Human rights group Hakam today urged the government to stop harassing UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers Param Cumaraswamy, as it may prove detrimental to his work.

"The government should accept the UN decision in re-appointing Param as he has done a fair and good job as a special rapporteur so far," Hakam secretary-general Elizabeth Wong said when contacted by malaysiakini today.

Wong was speaking in response to government criticisms led by Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar recently on Param's re-appointment as special rapporteur for the third consecutive term.

"Param speaks his mind and we dispute the government's claim that he has been biased in his opinions on the Malaysian judiciary. It is only fair for the special rapporteur to comment if there are problems with the country's judiciary," Wong said.

"If the Malaysian government does not want to see its judicial record lumped together with other dictatorship and authoritarian regimes, they should then clean up their act," she added.

Syed Hamid last Friday said that Malaysia objected to the basis of Param's re-appointment as special rapporteur and urged the UN Commission on Human Rights not to practise double standards.

The New Straits Times had on Saturday, quoted the minister as saying that Param had made comments about the country and "has a certain attitude" and he will not make an objective analysis.

"And if that person is to be assigned to a certain country, the appointment must be agreed upon by the country in question," the report said.

The government also launched a thinly-veiled attack to prevent his re-appointment during the Commission's recent session in Geneva.

Malaysian Ambassador and Permanent Representative to Geneva Hamidon Ali expressed unhappiness at situations where a special rapporteur may comment on issues involving a country of which he is a national. ("[#1] Malaysia seeks to limit UN special rapporteur's term [/#]", April 24)

Param, in response, accused the ambassador of being consistent" in presenting his statement in Geneva.

"I am most surprised that the government is now questioning whether it was proper for me to be investigating my own country thus by necessary implication questioning my objectivity and impartiality," he said in a letter faxed to Hamidon on May 3.

Param stressed that he recommended in his 1997 draft report on the Malaysian chapter, that another expert or a committee of experts be appointed by the UN Commission to investigate allegations of judicial improprieties in the country to avoid any possible criticism against him for impartiality.

He, however, withdrew the recommendation out of deference to concerns expressed, especially from the then head of the Malaysian delegation to the UN Commission Musa Hitam.

"Tan Sri (Musa) at a lunch with me in Geneva expressed grave concern over such recommendation. He equated such recommendation amounting to calling for appointing a country specific rapporteur for Malaysia and expressed how bad it would be for Malaysia," Param said.

"On hindsight it appears that I should have just ignored those concerns and proceeded then with the recommendation to the commission," he added.

In a press statement last Saturday, Param said that Syed Hamid's comments showed that the minister is not conversant with the UN's special procedure mechanism.

"Special rapporteurs are independent appointees; such appointments are done independently of the national governments where the rapporteurs come from. Hence, I do not represent Malaysia," Param said.

The mandate entrusted to him, Param stated, is "thematic i.e. I monitor the whole world. Malaysia is just one among the 184 countries."

"Malaysia's attempt to block my reappointment under the pretext of a technical point on the interpretation of a transition provision on time limits for mandate holders was seen by some member states as an act of personal vendetta," he added

Param is currently facing defamation lawsuits filed by several Malaysian companies seeking a total of RM280 million in damages for defamatory language in an interview he gave to the International Commercial Litigation magazine in 1995.

The International Court of Justice ruled on April 29 last year that the rapporteur was entitled to immunity from legal proceedings because his comments were related to his work and was within the scope of his duties.