After years of fighting what it regards as abuses of detention without trial provisions in the law, the Bar Council has finally decided to formalise its efforts by launching a campaign against all forms of preventive detention.

At a press conference today, Bar Council chairperson Kuthubul Zaman Bukhari said the 'No Detention Without Trial' or NDWT campaign would start by focusing on three major legislation - the Internal Security Act, the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 and the Dangerous Drug Act (Special Prevention Measures) Act 1985.

"The time has come for Malaysia to progress to the next (and higher) phase of compliance with internationally recognised human rights standard.

"It is a fallacy that effective governance and maintenance of public security cannot be successfully carried out without laws that violate the rights of citizens," he said.

As part of the campaign, the council will be organising nationwide distribution of pamphlets entitled 'What is Preventive Detention?', car stickers, lapel pins, compiled reading materials for various organisations, universities and institutes of higher learning. Talks and seminars on the subject will also be held.

In addition to the three legislation mentioned, the campaign will also seek the repeal of provisions in 11 other pieces of legislation which allow the state to impose restrictions on the rights of a person.

These, said Kuthubul, include the Restricted Residence Act 1933, the Police Act 1967, the Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975 and the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984.

Prior to this, the Bar Council had submitted a memorandum on the repeal of laws relating to detention without trial to then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 1998.

However, the government did not respond to the memorandum.

Not Western values

Commenting on the recent statement by Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Dr Rais Yatim that the government is considering shortening the detention period under Section 73 of the ISA from 60 days to 30 days, Kuthubul said while the move is welcomed, it is still insufficient to restore individual rights.

"It must be stressed that, in relation to a matter as important as the liberty of persons, adequate conformity with natural justice and accepted international norms will take place only if detention without trial is completely abolished," he asserted.

The Bar Council chairperson also said that human rights are universal and not "Western" in nature. For example, he said the same principles are found in the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights.

"(Therefore) arguments that we need to deal differently with human rights by using 'Eastern values and methodology' are misplaced."

He added that the government should also stop comparing the developments in Malaysia with those in the United States in terms of civil liberties since the US "has never been, and is not, the yardstick for human rights compliance".

Meanwhile, Bar Council vice-chairperson Yeo Yang Poh said the campaign would hold consultations with the government. "We are not going ahead in the absence of consultations".

He said the government has rightly criticised human rights violations in other countries when they occur but at the same time, it should also ensure that it does not make the same mistakes at home.

"Detention without trial is (action taken) based on mere suspicion. This is akin to what Malaysia has criticised the US for in Iraq," he said.

Sufficient laws

Another lawyer, Bar Council human rights committee vice-chairperson Malik Imtiaz, said the NDWT campaign is also aimed at correcting skewed perceptions after the Sept 11 period whereby preemptive actions by governments have become more acceptable in the eyes of the public when dealing with alleged terrorists.

"Many Asian governments have used the 'terrorism' excuse to further their own political agenda. We can see this from the behaviour of our government. Before, it was defensive about preventive detention laws but later, it became brash and proud to have these laws."

Questioned about the possibility of the Bar Council suggesting medium-term steps in order for the government to progress towards repealing the laws, Malik said existing laws are sufficient to deal with all types of infractions including those considered 'national security' crimes.

"The Penal Code has provisions to deal with the problems. We do not need a new regime. If a problem has to be solved, it has to be done using the right channels and respecting (constitutional rights).

"Preventive detention cannot be justified by referring to the end. We don't accept mid-range measures. As a start, all laws must be wholly consistent with the Constitution," he said.

Various non-government organisations and human rights activists have been campaigning for years for the government to repeal a barrage of restrictive laws which have been in place since the country's independence.

While it had indicated its willingness to review the laws, the government has thus far indicated that it is not prepared to do away with its powers to detain individuals without trial.