The Shah Alam High Court's decision yesterday to release two Internal Security Act (ISA) detainees received a stamp of approval from many groups who described it to be a "breath of fresh air", "historic" and the "beginning of the end to oppressive laws".

The Malaysian chapter of Amnesty International said the judgment signaled the "resurgence of the willingness" of Malaysian courts to exercise their right and duty to safeguard the fundamental liberties of the people from arbitrary decisions by the executive.

Its chairperson Joseph Paul said the judgment by justice Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus reaffirmed the right of the courts not to be "blindly bound" by laws that were manifestly contrary to the spirit of the constitution or enforced in bad faith.

"It is hoped that this judgment marks the beginning of the end to cruel and oppressive laws," he said.

Social reform movement Aliran said the court ruling was the beginning of the end to an unfortunate tradition of judicial reluctance to challenge the use of draconian legislation and brutal force by a regime that has increasingly set aside the rule of law.

"Aliran salutes both judge and judgment for this historic defence of the Constitution, civil liberties and human rights."

The movement called upon everyone to derive inspiration from the ruling and to continue the struggle to protect civil liberties and human rights.

Unlawful detention

In his decision yesterday, Hishamudin allowed the habeas corpus applications made by two Keadilan leaders, N Gobalakrishnan and Abdul Ghani Haroon, and ruled that their detention was unlawful. He ordered the police to release them immediately.

The judge added the detentions had been carried out in bad faith, violated the detainees' constitutional rights and ignored their procedural rights. Hishamuddin also ordered the police not to re-arrest the two for at least 24 hours.

Hishamudin also suggested that "it is high time" for Parliament to reconsider the relevance of ISA so as to prevent and minimise abuses of law by the authorities.

The duo were among 10 reformasi activists detained by the police under the ISA beginning April 10 for allegedly being a threat to national security and planing to overthrow the government via "militant means".

A reminder

Meanwhile, DAP chairman Lim Kit Siang called for the setting up of an All-Parliamentary Committee to seek public views on the continuing relevance of the Act.

He added that Hishamudin's judgment came like a "breath of fresh air" and that the judgment was "an appropriate reminder to all judges in the country".

Lim said this judgment totally contradicted an earlier one made by Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Augustine Paul who dismissed the habeas corpus applications by five other ISA detainees on the grounds that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the matter as the arrests and the detention of the five were done in accordance with powers vested in the police through the Act.

"If Malaysia is to move forward confidently into the future and mature as a democratic and vibrant civil society, then it is the Hishamudin judgment which should prevail over the Augustine Paul judgment on the ISA, habeas corpus and fundamental liberties of Malaysians," said Lim.

Regain credibility

Keadilan deputy president Dr Chandra Muzaffar said that the release of the two was also a golden opportunity for the police to regain its credibility.

"If the police refrains from re-arresting the two, their standing with the general public will shore up. The police will be seen as an institution capable of upholding the rule of law," he said.

He also added that the police must join hands with the judiciary to re-establish its integrity in the public eye.

On the judgment, Chandra said that it was the first step in the journey to restore the dignity of the judiciary, adding that other judges must now demonstrate "through their judicial decisions that they value their independence and are not subservient to the executive".

Human rights watchdog Suaram was of the view that the police will be committing a contempt of court if they re-arrested the two even after the 24-hour amnesty.

"It will make this historical judgment slide many steps backwards. Habeas corpus is a constitutional right but history has shown that the police and the government have abused this right many times by making re-arrests," said Suaram coordinator S Arutchelvan.