The Sword of Damocles stays

Many Malaysians may be pleased with the move to remove the much condemned Internal Security Act (ISA), but the sword of Damocles that hangs over the heads of opponents of the ruling Barisan Nasional stays intact.

This is due to the embedding of two key elements into the newly introduced Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill that are to allow arbitrary detention for many years.

These elements are the broad and vague definition of offences that fall under this Bill, and the loophole that will allow prolonged and lengthy detention through exploitation of the judicial process.

How security offences are to be defined

Among the broad range of vague offences included under this Bill are threats to public order or security and disaffection with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

That the vague ground of "prejudicial to public order or security" has been consistently and widely abused under ISA detentions in the past is evident from the fact that, except for a few genuine cases, all the more than 10,000 individuals so detained are political dissidents, whose only "guilt" is their opposition to BN.

Prominent among them are Anwar Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang, Mat Sabu and Lim Guan Eng, just to mention a few. Who in their right mind would imagine that these leaders of outstanding integrity and steadfast principles would have done anything that would undermine the security of the nation?

As for the offence against the Agong, isn't it still fresh in our mind that in the run-up to the Bersih 2.0 rally last year, the authorities detained six members of Parti Sosialis Malaysia for "waging war against the Agong"? That this is a concocted charge is self-evident when not an iota of evidence has been produced, to date, to substantiate the accusation against the 'PSM6'.

If BN has thought fit to freely abuse these grounds of detention in the past when its political power had always been secure, why should we assume it will not do so now, when its very political survival is hanging on a thread due to the vibrant rise of Pakatan Rakyat and widespread public disillusionment over BN's endless mega misdeeds and ineptitude?

Prolong detention, but only through the courts

Though the new Bill provides for the right of the detainee seek trial within the first 28 days of detention, he or she may not see freedom for many years to come.

This is because of Section 30(1), which states that even if the detainee is acquitted by the court, his or her detention may continue uninterrupted, as the prosecutor is entitled to orally apply for appeal and ask for the detention to continue until all legal processes are exhausted.

Experience in the past tells us that if it so pleases BN, this legal process can take many years.

One example is Anwar Ibrahim's Sodomy I trial, which started in 1999 and ended five years later in 2004, and even that duration was considered shortened, thanks to the resignation of former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's resignation in 2003.

This is evident from the fact that the sodomy trial took four years to move from the High Court to the Court of Appeal, but took just a year for the Court of Appeal to be heard by the Federal Court, where Anwar's guilty verdict was overturned in 2004. This was when Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had become prime minister, in November 2003.

A more recent example is the murder trial of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu, which Premier Najib Razak is said to be entangled in.

The trial started in January 2007, but the appeal of the two police officers, who had been body guards to Najib, who was then deputy prime minister and defence minister, have not, despite five years having passed since their appeals to the Court of Appeal.

And, it looks set to be further delayed until after the next general election. Obviously, someone up there does not want it to be heard so soon for obvious reason.

There is not the slightest doubt that our judiciary, along with all other state institutions, are subject to illegitimate political manipulation.

With that in mind, how can we not be worried that any of BN's opponents may be arbitrarily arrested under a pseudo crime specified in the new Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill and kept in prison indefinitely while the legal process goes on endlessly?

No justification for new Securities Bill

The point is that the premise upon which the Bill is built, as cited in the preamble that "the security of the country is under threat", is false. Hence there is no justification to introduce this Bill after the ISA is repealed.

To justify the new Security Offences Bill, the BN has to satisfactorily explain precisely the threats that the nation has been facing.

It is common knowledge that we have not been threatened, nor do we foresee threats from any foreign country, not even in the remote future.

Neither is there the slightest evidence of any internal plot from any quarter to overthrow the government by force or to inflict mass violence.

The only possible threat that may justify the introduction of preventive law is international terrorism, for which we must have a precise definition for "terrorism" - unlike the wide ranging and non-defined offences included in the Bill - so as to eliminate abuse of this new law.

For such guidance, we can look to the existing convention of the United Nations, which is in tune with universally-accepted values.

As for all other offences - even those arising from racial and religious frictions - we have ample existing laws to deal effectively with them.

What we now lack are not good laws but good implementation, and with integrity.

In conclusion, this latest legislative initiative hyped by Najib as "heralding a golden democratic age in Malaysia" in his speech during the installation of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong yesterday, is but another gimmick to woo the middle ground ahead of the general election without actually reforming BN's repressive powers.

 

---

KIM QUEK is a retired accountant and author of the banned book ‘The March to Putrajaya'.