The Internal Security Act (ISA) will not be used indiscriminately and will only be invoked against rice smugglers if their actions threatened the country's padi and rice industry, said Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi today.

"I wish to clarify that we are not going to use the ISA indiscriminately. ISA is indeed meant for use in matters related to security.

"But if it is found that there are serious cases which might jeopardise our padi and rice industry...which if left unchecked would create a lot of problems to local millers and farmers, the possibility of using the ISA is something to be considered," he was quoted as saying in a Bernama report.

He said the rice industry was closely linked with the livelihood of farmers, who were mostly low-income earners.

Abdullah, who is also home minister, said this when asked on the actions taken to combat rice smuggling.

Permit abuse

Meanwhile, he said the government also wanted to know how the smuggling was carried out, for example, whether APs (Approval Permits) for importing rice had been abused to bring in more than the amount allowed.

"There is talk that the same AP might have been used to bring in rice through different ports...for example via Port Klang, Penang and Pasir Gudang," he said.

He added that the problem had given the government an opportunity to make a comprehensive study of the system of processing and issuing APs for importing rice.

It has been alleged that some 350,000 tonnes of rice were smuggled into the country a year, causing Padi Beras Nasional Sdn Bhd (Bernas) to suffer accumulated losses of RM27 million and local farmers to incur losses of more than RM120 million.

Smugglers are said to have reaped profits of RM105 million.

On Tuesday, Abdullah said the controversial ISA can be used against the smugglers if their actions amount to economic sabotage.

"If there is proof and connection with economic sabotage, I think it is appropriate that the ISA is used," he had added.

The law which provides for detention without trial was initially formulated to deal with the communist insurgency. However, it earned notoriety when it was used against opposition politicians and dissidents for allegedly threatening national security.

Its critics have labelled it as being draconian and have repeatedly called for its abolishment.