It is ironic that the government has once again decided to use the Emergency Ordinance (EO) against six peaceful political activists from Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM), a law that its own royal commission recommended to be repealed in 2005 because it had outlived its purpose.
On July 25, 30 members of Parti Sosialis Malaysia were arrested under Article 122 of the Penal Code for allegedly intending to “wage war against the King”.
Penang deputy police chief SAC Abdul Rahim Jaafar said the PSM members were found with subversive materials instigating an overthrow of the government when they were arrested at the Sungai Dua toll plaza of the North-South Expressway. He said they seized T-shirts, which bore pictures of former communist party leaders with the words Chin Peng, Rashid Maidin and Suriani Abdullah.
Abdul Rahim also said they had confiscated leaflets that had “seditious content” and that their investigations showed that “those arrested were trying to revive the communist philosophy on the pretext of campaigning for the opposition-initiated Bersih 2.0 rally on July 9”.
If the police seem to have so much evidence against the group why didn’t they charge them and prove their case in court? Why not put them through a criminal justice process where they are able to defend themselves against these allegations?
The fact the government had to resort to the EO, an archaic emergency law, shows that the police had a flimsy case and that the charges were clearly political motivated.
As we know the EO, a law promulgated under the state of Emergency proclaimed after the 1969 racial riots was intended originally to restore peace and order that had been seriously disturbed at that particular point in time.
The EO gave the home minister powers to issue a detention order of up to two years against a person if he deemed it necessary to protect public order. Under a 1989 amendment all forms of judicial review of the discretionary powers of the minister were denied, except those related to the EO procedural requirements.
However in practise the EO has become a tool of the police to undermine the whole criminal justice system. It allows the police to arrest and detain without trial suspected criminals who are regarded as “difficult to bring to justice” by the ordinary process of law due to lack of evidence.
As human rights groups such as Suaram have documented, there are an estimated 1,000 people detained without trial under the EO at the Simpang Renggam detention centre and other detention centres around the country.
In 2005, the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysian Police set up by the government submitted 125 recommendations to reform the Malaysian police. One of the key recommendations was for the EO to be repealed because “it has outlived its purpose and in some instances facilitated the abuse of some fundamental liberties”
The fact that the law has been used once again despite all this, shows the utter disregard by the government and the police for the rule of law and human rights. It is also another reminder of the possibility that hundreds of innocent people may be languishing in Malaysia’s detention centres and will never have their day in court.
The EO, like the Internal Security Act and other emergency laws - many of which were inherited from the former British colonial government - should be abolished immediately. These laws have no place in a democracy and until they are repealed will continue to be abused by the state apparatus and will have had an intimidating effect on political life and the development of civil society in Malaysia
