Thank you, Mr Sivarasa. Our hopes are also with you, and we all go against ISA. Sekarang saya ingin menjemput Tan Seri Harun Hashim. Beliau adalah hakim terkenal dan berwibawa. Beliau juga pernah memegang tugas yang amat penting untuk iaitu Pengarah ( ) yang kini dikenali sebagai BPR. Dan kini Tan Seri Harun Hashim merupakan salah seorang Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia(SUHAKAM). Sekian. Sekarang dipersilakan.
Assalamualaikum warahmatullahiwabarakatuh. Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, is it Madam or Miss Chairperson.
Tajuk tu dari ISA dari segi/ apatuh daru perspektif hak asasi manusia, benarlah, kalau dari segi/ perspektif hak asasi manusia memang ISA tidak patut ada, tidak patut di ( ) Kerana mengikut Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 5 menyatakan no one shall be tortured or punished cruelly or treated in a degrading way (Tiga tiga tu saudara tadi sudah mengalami, the law must be safe for everyone), and then no one shall be arrested or imprisoned or sent away from their country without proper reason, everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial legal body. Sebab tu lah bila asalnya tujuh orang kena tahan, SUHAKAM telah keluar kenyataan untuk mereka tujuh orang ni patut dibebaskan, atau telah dia buat kesalahan patut didakwa didalam mahkamah.
So itu dari segi perspektif ISA. Sekarang kita rujuk balik ke ISA ni. Dia... ISA ni telah di wujud pada tahun 60- iaitu daripada tahun 48 hingga tahun 60 keadaan darurat yang mengakibatkan secara aktiviti komunis, masa tu komunis cukup ... ah...bunuh orang, kalau tak bagi duit, dia bunuh orang depan keluarga, tebalikkan keretapi, lempah bom ke dalam panggung wayang, membunuh orang perempuan yang anak beranak, dan sebagainya. Jadi betul dia zalim dan jahatlah... memang betul betul orang jahat ...dia terrorist...(........) dia tembak, dia bunuh orang, tikam, macam macam dia buatlah... They were really bad. Sebab tu ada undang undang... Jadi... asalnya Emergency Ordinance, bapak EO, ialah daripada Ireland. Pasal orang Irish ni pandai memberontak dan sebagainya. Sampai sekarang tak habis habis lagi cerita dia. Dia Irish... they are first class terrorrist. Jadi undang undang tu wujud di situlah, (...) kita ambik daripada sana bawa ke sini, jadi EO. Tetapi selepas ada tu terpaksa membuat Internal Security Act. Jadi ISA ini telah dilulus oleh parlimen selepas kemerdekaan. Jangan kata orang putih jahat. Orang putih dah tak ada dah. Ah ni orang kita ni.
We made this law..Malaysians made this law. The Malaysian parliament elected by you people. So it is our parliament, our law, and every five years we renew the license one more time, one more time,..So we are complaining against ourselves. Lets face it this is the problem. So what the police are doing is a very legal thing in that sense.But I will admit the experiences narrated by both our two previous speakers are not in the law Are not in the law, certainly against human rights. You are not supposed to torture people, etc, etc.
Now but look at the kepala of this Act.It says An act to provide for the internal security of Malaysia .preventive detention, the prevention of subversion, the suppression of organised violence against persons and property in specified areas of Malaysia. So you must name the area first. I dont know whether theyve named any area or not . And then the Because this is a special law under Article 159 I think 149 is it? Whereas action has been taken , and further action is threatened by a substantial body of persons (...) both inside or outside Malaysia to cause and to cause a substantial number of citizens to fear organised violence against persons and property and to procure the alteration otherwise than by lawful means of the lawful government of Malaysia by law established. And whereas the action taken and threatened is prejudicial to the security of Malaysia and whereas parliament considers it necessary to stop or to prevent that action, now, therefore, pursuant to Article 149 of the Constitution , be enacted, etc.
So these are the preconditions, but if you look at these conditions again, they fit like a glove the conditions of this country in 1960 The threat of communism which was very, very physical. They were really killing people, and there were subversion . Of subversion. Even they had literature they want people to become communist- very subtle .Killing people is one part of the story you dont , they kill you. But at the same time they were persuading people to be communists because after the second World War in particular, the communist wanted to rule the world. That was a fact of life, you know. They really wanted to rule the world. And so they wanted every country to become communist, and they tried it- one country after another. Of course Russia was there, and actually, when you talk about revolutions this communism was invented in Paris, you know, not in Moscow. The stupid Russians probably know this.. It was invented by the French and then of course its still in China. And the propoganda at that time was such that there were a lot of poor people. Poverty was everywhere, and to sell communism was very, very easy- because if you accept communism then you wouldnt have this problem.
Now this is talking about communism, but actually
the target, the whole idea was actually socialism. Socialism you do it
in a nice way, you go for election, you have a political party, then win elections,
and then you can implement socialism. That was how Hitler started. And many
western countries became socialist through the normal legal process. But some
countries adopted communism because that is the only way to establish socialism.
So communism is the forceful way of getting to the same objective, which is
socialism. Socialist countries is what they take through normal legal parliamentary
means that sort of thing.
Now in theory, socialism is very good.. in theory. But people being what they are... it is almost impossible to achieve that objective. See , the ah, the what do you call this.. to practice real socialism, the communist of course very particular to this country because they were very violent. But distinct socialism. Socialism is that if properly applied, if there are not enough shoes, each man will only get half a shoe. So lets be fair to everybody. Everybody gets half one shoe. And there was this story about an Egyptian- He was down and out. He has borrowed from everybody in the family til they do not want to give him any more money. So he wants to borrow from his friends, and his friend also refuse to lend him any more money. He was down and out. Got wife and children. They were hungry. So he do not know what to do, so he wrote a letter addressed to Allah: Allah, please help me- my family now starving, please send me 20 pounds. He is not a very ambitious man, he only asked for 20 pounds. So he posted the letter, but the postman got the letter, did not know where Allah was, so he did the next best thing- delivered it to the president. And the president said You must be very desperate to write to Allah to borrow 20 pounds... Send him 10 pounds. So when he received the 10 pounds, another letter to Allah: Allah thank you very much for sending me the 10 pounds, but you should not have sent it through president Nasr. Hes a socialist, he kept the other 10 pounds.
This universal declaration, I know a lot of politicians say so, this it was referred to , related to, this is the western concept. They are making use of it to recolonise us. Human rights, human rights is western concept- they are using it to recolonise us. And China having the same problem with the WTO because their.. what happened in Tianemen Square, etc etc. In fact the good news yesterday was that for the first time in the history of United Nations Human Rights Commission, the US lost its seat. They preach human rights, but they themselves do not practice it. So.. I was there for two weeks and I know what happened at this particular conference.
Now .. if you look at the ..there are thirty articles, this Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was made on the 10th of December 1948, in California, in San Francisco. It was adopted by the United Nations on the 10th of December 1948, there are thirty articles. Still, seeing what our brother has said, if you go through the thirty aricles, every one of them is not new to us. In fact, Ill go one step further, every single article of this Universal Declaration are contained in the Quran, which is 1400 years old. The right to justice, the right to a fair trial, all this sort of thing is already there in the Quran. The qualification who should be judged, how the judge should do his work.. its all there. And these are in the UDHR, so its nothing new to us- our religion says so.. so its nothing new.
Now what has happened is that the,... I think cannot run away from the fact that the ISA was designed to deal with the communist, and mercifully they are no more around. In fact our communist .. the communist are now our good friends. China is buying our rubber , our palm oil, you name it, they are buy buy buy. And then recently what was it , they are manufacturing something, they dont have the money to buy our product... no , they have invented something we dont have the money to buy, so never mind we supply you palm oil, you supply us whatever it is that you are manufacturing.. so back to the old style of barter trade.. The more sophisticated you are, the more basic we become. So we have that. So, the question is, the big question mark is: How is ISA still relevant today? It was designed to deal with the communists,but then the communists are no longer around no trains are being derailed etc. etc. nobody throwing bombs into cinema houses , in fact cinema houses dont exist anymore anyway But that was the scenario.
So the government, I think with reference to what our learned friend has said earlier on, this... the courts have been quite proactive in many respects, and I was part of that system for some years, and everytime we made a decision, they will rush to parliament to change the law again. And .is very very evident, if you look at sections 8 on powers of preventive detention power to order detention or restriction of gossip this is what these 7 or 10 have been arrested, you see. And then you have a,b,c you know, because 8 is followed by 8a, 8b, 8c. Everytime we make decision, a, then next decision b, then next, c. So quickly Id like to go through this- its the 1999 Amendments. I joined the Supreme Court in 1998, in 1999 we got all this series of laws. Which says that no new sections judicial review of act or decision of Yang Dipertuan Agong and minister /can administer- there should be no judicial review in any court because we were proactive. So tangkap lepas, tangkap lepas eh apa you Harun bikin nih.
Power in accordance with the act- Same in regards to any question on compliance with any procedurual requirements in this act governing such act or decision, which is actually reducing it to almost nothing. The exception of the governing on any question of law shall not apply pulak where the grounds are described as 8a. We have no power except, but they accept cannot also. .So in fact theres nothing kan.. you tolak tolak tolak . This macam if some people on the roadside they have three trucks bukan, they put the thing, we know where it is . So in this Act judicial review includes proceedings assisted by way of an aplication for any of the of containment of right. An application for the duration or an injunction, a writ of habeas corpus and any other suit, action or other legal proceedings relating to or arising out of any act done or decision made by the Yang Dipertuan Agong. Semua dah tak boleh tanya dah, you see
And then government section 8 (...) ...shall
apply to any proceedings by way of judicial review of any act done or decision
made by the Agung or the minister if such proceeding were
sudah lepas pun pakai balik
So the reference to proceedings
not include a reference to distinguish had concluded and in respect of
which is fair enough- if its concluded its concluded , theres nothing
you can do about it bukan? Tapi not concluded boleh pakai lagi. So that was
a very severe series of amendments in 1989.
Now the point is that this law has been amended 19 times- ISA. A 1960 law, and the series of amendments started in 1962 and its been regularly amended. And the more they amend, the worse it becomes, the worse it becomes. So.. justified in 1960, conditions in 1960 but the question is, is it still justified under the present situation.
Now I think what is also clear is that the government made some law to control unexpected situations. We got good comparisons- recently in the Philippines- the people power- were very peaceful demonstrations and brought down the present government. But last week it was not so peaceful. I mean they started burning things up and what not, so the president had to act, by arresting people. And then using force to disburse the crowd. But that was an unexpected situation. And the courts in Indonesia, in Jakarta, the same situation again So there are unusual situations and any government worth its salt . Must have some power, some legal power to act quickly to solve this. Now we cannot say that well because of human rights, right to fair etc etc bukan?... Let them burn the houses, let them terbalik peoples kereta .. these cars and what not on the roadside does not belong to the people, I mean belongs to public people but nothing to do with what happened, and the innocent peoples property- cars get burned down just because of the mob. I have faced actual mobs myself in my rather long career with the government. You must go and see a real mob, ready to break out into violence. And just a freak like that is enough for the people to go wild. So when that happens, so the question is ...alright .. for the normal cause of things these people have done.. . tangkap dia, you arrest for causing damage to so and so, arrest for burning peoples property, that sort of thing. So but then sekarang ni, the police have