Home / News / Urgent Appeals / MALAYSIA: Persons arrested and charged over oppressive police laws continuously detained
 

MALAYSIA: Persons arrested and charged over oppressive police laws continuously detained

December 15, 2007

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

15 December 2007
------------------------------------------------------
UA-342-2007: MALAYSIA: Persons arrested and charged over oppressive police laws continuously detained

MALAYSIA: Police assault; inhuman treatment; freedom of assembly
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) writes to inform you that the 31 persons who had been charged for supposedly attempting to murder a policeman and for illegal assembly in connection with the November 25 demonstration, organized by Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) in Kuala Lumpur, had been denied bail. The court on December 6 denied their petition for bail on pretext of "national security". They were arrested following a violent dispersal by the policemen following a peaceful demonstration by ethnic Indian minorities which was joined by thousands of people.

CASE DETAILS: (According to information received from Suaram and other sources)

In November 25, the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), a non-governmental organisation fighting for the rights of the Indian minority in Malaysia, organized a demonstration in Kuala Lumpur. It is reported that over 20,000 people have joined the demonstration.

Hindraf organised the demonstration in time for their submission of petition before the British High Commission demanding compensation for taking the ethnic Indians into Malaysia from India during the colonial period over 150 years ago.

Under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, it guarantees its citizens their rights to freedom of assembly and expression. However, this provision had been subverted after the draconian Police Act had been implemented. This Act requires any groups or persons permit from the police authorities should they organize demonstration of persons that exceeds more than three individuals. The police's decision is final and could not be challenged in court.
 
It is reported that when Hindraf made their application for permit, it was rejected by the police but nevertheless the organizers proceeded with the demonstration which effectively been pronounced as illegal by the government. It resulted to the arrest of about 400 persons and several others have suffered injuries following a violent dispersal by the police. At least 200 tear gas canisters were thrown into the crowd of unarmed individuals and water cannons laced with chemical were dosed at them.

Two of those injured were identified as Ravin A/L Mahalingam, 22; and Kumaran Shanmugan, 22. They were sent to the General Hospital in Kuala Lumpur for medical treatment.

Meanwhile, those arrested were also taken separately at the Kuala Lumpur Contingent Police Headquarters (IPK Kuala Lumpur) and at the Police Training Centre (Pusat Latihan Polis, Pulapol) in Jalan Semarak, Kuala Lumpur. Some of those presently detained are believed to have been injured and in urgent need of medical assistance.

On December 6, Judge Azimah Omar of the Shah Alam Sessions Court, denied the petition for bail of the 31 person who had been charged for attempted murder on pretext of "national security". The attempt by the 31 persons to murder a policeman supposed happened at the Hindu temple of Batu Caves where the protesters had gathered. However, it is learned though that apart from the said policeman, several police officers and crowd have also been injured during dispersal by the police.

Of the 31, twelve were also charged for illegal assembly under Section 27 of the Police Act. The next hearing of the case was for 14 to 18 January 2008. Twenty-four of those identified to have been detained at the Police Training Centre, including the two injured victims, were;

1. Ravin A/L Mahalingam
2. Kumaran Shanmugan
3. Nya Prakasam
4. Polan Isamy
5. Shanmuganathan A/L Kalimuthu (aged 29)
6. Jivan Chilayah
7. Komala
8. Ramesh A/L Rajen (aged 26)
9. Palanisamy A/L Munasamy (aged 47)
10. Sangkar A/L Supramaniam B
11. Kumar
12. Saravanan Doraisamy
13. Vilaman Ravi
14. Thanabalan
15. Subramaniam
16. Sivakumar
17. Selvarajoo A/L Viramuthu
18. Murugan A/L Sokan
19. Francis A/L Kurus
20. Robert
21. Palanisamy
22. Nagan
23. Indran A/L Pasupathi
24. Ramesh Rao A/L Simanaido

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

There have been a series of arrests, filing of charges and detention of persons following violent dispersals by the police in Malaysia in recent times. As mentioned earlier, the police have had sole discretion under the Police Act whether or not to allow public demonstrations. However, the police often deny organizers of demonstrations once they apply for permits, or they prevented them from holding demonstration.

In November 10, the police also violently dispersed a peaceful demonstration in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia calling for fair and free elections. The police had used teargas and water cannons in dispersing the crowd which resulted to injuries of several demonstrators. Thirty four persons had been arrested but were soon after released. Please see for further details: UA-324-2007.

On December 9, human rights lawyers and activists have also been arrested following their peaceful march to mark the International Human Rights Day. The march, which began at a large department store in Kuala Lumpur central market, was halted by the policemen. They were arrested and charged for illegal assembly and for disobeying police orders.

Please read the forwarded statement on this: FS-047-2007. You can also view the video taken on this incident.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the concerned authorities below requesting for their appropriate intervention in this case. All those arrested must be fully accounted for. The charges against the detainees must be adequately reviewed, and they must be released unconditionally should there be no sufficient proof to hold them for trial.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear _____________,

MALAYSIA: Persons arrested and charged over oppressive laws continuously detained

Name of the detainees:
1. Ravin A/L Mahalingam
2. Kumaran Shanmugan
3. Nya Prakasam
4. Polan Isamy
5. Shanmuganathan A/L Kalimuthu (aged 29)
6. Jivan Chilayah
7. Komala
8. Ramesh A/L Rajen (aged 26)
9. Palanisamy A/L Munasamy (aged 47)
10. Sangkar A/L Supramaniam B
11. Kumar
12. Saravanan Doraisamy
13. Vilaman Ravi
14. Thanabalan
15. Subramaniam
16. Sivakumar
17. Selvarajoo A/L Viramuthu
18. Murugan A/L Sokan
19. Francis A/L Kurus
20. Robert
21. Palanisamy
22. Nagan
23. Indran A/L Pasupathi
24. Ramesh Rao A/L Simanaido
Date of incident: Kuala Lumpur
Place of detention: Police Training Centre (Pusat Latihan Polis, Pulapol), Jalan Semarak, Kuala Lumpur.

I am writing to express deep concern regarding the violent dispersal which resulted to the subsequent arrest, filing of charges and detention of persons during a demonstration on November 25 in Kuala Lumpur. I have learned that the demonstration, which was organized by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), had been peaceful but the police had instead violently attack in dispersing them.

The policemen had thrown tear gas and dosed the crowd with water cannons laced with chemicals. Several persons had been injured, including those persons who have been taken into police custody and are presently detained. I am aware that 31 persons have already been charged supposedly for attempting to murder a police officer who was one of those injured; and some of them have been charged for illegal assembly.

I am aware that under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia it guarantees their citizen's rights to freedom of assembly and expression. However, the Police Act, in particular Section 27, requiring any persons or groups intending to hold demonstrations to obtain prior permit from the police, is a devoid of these Constitutional rights. In recent times, the police have been either denying permits for demonstrations or preventing them in absence of justifiable reasons.

For instance, when human rights lawyers and activists had their peaceful march to mark the International Human Rights Day on December 9, they too were violently dispersed. Nine of whom have been arrested. I fail to comprehend that even peaceful demonstrations, or occasions to mark human rights day, the police have failed into exercising adequate restraint or tolerance but rather used brute force in dealing with dispersals.

I am deeply concerned by the excessive use of force by the police. While I acknowledge the police' duties to maintain law and order in public; however, I fail to comprehend that the police actions on November 25 remains justifiable. The police have used its excessive forced in violently attacking a supposedly peaceful demonstration. As you are aware, the crowd had gathered for legitimate purpose which is to submit petitions to the British High Commission concerning the welfare of ethnic Indian minorities however even on this condition the police could not tolerate.

I therefore urge you to ensure that all the detainees are fully accounted for. Their case must be adequately reviewed by a credible and independent court. Should there be no sufficient evidence to hold them for trial, their case must be withdrawn and that they should be released unconditionally promptly. Additionally, I urge you to look into allegations of torture and maltreatment on the detainees and ask your adequate action on this.

Those involved in violently attacking and dispersing the crowd should also be investigated and they should be held to account. I also ask you to consider amending the existing laws, in particular the Police Act, which subverts the fundamental rights of the citizens. I am deeply concerned that unless this law is amended the policemen could continuously violently attack peaceful demonstrations without being held to account.

Yours sincerely,

---------------------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Tan Sri Musa Hassan
Inspector-General of Police
Ibu Pejabat Polis Diraja Malaysia
Bukit Aman
50560 Kuala Lumpur
MALAYSIA
Tel: +60 3 2262 6222
Fax: +60 3 2273 9602

2. Dato' Seri Abdullah bin Haji Ahmad Badawi
Prime Minister and Minister of Internal Security
Prime Minister's Office
Perdana Putra Building,
Federal Government Administrative Centre,
62502 PUTRAJAYA,
Selangor,
MALAYSIA
Tel: + 60 3 8888 6000
Fax: + 60 3 8888 3444

3. Datuk Zul Hasnan Najib Baharudin
Chief Police Officer of Kuala Lumpur
Ibu Pejabat Polis Kontinjen Kuala Lumpur
Polis Diraja Malaysia
Jalan Hang Tuah
51100 Kuala Lumpur
MALAYSIA
Tel: + 60 3 21460522 / 3 2485522
Fax: + 60 3 20726786

4. Mr. Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman
Chairperson
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
Tingkat 29, Menara Tun Razak
Jalan Raja Laut 50350
Kuala Lumpur
MALAYSIA
Tel: +60 3 26125600
Fax: +60 3 26125620

5. Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail
Attorney General
Aras 1-8, Block C3, Parcel C                                                           
Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan                        
62512 Putrajaya
MALAYSIA
Tel: +60 3 88855000
Fax: +60 3 88889378
Email: ag@agc.gov.my

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-342-2007
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.