Giving credit where it's due, the Home Minister should be given Kudos! for conducting an online poll on the controversial Internal Security Act and you know for once, the results were/are not biased as can/could easily take place with "certain" surveys! I join the DAP publicity chief Tong Pua in applauding Hishamuddin Hussein for his bold efforts, so Sybas again!
From the MI -- yes, again, and I don't get any 30% commission for doing this PR! -- is what I'm a lifted yesterday, when our troubles seemed so far away, but NOW...?
91pc in Home Ministry web poll want ISA abolished
By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani
PETALING JAYA, Aug 7 — A week after a mammoth anti-Internal Security Act (ISA) rally in Kuala Lumpur, results of a two-day old Home Ministry online poll shows that 91 per cent of 8,722 respondents want the security law abolished.
The rest want a review of the ISA which allows detention without trial and first introduced in 1960 against communist terrorists. The results of the poll at 6.15pm is available at www.ikdn.gov.my.
DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua today commended Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein for taking the steps to gauge public perception over what the opposition calls a draconian law.
“We hope that the minister will not only make this polls for show only and take this a real important feedback to ensure that ISA is abolished. The voice is very clear,” the Petaling Jaya Utara MP told reporters.
Critics and opposition parties say the law is now being used against political rivals. Some 80 are still being detained under the law at the Kamunting Detention Centre in Perak.
Those previously detained include religious extremists, currency forgers and a nuclear parts middleman apart from opposition politicians and other activists.
But Pua criticised the website for a question that is aimed to mislead the public about ISA. The poll asked if Malaysians know that Britain and America referred to ISA to gazette their Anti-Terrorism Act and Patriot Act.
“I feel that this question has misled the public because firstly they did not refer to ISA and the ISA Act is not the same as Anti-terrorism and Patriot Act. In UK, when the anti-terrorism act is used they have to go to the courts.
"The detention they use is the same with the police act in Malaysia, that is detention of not more than two weeks. But even when they want to have detention for two weeks, they must after two days to go to the courts and request for the detention. So the terrorism act in UK is like the police act in Malaysia,” Pua explained.
He also pointed out that the Patriot Act and Anti-Terrorism Act can only be used when the crime is clearly connected to terrorism.
“But in Malaysia, matters not related to terrorism can be detained under ISA, writing blogs can be brought to ISA, and writing newspapers can also be brought to ISA,” he said.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has promised a review of the ISA but it is still unclear which provisions will be amended.
Opposition politicians and activists have demanded the law be repealed and marched through Kuala Lumpur last Saturday to hand a memorandum to the King.
But police locked down the capital city and crushed the protest, briefly detaining some 600 people of which 63 were charged in court.
PS: I just cast my "V"ote; as at 7.20AM, the following are the results of one of the 5 categories surveyed:
Created: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 8:52:39 PM Central Time
Do you have a friend who would be interested in this survey? Send this survey to them!
Apa yang anda mahu dari ISA?
Dimansuhkan 91% 9,822
Diteruskan dengan semakan 9% 990
Saya keliru 0% 36
Total: 10,848 responses
This survey is not scientific and reflects the opinions of only those Internet users who have chosen to participate. The results cannot be assumed to represent the opinions of Internet users in general, nor the public as a whole. Neither this website or its sponsors are responsible for content, functionality or the opinions expressed therein.
ANOTHER UPDATE from Desi -- see how hard/heaRT this blardy BUMmer wroks for Thee:) --And I still have not had my tehtarik nor CON BF!:(
Thanks to dear RPK, wherever thou art, Gb! -- YL, Desi
ISA detainees are tortured under interrogation
Posted by admin
Wednesday, 05 August 2009 02:48
“The behaviour of the defendants is inhumane, cruel and despicable, as the plaintiff was not just arrested and detained unlawfully for 57 days but was also subjected to a vile assault, unspeakable humiliation, prolonged physical and mental ill-treatment.”
NO HOLDS BARRED
By Raja Petra Kamarudin
Ex-ISA detainee gets RM2.5mil in landmark decision
By Chelsea L.Y. Ng, The Star
19 October 2007
In an unprecedented move, the High Court awarded RM2.5mil in damages to an ex-ISA detainee for having been unlawfully arrested, detained and beaten up while in police custody in 1998.
High Court Judge Hishamudin Mohd Yunus granted the award after ruling that Abdul Malek Hussin had succeeded in suing former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Noor, a police officer and the Government for the misdeeds done to him during the detention.
“The behaviour of the defendants is inhumane, cruel and despicable, as the plaintiff was not just arrested and detained unlawfully for 57 days but was also subjected to a vile assault, unspeakable humiliation, prolonged physical and mental ill-treatment,” the judge said in his judgment yesterday.
SEE VIDEO: Malik Hussin reveals how he was tortured under ISA detention
SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPc_V4_Htns )
He added that the arrest and detention were unlawful because Abdul Malek was not told of what he had done or intended to do that would pose a threat to national security.
Apart from ruling that the arrest and detention smacked of mala fide, the judge also said they were done for political purposes rather than for the sake of national security.
The case is the first where a former ISA detainee has won millions in damages.
In 1996, a former ISA detainee, Guracharan Singh, won his case for unlawful detention but was awarded nominal damages of RM1.
Yesterday, when Justice Hishamudin spoke of the inhumane acts, he was referring to Abdul Malek’s account of how Special Branch police officer Asst Supt Borhan Daud had slapped him thrice during the arrest at 10pm on Sept 25, 1998, blindfolded him and taken him to the police contingent headquarters here.
At the headquarters, Abdul Malek had told the court, he continued to be blindfolded and was led into an air-conditioned room before being stripped naked, verbally abused, hit in the face and body as well as having urine-like liquid poured into his mouth which was forced open.
He had testified that he knew Abdul Rahim was one of those who assaulted him in that room because at one point his blindfold slipped and he was able to see his assailants.
Justice Hishamudin said the practice of torture of any kind was to be detested.
“The Special Branch Department must not only be neutral but must also be seen to be neutral and non-partisan. It must be above politics,” he said when awarding RM1mil in exemplary damages.
“The despicable conduct of the then IGP was shameful and a disgrace. He showed an extremely bad example to the thousands of men under his charge,” he said.
The judge stressed that the award of exemplary damages was necessary to show “the abhorrence of the court of the gross abuse of an awesome power under the Internal Security Act.”
“Any gross abuse of this power, therefore, must be visited with an award of exemplary damages to ensure that the extent of abuse is kept to the most minimal, if not eliminated completely.
“The practice of torturing detainees by the police can never and should never be condoned by the courts. The court must show its utmost disapproval,” said Justice Hishamudin.
He said he believed Abdul Malek's story rather than that of the police officers because there were glaring discrepancies, as if it was “being concocted to present some kind of chronology of events” to cover up what had happened in the first four hours of Abdul Malek's detention.
Apart from the exemplary damages, the judge also awarded general damages of RM1mil and RM500,000 for false imprisonment and the assault and ill-treatment, respectively.
Abdul Malek, 51, is now the chairman of a non-governmental organisation called Malaysians For Free and Fair Elections.
SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4N137JI4w0 )
Dissent is democracy’s twin
The Sun, 27 October 2007
THE Internal Security Act (ISA) is defended as a necessary evil for containing potential threats to national security. Under that broad objective, however, a whole range of civil liberties have been compromised ever since the law was promulgated in the early 1960s to contain the threat of communist terrorism.
Over the decades, the long list of ISA detainees have included opposition politicians, academicians, trade unionists, women’s rights leaders, environmental activists, social reformers and members of religious groups, among others. How these dissidents can be considered threats to national security is a question that has been posed time and time again, without being satisfactorily answered.
However, the scope for challenging the use of the ISA has been extremely constrained, since the police are empowered to detain anyone on the mere suspicion that he or she may be a threat to national security, the maintenance of essential services or to economic activity, as stated in Section 73(1) of the Act. Moreover, the minister is empowered to extend the detention order for up to two years, and in effect, indefinitely, without judicial review.
Last Thursday, a ray of hope emerged with the High Court decision to award RM2.5 million to former ISA detainee Abdul Malek Hussin for his detention for 57 days in 1998. Justice Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus found that Abdul Malek’s arrest was unlawful because he was never told the grounds for his arrest, a right protected under Article 5(3) of the Federal Constitution. Furthermore, the judge found that Abdul Malek’s claim that he was never interrogated concerning any planned or actual violent act had been unchallenged. This made the use of the ISA unlawful, the judge said.
This judicial finding creates the space for peaceful dissent without fear of a reprisal from the state, a fundamental liberty that is the hallmark of developed democracies. It is time to recognise that the freedom to exercise basic human rights is integral to a maturing democratic tradition. And not until the people are free to express their views within the limits of a wholesome social order will we qualify to take our place among the nations whose opinions matter to the rest of the world.