Drop charges on Hindraf 54

This would show that Najib was genuine in bringing about greater civil liberty, says Hindraf Makkal Sakti.

GEORGE TOWN: Hindraf Makkal Sakti today called on the Barisan Nasional (BN) federal government to drop the charges against its 54 activists for alleged involvement in an outlawed organisation.

It secretary P Ramesh said that by dropping the charges, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak will prove true to his words that his government was finally driving the country towards greater civil liberty.

If Najib is serious to improve the country’s internationally disapproved human rights record, he said the Prime Minister Office (PMO) should advise the Attorney-General’s Chambers to drop the charges against the 54 immediately.

“The charges have violated the freedom of association guaranteed under the Federal Constitution. Article 10(b) states that ‘all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms’”.

“Citizenry rights to freedom of association is fundamental civil liberty,” Ramesh said.

In early March, Hindraf activists, including Ramesh, were charged under Section 43 of the Societies Act with being members of an illegal organisation, Hindraf.

They were also charged under Section 47 of the same law for allegedly being in possession of materials and items pertaining to Hindraf.

Both Acts carries a jail sentence of between three and five years, and a fine of not more than RM3,000, or both upon conviction.

They were alleged to have committed the offences during the Hindraf Makkal Sakti’s aborted anti-Interlok rally on Feb 27.

Good step forward but not enough

Ramesh said that both charges were illogical and flawed considering that the activists were members of the newly formed civil rights movement Hindraf Makkal Sakti, not Hindraf, which was banned in October, 2009.

“Hindraf Makkal Sakti is not an illegal organisation. It’s waiting for registration,” he told FMT here today, adding that Hindraf Makkal Sakti is only one of over several thousands of NGOs operating in the country.

He equated Hindraf Makkal Sakti activists’ position to the membership status of those in the old Umno when it was declared unlawful by the High Court in 2008.

He recalled that the then Umno leadership formed a new party, Umno Baru, which ultimately inherited everything from the old Umno.

He said the party shrewdly managed to restore public confidence to accept the new Umno as the old Umno, although technically it’s Umno Baru.

“Umno Baru members have never been charged with being member of an illegal organisation for associating themselves with the illegal Umno,” he said.

Similarly, Ramesh said Hindraf activists needed a platform to carry on their struggle after the home ministry banned it.

Thus, like Umno Baru, he said Hindraf Makkal Sakti was formed to absorb these activists.

He said that Najib’s recent announcement to either repeal or review several draconian laws was a good step forward, but not good enough to steer the country towards true democracy.

Act of deception

Although the Internal Security Act 1960 would be repealed, he said two virtually similar new laws pertaining to public order and anti-terror were likely to replace the ISA.

He said that the government was only trying to gain political mileage by abolishing the much- criticised ISA and Emergency Ordinance (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) 1969 (EO).

He said the proposal to review the Police Act 1967, Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 and citizenry rights to freedom of peaceful assembly was also politically motivated.

However, he said that many other draconian laws have been conveniently left out from government consideration.

Among other draconian and draconian-typed laws were Public Order (Preservation) Act 1958, Prevention of Crime Act 1959 and Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975.

Other laws are Official Secret Act 1972, Sedition Act 1948, , Trade Union Act 1959, Immigration Act 1959, Societies Act 1966 and Universities and University Colleges Act 1971.

Crime prevention laws such as Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, Arms Act 1960 and Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act, 1975, are said to have violated fundamental civil liberties.

“Najib looks into only certain draconian laws just to ease political pressure, not because the federal government has listened to the people’s call for greater democracy,” Ramesh said, adding that this was an act of deception.