'Paper writers' and not decision makers sent from government departments to deal with the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) are thwarting the latter form exercising its role.

"This is the problem faced by us in fulfilling our obligations. Sometimes if we want to have meeting with government departments or institutions, we don't seem to be able to get the right person to discuss things with," Suhakam chairperson Abu Talib Othman lamented today.

However, he said, Suhakam was not in a position to ask who should be sent from government bodies to have a meeting with them adding that many of those officers were merely sent to submit a report of the meeting and not to make decisions.

Abu Talib also said that another factor hampering Suhakam's objectives was the lack of power given to the body under the law which prevented it from tackling bigger tasks

"The law passed by the parliament states that Suhakam is purely 'advisory' and it's entirely up to the government to accept or reject (our recommendations)," he told a press conference after the first session of the second day of the 2004 Malaysian Human Rights Day Conference in Kuala Lumpur.

Suhakam is required to file an annual report to Parliament, which it has done for the past three years, but the Barisan Nasional-controlled legislature had consistently refused to debate the rights body's findings and recommendations.

Abu Talib urged parliamentarians to examine the law and give more power to Suhakam to enable it to function more effectively.

Civil society voice

Meanwhile, parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang in his keynote address at the conference called on civil society to demand Parliament to review and rescind Bukit Gelugor MP Karpal Singh's six-month suspension .

"Karpal's suspension is the very antithesis of accountability, transparency, justice and good governance."

Lim told the conference that if the civil society could not rescind the suspension, '... then all the conferences to talk about accountability, transparency, justice and good governance would be quite meaningless and count for nothing'.

Karpal on Tuesday was given three days to tender an apology and then serve out a 10-day suspension from Parliament for misleading the House.

If he fails to do so, he is liable to a six-month suspension during which he will not be allowed to receive his MP's monthly allowances and enjoy other perks.

Lim's remarks drew responses from two participants who said that Karpal should be accountable to his constituency and urged him to apologise to the House.

However, another participant supported Lim's idea and said that civil society should rise up to condemn Karpal's suspension, and called upon Suhakam to look into the issue.