Police showed no bad faith when quizzing ISA 5, Federal Court told

comments     Leong Kar Yen     Published     Updated

The police showed no bad faith when interrogating five Internal Security Act detainees on their political views and other issues, the Federal Court heard today.

It is important to bear in mind that the purpose of detention under the ISA is to enable the police to conduct investigations in order to gather more information in relation to the appellants acts and conduct which are prejudicial to the security of Malaysia, said senior federal counsel Mohd Yusof Zainal Abideen.

Yusof was replying to lead defence counsel Sulaiman Abdullahs contention that the police were acting in bad faith for questioning the five on matters which were irrelevant to the reason given for their arrest.

The five, Keadilan and reformasi activists Tian Chua, Mohd Ezam Mohd Nor, Saari Sungib, Raja Petra Kamaruddin and Hishamuddin Rais, were arrested in a police dragnet beginning April 10 last year for their alleged involvement in a militant attempt to overthrow the government.

However, in their sworn affidavits, there were allegations of physical abuse and interrogations on sexual allegations. The five claimed they were also quizzed on the sexual misconduct of ex-deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim.

A matter of relevance

Yusof argued that even if the police had posed such questions, it must be allowed as the detaining authorities know best the relevance of these issues to national security.

What information is relevant for the purposes of national security should be best left to the authority having the charge of security, that is, the police.

Once the police assert that all the questions were relevant and directed to matters relating to national security then the court has no reason not to accept the point, he added.

Meanwhile defence counsel Christopher Leong told the four-member panel that emergency laws enacted under Article 149 of the Constitution, such as the ISA, are made to deal with specific situations.

Article 149 enables Parliament in a given dire situation to enact legislation to counter a specific situation, and the ISA was enacted solely in response to the communist insurgency and threat, he said.

Leong added that Article 149 should be read in a restrictive manner as legislation stemming from it could also encroach upon fundamental liberties enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

Violation of human rights

Defence co-counsel Malik Imtiaz Sarwar added that countering terrorism and subversion cannot justify the violation of human rights.

If there is to be law to fight terrorism, it is not essential to suspend human rights as terrorism laws which do not suspend human rights can still be enacted.

That is why Article 149 must be construed in a specific manner, he said.

The defence team also comprises R Sivarasa and M Mogamnambal. Prosecution is led by Azahar Mohamed, assisted by Yusof, Mary Lim and Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah.

The four-member Federal Court panel consists of Chief Justice Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah, Chief Judge of the High Courts of Sabah and Sarawak Steve Shim, Federal Court justices Siti Norma Yaakob and Abdul Malek Ahmad.

Hearing continues tomorrow.



Malaysiakini
news and views that matter


Sign In