalah sebahagian daripada trend membimbangkan di mana undang-undang lama yang zalim terus digunakan sebagai senjata untuk membungkam bantahan, mengekang advokasi yang sah, dan menanam rasa takut terhadap mereka yang bersuara menegur kuasa. Adalah amat membimbangkan bahawa kerajaan Madani masih mengulangi amalan represif pentadbiran terdahulu, meskipun berjanji untuk melaksanakan reformasi dan menegakkan nilai-nilai demokrasi. SUARAM menggesa pembebasan segera dan tanpa syarat terhadap S. Arutchelvan, serta menegaskan bahawa siasatan di bawah Seksyen 353 dan 427 Kanun Keseksaan mesti dihentikan serta-merta. Kami turut menggesa kerajaan dan pihak polis agar menghormati hak perlembagaan untuk berhimpun secara aman, dan segera menghentikan kitaran penahanan serta siasatan sewenang-wenangnya terhadap aktivis. Dalam solidariti, Azura Nasron Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) condemns the use of Section 353 of the Penal Code to investigate Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) Deputy Chairperson S. Arutchelvan over a peaceful assembly involving more than 500 estate workers to meet policymakers to submit the proposed Estate Workers Housing Scheme Act outside Parliament on 13 August 2025. The use of Section 353—criminal force or assault to deter a public servant from performing their duties—is grossly disproportionate, given that police were actively blocking peaceful protesters from approaching Parliament. Under the current Madani administration, at least four peaceful assemblies have been investigated under Section 186 of the Penal Code for obstruction of public servants. The invocation of Section 353 marks a troubling escalation—shifting blame onto citizens exercising their constitutional right to peaceful assembly, while failing to hold police accountable for their failure to facilitate the protest effectively. Public assemblies outside Parliament long predate the Peaceful Assembly Act and have been part of Malaysia’s democratic tradition. Public roads and spaces—especially just outside the Parliament gates—must remain accessible for protest, particularly during sitting periods. Yet despite over a decade of managing assemblies under the PAA, the police have, since 2020, increasingly pushed protesters further away from Parliament gates to the base of the hill—undermining the core purpose of peaceful assembly: to deliver public demands directly to elected representatives. SUARAM therefore urges the police to immediately drop the investigation against S. Arutchelvan and cease all forms of intimidation against peaceful protesters. We also call on the Home Ministry to review police protocols and ensure that all officers adopt a facilitative, rights-based approach to managing assemblies — including at high-security locations such as Parliament. Amidst ongoing amendments to the Peaceful Assembly Act, the Madani government must ensure that assembly policing practices reflect—not undermine its stated commitment to reform. In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director of SUARAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUARAM: HENTIKAN SIASATAN SEKSYEN 353 TERHADAP ARUL Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) mengecam penggunaan Seksyen 353 Kanun Keseksaan untuk menyiasat Timbalan Pengerusi Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM), S. Arutchelvan, berhubung perhimpunan aman yang melibatkan lebih daripada 500 pekerja estet bagi bertemu dengan ahli parlimen untuk menyerahkan cadangan Rang Undang-Undang (RUU) Skim Perumahan Pekerja Estet di hadapan Parlimen pada 13 Ogos 2025. Penggunaan Seksyen 353 iaitu kekerasan jenayah bagi menghalang penjawat awam daripada menjalankan tugas adalah sama sekali tidak adil, memandangkan pihak polis secara aktif menghalang para peserta perhimpunan aman daripada menghampiri Parlimen. Di bawah kerajaan Madani ketika ini, sekurang-kurangnya empat perhimpunan aman telah disiasat di bawah Seksyen 186 Kanun Keseksaan atas dakwaan menghalang penjawat awam. Penggunaan Seksyen 353 menandakan permasalahan lain iaitu mengalihkan kesalahan kepada orang awam yang menggunakan hak mereka untuk berhimpun secara aman di samping kegagalan untuk meletakkan akauntabiliti pihak polis atas kegagalan untuk mengendalikan perhimpunan secara efektif.   Perhimpunan melibatkan orang awam di luar Parlimen telah lama wujud sebelum Akta Perhimpunan Aman (APA) dan telah menjadi sebahagian daripada tradisi demokrasi Malaysia. Jalan raya dan ruang awam terutamanya kawasan di luar pintu pagar Parlimen mesti kekal dibuka sebagai akses untuk tujuan protes, khususnya ketika sidang Parlimen berlangsung bagi memudahkan urusan perjumpaan bersama menteri sebagai contoh untuk penyerahan memorandum dan lain-lain. Namun, meskipun lebih sedekad menguruskan perhimpunan di bawah APA, pihak polis sejak tahun 2020 semakin kerap menolak serta menyekat peserta protes lebih jauh dari pintu pagar Parlimen ke kaki bukit, ini sekali gus menjejaskan tujuan utama perhimpunan aman: menyampaikan tuntutan rakyat secara langsung kepada wakil rakyat. Sehubungan itu, SUARAM menggesa pihak polis untuk segera menghentikan siasatan terhadap S. Arutchelvan dan segala bentuk intimidasi terhadap peserta perhimpunan aman. Kami juga menyeru Kementerian Dalam Negeri untuk mengkaji semula protokol polis dan memastikan semua pegawai mengamalkan pendekatan berasaskan hak asasi dalam mengendalikan perhimpunan termasuk di lokasi yang mempunyai kawalan keselamatan tinggi seperti Parlimen. Di tengah proses pindaan APA, Kerajaan Madani harus mengukuhkan pengurusan perhimpunan selari dengan perlembagaan, dan tidak menjejaskan komitmen reformasi yang diikrarkan. Dalam solidariti, Azura Nasron Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) is gravely concerned by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia’s (SUHAKAM) hesitation to lodge police reports against prison officers who have lied under oath during SUHAKAM’s ongoing public inquiry into the 17 January assault at Taiping Prison this year. SUARAM has observed that several staff from Taiping Prison who have testified thus far began by denying under oath any involvement in hitting and/or kicking detainees. These denials were flatly contradicted by CCTV recordings shown during the inquiry. When shown the recordings, only some officers admitted to their actions - after repeated warnings from the inquiry panel that they were under oath. Others continued to downplay their conduct using euphemistic terms such as “ sentuh ”, or by citing intent such as “ menakut-nakutkan ”. For some, this is not the first instance of false testimony: their sworn statements to SUHAKAM in March 2025 similarly omitted or denied any involvement, despite evidence to the contrary. In Wednesday’s (5 August 2025) proceedings, family counsel Shashi Devan made an urgent and justified call for SUHAKAM to act. He emphasised that delaying action until the inquiry concludes will send the wrong message to witnesses who are yet to testify. SUARAM agrees. Repeated breaches of the oath should not be allowed to accumulate unchecked. Each dishonest testimony risks obscuring case details that are not visible in the CCTV recordings, which lack audio. Such details are essential for SUHAKAM to establish a complete picture of the events, institutional dynamics and underlying causes necessary for credible findings and effective reform recommendations. The argument that lodging a police report would create an “investigation within an investigation” is also misplaced. A police report does not interfere with SUHAKAM’s inquiry—since the inquiry focuses on uncovering systemic failures through the assault in Taiping Prison and recommending critical prison reforms, while a police investigation of a report focuses on specific violations of the law. We maintain that by acting against false testimony, SUHAKAM will be safeguarding the integrity of the inquiry. To illustrate the extent and seriousness of this issue, we provide two examples. Firstly, on Day 11 of the inquiry, prison officer Raja Masuri bin Mansor repeatedly denied using his phone to record the assault, despite CCTV footage clearly showing that he did: no further evidence is required to prove that he was lying, since no one has questioned the veracity of the CCTV recording. We note that although four weeks have passed since Masuri testified,  SUHAKAM has not recovered the phone he used. Secondly, there was a striking similarity in the testimonies of all five officers in Week 4 of the inquiry. All the officers cited utterances of profanities, and death or rape threats by detainees as the reason why they “lost it.” and thrashed the detainees. These near-verbatim patterns raise serious concerns of coaching or collusion. We note that there is sworn evidence that they had met together in a room to watch the recordings before they came to testify. The inquiry panel, conducting officers and observers have had to spend much time and effort establishing truths that should have been voluntarily disclosed. Yesterday’s (7 August 2025) testimony by Khairol Azmeer Ibrahim underscores this. He was later recalled for further questioning on key inconsistencies, including his purported knowledge of deceased detainee Gan Chin Eng’s history of heart problems and whether he had met other Taiping Prison officers while lodging the police report on Gan’s death. In the face of such protracted attempts to untangle misleading accounts, SUHAKAM’s continued inaction is untenable. If SUHAKAM fails to act now despite what appears to us glaring evidence of false testimony, it risks setting a damaging precedent for its future inquiries it holds—and by extension, dents the independence, effectiveness and integrity of its human rights protection mandate as an A-status national human rights institution. SUARAM therefore calls on SUHAKAM to immediately lodge a police report to commence an independent investigation into the pattern of false and misleading testimony observed during the inquiry. If SUHAKAM is to play a serious role in holding enforcement authorities accountable, it must demonstrate that its processes cannot be manipulated. Delaying action only sends the wrong signal about institutional tolerance for false testimony under oath and weakens public confidence in the inquiry’s outcome. In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director of SUARAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUHAKAM PERLU BUAT LAPORAN POLIS TERHADAP KETERANGAN PALSU OLEH PEGAWAI PENJARA SEGERA Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) berasa bimbang terhadap keberatan pihak Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (SUHAKAM) untuk membuat laporan polis terhadap pegawai penjara yang tidak bercakap benar di bawah sumpah dalam Inkuiri Awam SUHAKAM berhubung insiden serangan di Penjara Taiping pada 17 Januari lalu. Berdasarkan pemerhatian SUARAM, beberapa kakitangan Penjara Taiping yang telah memberikan keterangan setakat ini memulakan testimoni mereka dengan penafian (walaupun telah mengangkat sumpah) bahawa sebarang penglibatan dalam memukul dan/atau menendang tahanan.  Apabila rakaman ditayangkan, hanya sebahagian pegawai yang akhirnya mengakui perbuatan mereka, setelah berulang kali diingatkan oleh panel inkuiri bahawa mereka berada di bawah sumpah. Pegawai penjara yang lain juga berterusan meremehkan perbuatan mereka dengan menggunakan istilah berlapik-lapik seperti  “sentuh”  atau dengan memberi alasan niat seperti “menakut-nakutkan” .  Bagi sesetengah pegawai, ini bukan kali pertama mereka memberikan keterangan palsu: kenyataan bersumpah mereka kepada SUHAKAM pada Mac 2025 juga tidak menyebut atau menafikan sebarang penglibatan, walaupun wujud bukti yang bercanggah. Dalam prosiding 5 Ogos (Rabu), peguam kepada keluarga, Shashi Devan telah membuat gesaan kepada pihak SUHAKAM untuk mengambil tindakan. Beliau menegaskan bahawa menangguhkan tindakan sehingga inkuiri selesai akan memberikan isyarat yang salah kepada saksi yang masih belum memberi keterangan. SUARAM bersetuju.  Pelanggaran sumpah secara berulang tidak sepatutnya dibiarkan berlarutan tanpa tindakan.  Setiap keterangan yang tidak jujur berisiko menutup butiran kes yang tidak kelihatan dalam rakaman CCTV, yang tidak mempunyai audio. Butiran seperti ini penting untuk membolehkan SUHAKAM mendapatkan gambaran penuh berhubung kejadian, dinamik institusi dan punca asas yang diperlukan bagi menghasilkan dapatan yang berwibawa serta cadangan pembaharuan yang berkesan. Hujah bahawa membuat laporan polis akan mewujudkan “siasatan dalam siasatan” juga adalah tidak tepat. Laporan polis tidak akan mengganggu inkuiri SUHAKAM—kerana inkuiri memberi tumpuan untuk mengenal pasti kegagalan sistemik melalui insiden serangan di Penjara Taiping dan mengesyorkan pembaharuan penjara yang kritikal, manakala siasatan polis terhadap laporan tertumpu kepada pelanggaran undang-undang secara khusus. Kami berpendirian bahawa dengan mengambil tindakan terhadap keterangan palsu, SUHAKAM akan mempertahankan integriti inkuiri tersebut. Bagi menggambarkan tahap dan keseriusan isu ini, kami kemukakan dua contoh. Pertama, pada hari ke-11 inkuiri, pegawai penjara Raja Masuri bin Mansor berulang kali menafikan menggunakan telefonnya untuk merakam serangan, walaupun rakaman CCTV jelas menunjukkan beliau berbuat demikian: tiada bukti tambahan diperlukan untuk membuktikan beliau berbohong memandangkan tiada sesiapa yang mempertikaikan ketulenan rakaman CCTV tersebut. Kami juga mengambil maklum bahawa walaupun empat minggu telah berlalu sejak Masuri memberi keterangan, SUHAKAM masih belum mendapatkan telefon yang digunakan beliau. Kedua, terdapat persamaan yang ketara dalam keterangan kelima-lima pegawai pada minggu ke-4 inkuiri. Semua pegawai memberi alasan kononnya tahanan mengeluarkan kata-kata kesat serta ugutan bunuh atau rogol sebagai sebab mereka “hilang sabar” dan memukul tahanan tersebut. Pola keterangan yang hampir sama ini menimbulkan kebimbangan serius tentang kemungkinan wujudnya latihan atau pakatan. Kami juga mengambil maklum bahawa terdapat keterangan bersumpah bahawa mereka telah berkumpul dalam sebuah bilik untuk menonton rakaman sebelum memberi keterangan. Panel inkuiri, pegawai pengendali dan pemerhati terpaksa menghabiskan banyak masa dan tenaga untuk mendapatkan kebenaran yang sepatutnya didedahkan secara sukarela. Keterangan semalam (7 Ogos 2025) oleh Khairol Azmeer Ibrahim menguatkan perkara ini. Beliau kemudiannya dipanggil semula untuk ditanya lebih lanjut berhubung percanggahan utama, termasuk dakwaannya mengetahui sejarah kesihatan - masalah jantung tahanan yang telah meninggal dunia, Gan Chin Eng dan sama ada beliau telah bertemu pegawai Penjara Taiping lain ketika membuat laporan polis mengenai kematian Gan. Dalam menghadapi usaha yang begitu panjang untuk menyelesaikan keterangan yang mengelirukan, kegagalan SUHAKAM untuk bertindak adalah tidak dapat diterima. Sekiranya SUHAKAM gagal bertindak sekarang walaupun terdapat bukti yang jelas mengenai keterangan palsu, ia berisiko mewujudkan duluan yang buruk untuk inkuiri-inkuiri pada masa akan datang—dan seterusnya menjejaskan kebebasan, keberkesanan serta integriti mandat perlindungan hak asasi manusia SUHAKAM sebagai institusi hak asasi manusia kebangsaan berstatus A. Oleh itu, SUARAM menggesa SUHAKAM untuk segera membuat laporan polis bagi memulakan siasatan bebas terhadap pola keterangan palsu dan mengelirukan yang diperhatikan sepanjang inkuiri. Sekiranya SUHAKAM mahu memainkan peranan serius dalam memastikan pihak berkuasa penguatkuasaan bertanggungjawab, ia mesti menunjukkan bahawa prosesnya tidak boleh dimanipulasi. Penangguhan tindakan hanya akan menghantar isyarat yang salah mengenai toleransi institusi terhadap keterangan palsu di bawah sumpah dan melemahkan keyakinan awam terhadap hasil inkuiri tersebut. Dalam solidariti Azura Nasron Pengarah Eksekutif Suara Rakyat Malaysia

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Sekretariat Himpun and the undersigned organisations condemn the obstruction by the police against peaceful protesters outside Parliament today as they submitted memoranda on the amendments to the Peaceful Assembly Act and the repeal of the Sedition Act. The right to peaceful assembly is enshrined under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. Obstruction and disproportionate police response—especially when protesters are seeking to deliver human rights-centred legal reforms to the Members of Parliament (MPs) undermine democratic freedoms and public trust in state institutions. This morning, protesters were met with a heavy police presence consisting of over 60 officers, including members of the Light Strike Force (LSF). A human barricade was set up less than a hundred metres from the Parliament gates, preventing participants from proceeding any further. Despite the peaceful nature of the assembly and the protesters’ clear intent to submit memoranda, police refused to permit passage. No clear explanation was provided other than Parliament was a “prohibited area”.  Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, peaceful assemblies were permitted to take place past the Parliament gates to submit memoranda. Since then, access has been arbitrarily curtailed, with protestors confined to the public road outside Parliament grounds, undermining the democratic function of assemblies.  As asserted by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly, protests include the right to demonstrate “within sight and sound” of the intended audience. This is a key democratic function of protest - bringing public demands directly to those in power.  Further, authorities have a duty to facilitate these assemblies at the designated location. In this instance, the police not only failed to facilitate the event but also made the space unavailable for organisers and participants due to a heavy police presence. As a result of the obstruction, MPs and/or their representatives had to leave the Parliament compound to receive the memoranda directly.  Even where restrictions are in place, they must be weighed against Malaysia’s constitutional guarantees and internationally recognised principles of necessity and proportionality. Blanket prohibitions on presence in Parliament fall short of these standards and send the wrong message—that public input must remain at the margins rather than at the heart of decision-making.  The sheer scale and posture of the police presence, including the deployment of the LSF—reflected a presumption that protest is inherently disruptive rather than democratic. This is especially troubling given the absence of any threat to public order. The intimidating display of force can chill civic engagement and erode confidence in the police as facilitators of the constitutional right of Malaysians to peacefully assemble, frustrating those who seek to peacefully protest. Notably as well, negotiations were ongoing between organisers and the police just behind the barricade when a female protester—part of the negotiation team—was pushed by a female officer, reportedly following vague instructions from a male commanding officer. Sekretariat Himpun unequivocally affirms and defends the right to peacefully assemble to demand justice and reform. No one should face any form of intimidation or obstruction for exercising their constitutional rights. We call for:  The immediate reinstatement of meaningful public access to Parliament, including clear, reasonable protocols for assemblies to approach Parliament for memorandum handovers in line with international human rights standards; Commitment by the Home Ministry to ensure that upcoming amendments to the Peaceful Assembly Act include a comprehensive review of all sections that impose restrictions on assemblies in line with international human rights standards;  Improved police training that focuses on managing peaceful assemblies in a facilitative, rights-based approach, and emphasises restraint in the deployment and use of force.  Endorsed by: 1. Mandiri 2. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) 3. Bersih 4. Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) 5. Federasi Pemuda Kebangsaan 6. Liga Mahasiswa Malaysia 7. Mahasiswa Demokratik Malaysia 8. Gerakan Perempuan Melawan 9. Justice For Sisters 10. Amnesty International Malaysia 11. Center To Combat Corruption & Cronyism (C4 Center) 12. Pro-Siswa Kolej Komuniti Malaysia Photo by: Mandiri --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Suara Rakyat Wajib Didengari: Polis Harus Memudahkan, Bukan Menghalang, Akses Ke Parlimen Sekretariat Himpun bersama organisasi yang menandatangani kenyataan ini mengecam sekeras-kerasnya tindakan pihak polis yang menghalang peserta protes aman di luar Parlimen hari ini semasa penyerahan memorandum berkaitan pindaan Akta Perhimpunan Aman dan pemansuhan Akta Hasutan. Hak berhimpun secara aman dijamin di bawah Perkara 10 Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Tindakan menghalang dan tindak balas polis yang tidak seimbang—lebih-lebih lagi apabila peserta protes membawa tuntutan reformasi undang-undang berteraskan hak asasi manusia kepada Ahli Parlimen—telah mencabul kebebasan demokratik dan menghakis kepercayaan awam terhadap institusi negara. Pada pagi ini, peserta protes telah dihalang oleh kehadiran lebih 60 anggota polis, termasuk Pasukan Light Strike Force (LSF). Satu barisan manusia (human chain) dibentuk kurang 100 meter dari pintu pagar Parlimen, menghalang peserta daripada mara lebih jauh. Walaupun perhimpunan berlangsung secara aman dan tujuan peserta jelas untuk menyerahkan memorandum, pihak polis tetap enggan memberi laluan. Tiada penjelasan munasabah diberikan selain dakwaan bahawa Parlimen ialah “kawasan larangan”. Sebelum pandemik COVID-19, perhimpunan aman dibenarkan melepasi pintu pagar Parlimen untuk penyerahan memorandum. Namun sejak itu, akses telah dihadkan secara sewenang-wenangnya, dan peserta protes kini hanya dibenarkan berkumpul di jalan awam di luar kawasan Parlimen, sekali gus menjejaskan fungsi demokratik perhimpunan awam. Seperti ditegaskan oleh Pelapor Khas PBB mengenai Kebebasan Berhimpun, hak untuk memprotes merangkumi hak untuk berada “dalam jarak penglihatan dan pendengaran” kepada audiens yang disasarkan. Inilah fungsi demokratik utama protes—menyampaikan tuntutan rakyat terus kepada pemegang kuasa. Pihak berkuasa mempunyai tanggungjawab untuk memudahkan perhimpunan di lokasi yang relevan. Namun dalam kes ini, bukan sahaja polis gagal memudahkan, malah kehadiran mereka yang berlebihan telah menghalang ruang buat penganjur dan peserta. Akibat halangan ini, Ahli Parlimen dan/atau wakil mereka terpaksa keluar dari kawasan Parlimen untuk menerima memorandum secara langsung. Sekalipun ada sekatan, ia mesti seimbang dengan jaminan Perlembagaan Malaysia serta prinsip keperluan dan keseksamaan yang diiktiraf di peringkat antarabangsa. Larangan menyeluruh ke atas kehadiran di Parlimen bukan sahaja gagal memenuhi piawaian ini, malah menghantar mesej yang salah—bahawa suara rakyat hanya layak di pinggiran dan tidak di pusat pembuatan dasar. Skala dan sikap kehadiran polis, termasuk penugasan LSF, jelas berpunca daripada andaian bahawa protes adalah ancaman, bukannya proses demokratik. Ini sangat membimbangkan kerana tiada sebarang ancaman terhadap ketenteraman awam wujud. Tindakan mempamerkan kekuatan sedemikian berupaya menakut-nakutkan masyarakat, sekaligus menghakis keyakinan rakyat terhadap peranan polis sebagai pemudah hak perlembagaan untuk berhimpun secara aman, dan mengecewakan mereka yang ingin bersuara secara beradab. Lebih membimbangkan, ketika rundingan masih berlangsung antara penganjur dan polis di sebalik halangan, seorang peserta wanita—ahli pasukan rundingan—telah ditolak oleh anggota polis wanita, dipercayai atas arahan samar seorang pegawai lelaki. Sekretariat Himpun menegaskan dan mempertahankan hak berhimpun secara aman untuk menuntut keadilan dan reformasi. Tiada sesiapa wajar diugut atau dihalang hanya kerana melaksanakan hak perlembagaan mereka. Kami menuntut: Pemulihan segera akses rakyat ke Parlimen, termasuk protokol jelas dan munasabah bagi membolehkan penyerahan memorandum kepada Parlimen oleh peserta perhimpunan, selaras standard hak asasi manusia antarabangsa; Komitmen Kementerian Dalam Negeri agar sebarang pindaan Akta Perhimpunan Aman akan melalui semakan menyeluruh ke atas mana-mana seksyen yang menghadkan hak berhimpun supaya selaras dengan piawaian hak asasi manusia antarabangsa; Penambahbaikan latihan polis agar tumpuan diberi kepada pengurusan perhimpunan secara fasilitatif dan berasaskan hak asasi manusia, serta penekanan terhadap kawalan diri dalam penggunaan kuasa. Disokong oleh: 1. Mandiri 2. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) 3. Bersih 4. Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) 5. Federasi Pemuda Kebangsaan 6. Liga Mahasiswa Malaysia 7. Mahasiswa Demokratik Malaysia 8. Gerakan Perempuan Melawan 9. Justice For Sisters 10. Amnesty International Malaysia 11. Center To Combat Corruption & Cronyism (C4 Center) 12. Pro-Siswa Kolej Komuniti Malaysia

*The Malay translation of this statement is available below, following the English version. Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution’s remarks on 16 July that the Federal Court decision to strike down Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) weakens police capacity to manage assemblies are concerning. The constitutional right to assemble cannot - and should not - be made contingent on police convenience. Saifuddin’s claim that police must now “mobilise all available police resources just to prepare for unknown scenarios” for assemblies misconstrues the Court’s decision and overstates the operational impact. Spontaneous or urgent assemblies are part and parcel of democratic life. Police forces are expected to plan adaptively, respond proportionately, and rely on discretion and intelligence—not blanket deployments. The absence of criminal penalties for non-notification does not eliminate the possibility of prior notice altogether. Suggesting otherwise implies a false choice between facilitation and chaos, and undermines public confidence in the police’s ability to facilitate assemblies efficiently while upholding constitutional freedoms. The track record of Section 9(5) further undermines its necessity. Between 2020 and 2024, only four were charged under Section 9(5) out of 636 investigated—highlighting its limited prosecutorial value and waste of enforcement resources. Section 9(1) has also been repeatedly invoked to investigate organisers even when notice is properly given—particularly for assemblies addressing corruption or human rights violations. This pattern of selective enforcement fosters a climate of fear that deters legitimate expression and diverts police efforts away from their core duty to facilitate - not restrict - peaceful assemblies. Saifuddin’s statement that organisers are still required to obtain permission from venue owners contradicts Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s announcement in February 2025 that a moratorium on Section 11 investigations was in effect — a discrepancy SUARAM had already flagged in our 2 July statement. The government must urgently clarify its position on the enforcement of Section 11, as continued ambiguity risks misleading organisers and deterring legitimate assemblies. We urge the government to engage civil society in transparent consultations—not only on the content of the upcoming PAA amendments, but also on improving police facilitation practices in line with constitutional obligations and operational realities. This is an opportunity to build institutional capacity for enabling peaceful expression, while reducing reliance on punitive measures. In solidarity, Azura Nasron Executive Director of SUARAM Film Screening and Discussion at Dataran Merdeka on 12th July 2025. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PENGURUSAN HIMPUNAN YANG BERKESAN TIDAK MEMERLUKAN SEKSYEN 9(5) Kenyataan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Saifuddin Nasution pada 16 Julai bahawa keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan untuk membatalkan Seksyen 9(5) Akta Perhimpunan Aman (APA) melemahkan keupayaan polis untuk menguruskan perhimpunan adalah membimbangkan. Hak perlembagaan untuk berhimpun tidak boleh — dan tidak sepatutnya — bergantung kepada kesenangan pihak polis. Dakwaan Saifuddin bahawa pihak polis kini perlu “menggerakkan semua sumber polis yang ada semata-mata untuk bersedia menghadapi senario yang tidak diketahui” mencerminkan salah faham terhadap keputusan Mahkamah dan melebih-lebihkan kesannya dari segi operasi. Perhimpunan yang spontan atau mendesak merupakan sebahagian daripada kehidupan demokrasi. Pasukan polis seharusnya bersedia merancang secara adaptif, bertindak secara berkadar dan bergantung kepada budi bicara serta risikan — bukan dengan pengerahan besar-besaran secara melulu. Ketiadaan hukuman jenayah atas kegagalan memberikan notis tidak bermakna notis awal tidak akan diberikan langsung. Malah, ini sebaliknya memberi gambaran palsu seolah-olah satu-satunya pilihan adalah antara fasilitasi dan kekacauan, serta menjejaskan keyakinan awam terhadap kemampuan polis untuk memudahkan perhimpunan secara cekap sambil mempertahankan kebebasan yang dijamin oleh Perlembagaan. Rekod pelaksanaan Seksyen 9(5) juga menimbulkan persoalan terhadap keperluannya. Sejak dari tahun 2020 hingga 2024, hanya empat individu didakwa di bawah Seksyen 9(5) daripada 636 kes yang disiasat — menunjukkan nilai pendakwaannya rendah dan pembaziran sumber penguatkuasaan. Seksyen 9(1) juga sering digunakan untuk menyiasat penganjur meskipun notis telah diberikan dengan sewajarnya — terutama bagi perhimpunan yang membangkitkan isu rasuah atau pelanggaran hak asasi manusia. Corak penguatkuasaan secara terpilih ini mewujudkan rasa takut yang menghalang ekspresi sah dan mengalih fokus tugas polis daripada peranan utama mereka iaitu untuk memudah cara — bukan menyekat sesuatu perhimpunan aman. Kenyataan Saifuddin bahawa penganjur masih perlu mendapatkan kebenaran daripada pemilik premis juga bercanggah dengan pengumuman Perdana Menteri Anwar Ibrahim pada Februari 2025 mengenai pelaksanaan moratorium terhadap siasatan di bawah Seksyen 11 — satu percanggahan yang telahpun dibangkitkan SUARAM dalam kenyataan bertarikh 2 Julai. Kerajaan mesti segera menjelaskan pendiriannya berhubung penguatkuasaan Seksyen 11 memandangkan kekeliruan yang berterusan hanya akan mengelirukan penganjur dan menghalang perhimpunan yang sah. Kami menggesa kerajaan untuk melibatkan masyarakat sivil dalam perundingan yang telus — bukan sahaja mengenai kandungan pindaan APA yang akan datang, tetapi juga dalam usaha memperbaiki amalan pemudahan polis selaras dengan tanggungjawab perlembagaan dan realiti operasi. Ini adalah peluang untuk memperkukuh keupayaan institusi dalam menyuburkan ekspresi secara aman, sambil mengurangkan kebergantungan terhadap langkah-langkah berbentuk hukuman. Dalam solidariti, Azura Nasron Pengarah Eksekutif SUARAM