YOURSAY 'Where in the corridors of power assurances are given, like promises made, they are not worth the paper they are written on.'

PCA not to intimidate opposition, assures Zahid

your say SenyumUnta: The amendment to the Prevention of Crime Act (PCA) is not meant to intimidate the opposition, assures Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. They can't even honour an officially signed agreement; can we then trust a verbal assurance? The PCA is just another ISA in disguise.

Asitis: Yes, Zahid. Before GE13 your government said there would be no increase in the price of petrol. And look what happened. You don't seriously expect us to take your word for it do you, Zahid? You can't be that naive. Or are you?

Mayvbwell: Yes, Zahid, the fundamental purpose of the PCA is to combat crime to ensure public safety. But, is it possible that one day the police would claim this or that Pakatan member is a threat to public safety (of course without giving evidence) and apply the amended PCA to detain them? Can?

Kim Quek: I can still recall our second prime minister Abdul Razak giving his solemn guarantee in Parliament when introducing the ISA half a century ago, that the law, meant to deal with the communists, would never be used against the opposition.

What happened after that was a never‑ending series of heartbreaking breaches of that promise.

In fact, ISA had become Umno's trump card, which it unhesitatingly used to crush the opposition as and when it deemed expedient in order to keep its hegemony intact. Enough of that nonsense. We have learned to treat such promise with contempt now.

Malaysians will never accept another ISA, in whatever form or guise.

Wira: Bapa Malaysia gave us the assurance that the ISA was only to be used against communist terrorists. A bad law should never be passed, regardless of its intention. Police should bring criminals to court with evidence to get a conviction and not to secure one on mere suspicion alone.

Onyourtoes: Zahid, you are effectively saying the panel that metes out the detention orders is incapable of abuse. If you want a judge to preside over the panel, why not subject the suspected criminals to open trial?

Are you saying the panel is entitled to a lower standard of proof? If so, how much lower? Can't you see it is always the subjective judgement and unencumbered discretion that will eventually lead to abuse of power and corruption?

If the panel does abuse its power, who then is ultimately responsible? Panel members are shielded from parliamentary and public scrutiny. You in turn will say you are not responsible since you have detached yourself from the decision process.

On your promise not to use the PCA on politicians, you should perhaps study the history of ISA, which has also given the same promise when it was first decreed.

OMG!!: Who can trust his assurance? Why is the ruling elite so obsessed with draconian laws that take away the fundamental rights of a person to legal recourse? Who can trust some of the ex-judges when every institution in the country has been manipulated to serve the ruling elite's interest? Not to mention some of the ex-judges have proven to be racists and the ruling elite's tool?

Real Truth: How are we to trust a government that officially signs a treaty and then fails to honour it and then gives all kinds of funny 1Malaysia reasons?

Cry, My Beloved Country: Where in the corridors of power assurances are given, like promises made, they are not worth the paper they are written on.

Jbsuara D: Reassurance is just an empty statement, devoid of substance and sincerity. The same type of reassurance was given when the Official Secrets Act (OSA) was being implemented. No safeguard was built into the law to protect the innocent groups such as the opposition and government critics. These groups have been innocent victims of our harsh draconian laws for too long. The powers that be are arrogant indeed.

Fair&Just : Why is it that their words sound so hollow and insincere every time they say something nice like "to avoid abuse" where we immediately focus on who's who in the panel and there we have it, some judges sitting in the panel and some judges in Bolehland could easily feel 'jumpy' over sensitive issues and act not so impartial? Just like kangaroos jumping.

CiViC: Don't take us for fools. We all know at the end of the day who these judges would favour. But Zahid is being very honest about it, the amendments indeed are not aimed at intimidating the oppositions, it's probably just to get rid of them entirely.

Sarajun Hoda: This is unbelievable. The BN government is living in a fantasy world erroneously believing that as the government, they have become god to Malaysians. That they have the right to do whatever they please, as if people trust them and believe them for whatever they say or do and will readily accept them without question.

It is definitely either one of these: the ministers are crazy, or the people of Malaysia have become so seriously disillusioned that they will accept anything thrown at them.

It is so insulting to our intelligence that Malaysian ministers think they are smart enough to make unquestionable decisions for the lives of others.

Bamboo: It is not possible to trust this wolf of a minister. He has inadvertently exposed the true intention of the PCA amendments. Malaysians are no fools. We know that ISA has been misused on many occasions in the past.

Changeagent: To solve our crime situation, you don't need new laws, you need to work! There is just not enough action from the police. They are too busy making money illicitly like the politicians.

Quigonbond: Let me put it in the simplest way so that Umno delegates can understand. First, even if Pakatan moved for these kinds of amendments, they would be vehemently rejected by Malaysians despite Pakatan assurances.

What more Umno's embarrassing record of abuse of any number of punitive legislation from the ISA to the Emergency Ordinance (EO) to the Police Act.

Second, it matters zilch to Malaysians that there are some kind of appeal mechanism. Convictions under the Penal Code or Sedition Act also can be appealed against up to the Federal Court level, but it means nothing because the highest echelons of the judiciary are nothing but Umno supporters.

There may have been some semblance of normalcy under former PM Abdullah Badawi, but the judiciary has since gone back to being another government department under Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Anonymous #01428088: Najib says "trust me" but he then does the opposite. Do you think the ordinary people still trust Umno?

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.