MALAYSIA has its hands full in dealing with various human rights issues affecting citizens. This being so, advocacy is quite a juggling act for those given the responsibility to promote and defend human rights.

Still, the palpable inability to prevent the 'rape' of human rights - as evident in the incidence of crimes nationwide - is painful and disgusting.

If blame is to be apportioned for dismal support of human rights issues, who should most clearly get a whack?

It would have to be the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam), established in April 2000, and whose performance has been disappointing to say the least.

Various situations that cried out for Suhakam's attention have gone unheeded. The dastardly attacks on individual human rights has been particularly evident in the many rape cases reported. Suhakam's silence has been deafening.

Yet, its vow of silence was surprisingly broken when vice-chairperson Simon Sipaun commented on the United Nations' threat to punish nations which ban homosexual activities. The new human rights resolution is to be tabled in April.

Objections to a UN position are not expected from a body like Suhakam, although these are typical of the powers-that-be in Malaysia.

In Malaysia, the laws state that homosexuality is illegal, as is cross-dressing.

While the government has made its stand clear on issues pertaining to same-sex relationships, what seems to have escaped leaders is that issues of homosexuality and transsexuality also fall under the ambit of human rights.

Positive development?

Suhakam, while trying hard to win the layperson's faith in its raison d'etre , certainly has a long way to go, if its past endeavours are anything to go by.

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 which gave birth to Suhakam was gazetted in Sept 9, 1999 and on April 3, 2002, the first Suhakam commissioners were appointed.

Foreign Affairs Minister Syed Hamid Albar had promised when presenting the Bill in Parliament that this "should be regarded as a positive development towards protecting the interests and realising the aspirations of our people".

To date, however, Suhakam has not been able to work independently of the government. While it years to live up to its image, it is unable to deal with the 'constraints' that prevent it from carrying out its tasks without fear or favour.

Human rights issues have never been a big talking-point among Malaysians or a part of the national agenda. Sadly, human rights only come to mind - if at all - when there is outrage over crimes like rape and domestic violence.

Zero tolerance

In the case of the UN's proposed censure of countries with anti-homosexuality laws, Malaysia has voiced its objection and that too on one ground - that the country's laws do not allow homosexuality.

This was reinforced by Bar Council chairperson Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari, who said that civil and Syariah laws clearly state that homosexual behaviour is illegal.

He proceeded to quote Section 377A, B and C of the Penal Code which states that any penile penetration through the anus or mouth is considered carnal intercourse against the order of nature. An offender can be jailed for a minimum of five years and a maximum of 20 years.

De facto

Law Minister Dr Rais Yatim said developing and Islamic countries like Malaysia did not recognise sexual relations between people of the same sex.

Rais' statement is open to interpretation. Would Malaysia's stand on homosexuality be otherwise if it was not a Muslim country? Has religion become the pre-determining factor in deciding whose human rights are protected and whose are not?

Both Kuthubul and Rais conveniently evaded the core of the matter of human rights in insisting that Malaysia has no tolerance for lesbians, gays, bisexuals, queers and transsexuals.

The biggest disappointment came courtesy of Suhakam itself. Sipaun, while trying to appease both the authorities and the public, said caution would have to be exercised if a decision is made to amend laws to allow homosexuality. This, he explained, is because homosexuality is not part of the Malaysian culture,

Sipaun's statement that "despite wanting to respect the rights of minorities, the laws of the land needed to be upheld as well" is akin to crucifying this community for choosing to live life with dignity by not withholding their sexual orientation.

Fulfill promise

The statements by Kuthubul and Rais, as shallow as they sound, go on to reflect the equally hollow impact of the often quoted 'mantra' of Malaysians being a tolerant and caring society.

The truth is, countries like Malaysia, or to be precise, Muslim countries like Malaysia have virtually zero tolerance of this community. And by extension, the question of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, queers and transsexuals having human rights does not figure at all.

Lest Suhakam forgets the true purpose of its existence, it should remember the two fundamental rights of a human being, as stated in the UN-sponsored Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 3 states that everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of a person, while Article 5 says that no one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

If Articles 3 and 5 fail to revive Suhakam's zest in doing justice to human rights, then perhaps the commission's pledge last year to this community will - it promised to protect them from prejudice.

JJ RAY started her career with a mainstream publication. A non-conformist, she soon saw the barriers that went up whenever, through her writing, she tried to make the world a home for one and all.