PETALING JAYA: Former Sosma detainee and Petaling Jaya MP Maria Chin Abdullah has raised concern over the potential abuse of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma) and its use against political dissidents.
Speaking at a forum on Sosma, organised by human rights group Suaram, she believed her detention on the eve of the Bersih 5 rally in November 2016 was political in nature.
Section 4(3) of Sosma states that the law should not be used against individuals for their political beliefs.
Maria later told reporters after the forum that politically-motivated detention, although wrongful, will always be a possibility even after the law has been amended.
“There’s no stopping that. They (police) might use it for political purposes. Detention without trial shouldn’t happen and politically-motivated detention also cannot happen, as that suppresses freedom of expression. The MPs have to understand that,” she added.
Meanwhile, she said she believes that the government would only do the “bare minimum” in amending the law just to fulfil its promise in the manifesto.
The PH manifesto, she said, only stated that the government would amend draconian provisions in certain laws, such as Sosma and the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (Poca), among others.
“But, of course, civil society and families of detainees would want to see the act abolished totally.
“I think it’s important to continue to push for it to be abolished. You can’t fix what is already rotten,” she added.
Lawyer Syahredzan Johan, who was also present during the forum, told reporters that a new law which prevents terrorism while ensuring the rights of individuals can be enacted to replace Sosma, if needed.
Earlier, in the forum, he gave an example of laws in the United Kingdom which allowed for a 28-day “judicial detention” for special criminal cases. This needed to be approved by the courts.
In Malaysia, the police, and not the courts, have the discretion to detain a suspect up till 28 days, he added.
Therefore, he said there are no “checks and balances” by an independent third party to ensure any arrest is justified.
Defining terrorism
During the forum, Syahredzan said the definition of the word “terrorist” should not be based on a person’s beliefs.
He added that under the Penal Code, the definition of the word “terrorist” is currently not associated with religious or political groups.
However, he said the definition of “terrorist groups” may have problems and should be reviewed.
He said the home ministry had the authority to classify and name certain groups as “terrorist groups”.
“There may be elements of misuse of power or misinterpretation.”
He suggested that the process of defining “terrorist groups” be done by an independent committee consisting of relevant stakeholders.
To this, Maria suggested that the definition should focus on actions, or “terrorism acts”, instead of labelling a person as a “terrorist”.
“It should look at the actions itself, if the person threatened violence, for example,” she said.
Perlis Mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, who was also present during the forum, said the Pakatan Harapan government must come out with a clear-cut definition of the word.
He argued that Western discourse currently generalised Salafism as terrorism.
“There needs to be a clear definition on who is a terrorist. If there are no definitions and people are free to label, this can be harmful.”
However, he agreed that some of the people detained under the law had tendencies towards violent extremism.
“It would be dangerous to say there was no terrorism threat at all. We need laws to prevent this, but it needs a system that is fair,” he said. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.