I wholly support the recent criticism leveled by the Malaysian government towards Burma over the brutality of the crackdown on its own people demonstrating against both the increase in fuel prices and 45 years of authoritarian rule.

At a time when Asean member nations are about to sign a rules-based charter (in Singapore in November) that would provide, inter alia, for a human rights mechanism in each member country, such a crackdown is a huge step backward for both Burma and Asean. The call by the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Caucus for Burma to be expelled from Asean should be seriously considered given that Asean's policy of constructive engagement has clearly failed and been rebuffed by Burma through the recent actions by its government.

However lest we forget, Malaysia had its own fuel price increase-related demonstrations last year.

According to the findings of Suhakam's inquiry into the matter, which were published on March 23, 2007, "the crowd was not unruly or violent. The crowd was merely chanting slogans prompted by the speakers, asking for a reduction in the price of electricity and fuel which the panel of inquiry cannot by any stretch of the imagination find as being inciteful or capable of provoking violence." Further, "most of the crowd had started to disperse when the water cannon was activated but the police charged after the members of the assembly."

We have seen over and over again on our television screens the brutality of the Burma authorities, indiscriminately kicking the protestors and beating them with their long batons.

However, lest we forget, the Suhakam inquiry concluded that "during the chase the FRU personnel and police officers used force on some members of the assembly it was also brought to the attention of the panel of inquiry that the physical injuries could have been caused by the use of shields and batons."

We have also seen pictures of Burmese people being bundled into the back of police trucks and taken away.

However, lest we forget, according to Suhakam, "at least three individuals were arrested the said three persons and others were at the assembly which was not licensed, but the assembly in itself was peaceful and did not warrant arrest of anyone. The panel of inquiry finds that the arrests were not justified as these individuals were merely protesting peacefully; they either gave speeches, listened to the speeches or distributed leaflets and pamphlets. These acts cannot be said to have breached the peace or calculated to breach the peace."

In fact, Suhakam concluded that "the interference by the police and the FRU personnel in dispersing the assembly on May 28, 2006 at KLCC and the arrests made were disproportionate to the aims of preventing disorder and protecting the rights of other and are not necessary in a democratic society."

In Malaysia, the fuel price increase-motivated protests attracted between 2,000 and 3,000 people. In Burma, literally thousands took to the streets. However, the principle underlying the response to the protestors in both countries appears to have been the same.

I am not for one moment saying that Malaysia should not protest what is happening in Burma. But we should also protest what happened here. The government should be consistent in its approach to such kinds of demonstrations. Otherwise, our criticism would bear all the hallmarks of hypocrisy.

In Burma, as a response to the emergency brought about by the protestors the government issued an order prohibiting an assembly of more than five people.

In Malaysia, even after 50 years of Merdeka and despite the tremendous prosperity of its people, our government still maintains three declarations of emergency and we have similar rules limiting the number of people that can assemble and other restrictions on freedom of assembly and expression.

In the aftermath of the protests in Burma, it was reported that the military authorities arrested monks and others during the night, out of ordinary view. People went missing and no one knew where they had been taken.

In Malaysia, if you speak to Nathaniel Tan, a local writer, blogger and PKR member, he will tell you that the same was done to him. Under the Internal Security Act and the Official Secrets Act people can be arrested, not told the reasons of their arrest, and those who arrested them can refuse to inform anyone where they had been taken for an extended period of time. In Malaysia, people can also "disappear".

In Burma, the authorities cleared out the monasteries and arrested the monks.

In Malaysia, under the Essential (Clearance of Squatters) Regulations 1969 local authorities have been allowed to clear out people who have been occupying land through the use of emergency-type legislation. The legislation provides that this can be done by day or by night, i.e. at any time, and with little or sometimes no notice. People who oppose the eviction can be arrested.

Regulations that were created to combat communism 38 years ago are being used even up till today to evict urban dwellers so that big corporations can develop the (highly valuable) land on which they have lived for several generations. This merely serves to increase the incidence of urban poverty and income inequalities. Appeals to the courts have fallen on deaf ears.

Nobody would dream of putting Burma and Malaysia on the same level when it comes to respect of human rights. But in reality the difference seems, sadly, to be only one of degree. The powers-that-be are content to prolong the use of emergency legislation as this has the immediate benefits of not having to comply with the terms and conditions of non-emergency legislation and a swift bypass of the courts.