Human Rights - SHAM

[pywong]

Suruhanjaya Hak Awam Malaysia - SHAM.

All the commissions that are set up are designed to play for time, hoping that the public will grow weary and give up or forget. There is never any intention to change the system towards more democracy. Because doing so, will jeopardize UMNO's hold on power.

The Toothless Tiger
Posted by Vineeth Menon
Monday, 27 October 2008 17:22
The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) was established by Parliament under the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999, Act 597. The Act was gazetted on 9 September 1999. The inaugural meeting of SUHAKAM was held on 24 April 2000.

The stimulus for the Malaysian Government to consider the setting up of a national human rights institution came from several sources:

1. Malaysia's active involvement in the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) when it was a member from 1993-1995 and 1996-1998;

2. Tun Musa Hitam’s suggestion (in 1994) to the Government for the establishment of Malaysia’s own independent national human rights institution;

3. The changing political climate in Malaysia with a more politically conscious electorate and dynamic civil society;

4. Indonesia and the Philippines (ASEAN) have both setup their own national human rights institutions;

http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/14300/84/

[pywong]

Western nations slam Malaysia over rights record

GENEVA, Feb 12 — Several Western nations took Malaysia to task yesterday over its treatment of asylum seekers and refugees at an United Nations human rights record review.

Belgium, Britain and the Netherlands were among the nations that expressed “concerns” for refugees and asylum-seekers detained in Malaysia, as they called on Kuala Lumpur to develop legislation that distinguishes asylum seekers from other migrants.

“We note serious problems faced by refugees, migrants and asylum seekers in Malaysia... that is linked to a lack of clarity on their status in the country,” agencies quoted Belgium’s representative as telling the UN Human Rights Council during a universal periodic review session.

Under universal periodic review, all 192 member states of the United Nations have their human rights record vetted by the council once every four years. The session is based on three reports, one submitted by the country under review and two summaries compiled by the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights. More… (http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/18238-western-nations-slam-malaysia-over-rights-record)

[pywong]

Azmi is right. Even though SHAM is a toothless watchdog, we can take their findings, publicize it and demand action from UMNO.

High hopes on Suhakam which has little power

Posted by admin
Saturday, 07 March 2009 11:37

Malaysians have this thing where they hope some mighty champion will sweep down from the mountains and solve their problems for them. (Admin: He calls it the Hang Tuah complex)

AZMI SHAROM, The Star

LAST weekend I was at a public forum organised by ERA Consumer. It was held in Johor Baru... regarding ERA Consumer’s report on Suhakam’s 2006 Annual Report.

What I noticed from the comments of the audience was a very strong desire for Suhakam to “do more” in the field of human rights.

........ Suhakam does not have any real powers. It is not a body that can start prosecutions, for example. Its role is largely advisory and also educational.

.........the appointment of Commissioners could be narrowed down from any old “eminent persons” that the Act specifies, to “eminent persons with a record of human rights work”. As it stands, the Commission is large and filled with people who are not necessarily experts on human rights.

.........Sure they are pretty powerless but there is nothing to stop civil society from using its findings. Raise the findings, publicise them and demand they be acted upon.

After all, Suhakam is a legally constituted body created by the Government.

If the Government does not want to take what Suhakam says seriously, then we have every right to ask why not.

More… (http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/18934/84/)

Dr Azmi Sharom is a law lecturer.

[pywong]

The members of SUHAKAM should just do the decent thing and resign, instead of carrying with this sham.

Govt misses UN deadline. (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/5/4/nation/3828780&sec=nation)

Govt misses UN deadline, Suhakam may lose 'A' status
Mon 4 May 2009

KUALA LUMPUR: There has been no response from the Prime Minister or his
government to Suhakam's letters outlining the need to make it compliant with
the Paris Principles or face losing its "A" status.

They have also missed the 28-day deadline, which ended yesterday, given by
the United Nations (UN) to challenge the observations of the Accreditation
Sub-Committee of the International Coordinating Commit*tee of National
Institutions for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights (ICC).

Last month, The Star reported that Suhakam had written to Prime Minister
Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak that the sub-committee was not satisfied with the
Suhakam (Amendment) Bill 2009, which was supposed to have been the
Government's attempt to make the Suhakam Act compliant with the Paris
Principles. Yesterday, Suhakam chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman told The
Star that Suhakam had written to de facto Law Minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz
early last week at his behest but had got no response either.

"Suhakam commissioner Datuk (SK) Choo and some others met Nazri and the
parliamentary Human Rights Caucus a few weeks back and discussed the Suhakam
Bill.

"The minister was very understanding and sympathetic to our concerns about
the Bill and the report of the Accreditation sub-committee.

"He said he would take the matter up with the Cabinet and asked us to write
a letter, which we did.

"We have not heard from him and neither were we able to find out whether the
Cabinet had discussed the matter last week.
____

Human rights... who calls the shot? (http://www.jeffooi.com/2009/05/human_rights_who_calls_the_sho.php)

Human rights... who calls the shot?
Posted by Jeff Ooi on May 4, 2009 08:16 AM

Is our Suhakam Act compliant with United Nation's Paris Principles?
SUHAKAM (http://www.suhakam.org.my/) & Paris Principles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Principles)
That has been challenged by the UNHCHR (United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights), and Malaysia was given a 28-day ultimatum to respond to the
observations of the Accreditation Sub-Committee of the International
Coordinating Commit*tee of National Institutions for the Protection and
Promotion of Human Rights (ICC).
ICC (http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/NHRI/Pages/NHRIMain.aspx) & ICC (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/4/17/nation/20090417203425&sec=nation)

The deadline ended yesterday, May 3. Malaysia failed to respond in due
course, despite seeing Suhakam chairman Abu Talib Othman sound the alarm
bells on April 29. Abu Talib sound the alarm. (http://bernama.com/bernama/v5/news_lite.php?id=407849)

As a consequence, Malaysia may lose the A-Status as a country committed to
protecting, upholding and promoting human rights. Suhakam will be downgraded
to equate that of yet another government bureaucracy.
SUHAKAM may be downgraded. (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/5/4/nation/3828780&sec=nation)

As it is, the Suhakam (Amendment) Bill 2009 was bulldozed through the Dewan
Rakyat during its first sitting 2009, seen apparently as a BN Government's
attempt to make the Suhakam Act compliant with the Paris Principles, which
were institutionalised in 1991.

For context, Malaysians need to know that the Suhakam (Amendment) Bill 2009
was passed by the BN-dominated Dewan Rakyat the day before Suhakam's review
in Geneva that took place on March 26.

Now, the UN had challenged and questioned Suhakam as being non-compliant to
the Principes de Paris. ICC challenges SUHAKAM. (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu6/2/fs19.htm#annex)

Earlier, the ICC issued a notice to Malaysia last April, threatening of a
possible downgrade if improvements were not made by March 26.

Malaysia was given an extension of 28 days when it did not reply by March
26, the day the notice expired.

As a Member of Parliament, I was given a briefing on this in April when the
Dewan Rakyat was in session.

However, I have heard nothing more thereafter. No news. (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/4/17/nation/20090417203425&sec=nation)

BY THE WAY... The Paris Principles list 5 key areas of responsibilities for
national institutions like Suhakam, namely:

1. The institution shall monitor any situation of violation of human rights,
which it decides to take up.

2. The institution shall be able to advise the Government, the Parliament
and any other competent body on specific violations, on issues related to
legislation and its compliance with international human rights instruments,
and on the implementation of these instruments.

3. The institution shall relate to regional and international organizations.

4. The institution shall have a mandate to educate and inform in the field
of human rights.

5. Some of these nationally-sponsored institutions may be given a
quasi-judicial competence.

The ICC had challenged Malaysia on these principles based on the provisions
of the newly passed Suhakam (Amendment) Bill 2009, particularly on the parts
relating to the promotion and protection of human rights. www.unhchr.ch/html/menu6/2/fs19\.htm+human+rights+Paris+Principles&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=my&client=firefox-a] (http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:uGEdq_Bl7g0J:ICC Challenge.[/color]

It wanted Suhakam's independence to be strengthened by a clear and
transparent appointment and dismissal process in the Suhakam Act. It also
human rights commissioners to serve longer than two years and for them to
represent different segments of society.

Apparently, the Government's Bill on Suhakam (March 2009), in response to
the ICC's demands, still fell short of the Paris Principles. A Malaysia NGO
described the amendments on the Suhakam Act as "superficial and irrelevant".
Govt bill fall short. (http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/101364)

Again, for context, Malaysia's track records in the eyes of UNHCHR can be
found this special online location. Malaysia's track record on human rights. (http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/AsiaRegion/Pages/MYIndex.aspx)

An "A" status accreditation means that Suhakam, originally designed as a
national human rights institution (NHRI), complies with the Paris Principles
and is able to participate directly in all meetings of the UN Human Rights
Council.

A "B" means it is not fully compliant and has observer status only. A "C"
means total non-compliance, an international pariah.
____

MCA spin on the ISA (http://anilnetto.com/human-rights/mca-spin-on-the-isa/) & Law Reform Committee formed to review ISA (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/5/4/nation/3827763&sec=nation)

[pywong]

Let's not waste our time pinning our hopes on UMNO doing away with or even amending the ISA. These oppressive laws are put in place to maintain UMNO's hold on power. So they won't give it up. Anything that will diminish UMNO's power will not get done.

The simplest thing is to get rid of UMNO.

Just keep our focus - UMNO must go!

And then all the laws like OSA, UUCA, PPPA, Sedition Act, etc will disappear.

KL faces pressure to abolish the ISA

KUALA LUMPUR, May 5 – As the government prepares to review the Internal Security Act (ISA), it is facing an increasing clamour for wide-ranging changes, including abolition of the law.

The pressure is coming from within the Barisan Nasional as well as civil liberties groups, as the government seeks to fulfil its pledge of revamping one of its most controversial and hated laws.

The promised review will get under way this week when the Law Reform Committee holds its first meeting tomorrow, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Liew Vui Keong said.

More… (http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/25475-kl-faces-pressure-to-abolish-the-isa-)

[pywong]

Wow! This is getting more blatant by the day. UMNO lawyer becoming Human Right's Commissioner!

Opposition MPs questioned Datuk Mohd Shafee Abdullah's appointment as Suhakam commissioner because at the same time, he was also actively involved as the lawyer for Umno.

Neutrality of Suhakam commissioners questioned

Husna Yusop

KUALA LUMPUR (July 2, 2009): The neutrality of members and chairman of Malaysia's Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) was questioned by MPs debating the Suhakam (Amendment) Act 2009 today. More… (http://sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=35299)


Nazri Abdul Aziz
Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz said Suhakam commissioners must be careful with their words because they must be seen as neutral, in line with the Paris Principles.

The Paris Principles, endorsed by the UN Commission on Human Rights and UN General Assembly, are the basis for accreditation of national human rights institutions at the international level by the International Coordinating Committee (ICC).

[pywong]

Suhakam Act amended under protest
2 Jul 09 : 7.48PM

By Deborah Loh
deborahloh@thenutgraph.com

KUALA LUMPUR, 2 July 2009: Amendments to the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) Act were passed despite protests by opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) today who questioned the neutrality of some commissioners and of the selection committee.

The Act now no longer states that the prime minister is not bound by the recommendations of the committee that selects the commissioners.

This committee comprises the Chief Secretary to the Government, the Suhakam chairperson and members of civil society.

Opposition MPs protested that this amendment was not clear in saying whether the prime minister was now bound to follow the selection committee's recommendations. More… (http://thenutgraph.com/suhakam-act-amended-under-protest)

[pywong]

We have said this from the start, the proper name for SUHAKAM is SHAM!

SUHAKAM boycott
September 8, 2009

Joint NGO Statement dated 8 September 2009 in Conjunction with SUHAKAM’s 10th Anniversary

42 Malaysian NGOs Boycott SUHAKAM’s Human Rights Day Event, Announce Conditional Engagement with Specific Timeframe for Substantial Reforms

On the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) tomorrow (9 September 2009), we, the undersigned Malaysian non-governmental organisations, announce that we will boycott the event organised by SUHAKAM to commemorate its 10th year of existence.

Our boycott of SUHAKAM’s event on 9 September 2009 is to register our strongest protest and disapproval towards:

1. The failure of SUHAKAM to proactively protect and promote human rights

loyarburok (http://loyarburok.com/the-lobby/suhakam-boycot/#more-4219)

[pywong]

Talk about hypocrisy - throwing the blame on the people for their incompetence.

Abu Talib has given us the solution: UMNO Must Go!
'We can't bite and it's all your fault'
Andrew Ong, Sep 9, 09

As the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) marks its 10th anniversary, chairperson Abu Talib Othman laments that it is still unable to go beyond making recommendations to the government - most of which are ignored.

But, he said, Suhakam is not to blame because it cannot function beyond the law that governs it. Since this was created by legislators elected by the public, he said the onus is on the electorate to vote for those who can rectify the situation. Malaysiakini. Subscription required. (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/112500)

[pywong]

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/112492

Suhakam must campaign for its rights
Steven Gan | Sep 9, 09 4:38pm

COMMENT

The following is an abstract of a speech given today at Suhakam's conference
on 'Human Rights in Malaysia: The last 10 years'.

I was reluctant to speak at this event. Reluctant, because I was afraid I
would say the same thing after all these years. Reluctant, because I cannot
claim to speak on behalf of human rights groups in this country. Reluctant,
because I knew I would be harsh on Suhakam.

But the organisers were insistent. Perhaps it was because I've been a
witness to Suhakam's growth. After all, Suhakam and Malaysiakini are born in
the same year.

The Suhakam Act was passed 10 years ago today, while Malaysiakini went
'live' two months after - Nov 20, 1999. We were the first media organisation
to do an extensive interview with Suhakam's first chairperson Musa Hitam
(right).

Since then, Malaysiakini has provided Suhakam so much coverage that we have
become, more or less, its official media. Indeed, we have been
fellow-travellers, and what a journey it has been these past 10 years.

Long struggle for press freedom

Months before Suhakam and Malaysiakini came into existence, print
journalists had handed a petition to the then home minister, Abdullah Ahmad
Badawi, calling for press freedom.

They mooted a self-regulatory regime - an independent press council - if at
least the licensing clause of the Printing Presses and Publications Act was
repealed.

In response, the government moved ahead with the council proposal, but not
the demand for repeal.

To this, we strongly object - a press council cannot operate in an
environment where restrictive press laws remain. We do not want yet another
layer of control over the media.

Since then, journalists have followed up on their petition with memorandum
after memorandum to Suhakam, often around May 3 - World Press Freedom Day.
Only last month, a media watchdog made yet another plea to Suhakam.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/110987

It has been 10 years - our message remains the same. It is essential for
Suhakam to promote freedom of expression as the central element in our push
towards an information society.

What has Suhakam accomplished?

I was asked some years ago at a forum to spell out what the commission has
accomplished on press freedom since its inception.

My answer: three things - nothing, nothing and nothing. Before, you lynch
me, the emphasis here is on 'accomplish', not 'has done'.

Yes, Suhakam has done quite a bit on press freedom. It organised a workshop
in 2002 and following that made a number of recommendations to the
government.

As expected, the government failed to accede to such requests. But that's
not new. Time and again, Suhakam's recommendations have been ignored.

That, I believe, is Suhakam's greatest failure. Suhakam cannot remain silent
when its recommendations are treated with contempt by the government. More
so, when Parliament refuses to even discuss its annual report.

Clearly, Suhakam is being used by the government like a trophy wife - nice
to bring along to dinner parties just to prove critics wrong about its lack
of respect for human rights, but at all other times, is kept under lock and
key.

Stake in press freedom

I have said this often enough: press freedom is like toothpaste - once it is
out, it's difficult to put it back into the tube.

Our job as journalists is to squeeze a blob of press freedom out from the
tube. Suhakam's job is to lend us a hand. And the government's job is not
stand in our way.

Press freedom is as much a lifeblood to journalists as it is to Suhakam.

Suhakam, too, has a stake in press freedom. Without it, the commission will
find itself shut out when dealing with a hostile government that has the
media under its thumb.

I have mostly restricted my speech on the issue of press freedom because
it's an issue with which I'm familiar. But the same can be said about the
lack of progress made in many other areas of human rights.

In particular, rights involving the truly vulnerable groups - indigenous
peoples, squatters, detainees and foreign workers. It's not surprising that
detainees continue to die in custody and Malaysia is blacklisted as a
country involved in human trafficking. And all this has taken place under
Suhakam's watch.

For a full account on how Suhakam has failed, you can refer to the press
statement of the 42 NGOs which have boycotted this conference. They are more
eloquent than I am on that score.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/112417

An excuse, not a reason

If there is one recommendation that I can give Suhakam, it is this - it
needs to campaign for its own rights.

More than 10 years ago, journalists were lamenting the state of the media
and blaming the laws which have muzzled them. My answer to that was "that's
an excuse, not a reason".

Suhakam cannot continue to claim that its hands are tied, that it is not
empowered to do more, and that its role is merely to advise, not to
admonish. These are excuses, not reasons.

In fighting for its rights, Suhakam must do it collectively - all 16
commissioners, with one voice. Don't let one or two commissioners do all the
talking because eventually the government will single them out - look at
what happened to Anuar Zainal Abidin (left), Hamdan Adnan and Mehrun Siraj,
whose tenure was not extended.

Suhakam must speak up as one. Here, I'm not talking about 1Malaysia, but
1Suhakam. And if the government decides to sack all of the commissioners,
then Suhakam would have indeed achieved something.

Until Suhakam can gain its rights to carry out its mission, it cannot hope
to do a proper job in advancing human rights in Malaysia. And hopefully, I
won't need to recycle this speech in 10 years' time.
----------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN GAN is editor-in-chief of Malaysiakini.
____

http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/news_lite.php?id=439224

1Malaysia Embraces Human Rights - SUHAKAM
September 09, 2009 17:09 PM

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 9 (Bernama) -- The 1Malaysia concept embraces the
principles of human rights in ensuring a life of dignity for all, said Human
Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman.

He said it was the realisation of this pro-human rights landmark policy that
the people looked forward to.

"Let's not letters written to the government went unanswered while police
reports ignored after this," he told reporters after delivering a keynote
address at the Malaysian Human Rights Conference 2009 with the theme "Human
Rights in Malaysia: The Last 10 Years" here on Wednesday.

Abu Talib said the government wielded the power to ensure that its agencies
provide efficient services with the interest of the people becoming their
top priority.

"It (1Malaysia) is tied to the people's interest, human rights and the
people's rights. The rights are not only determined by the laws but must
also integrate between the government and the people," he added.

Abu Talib said the laws must not only constitute good laws but must also be
enforced by good people without favour.

"In line with human rights, actions must be taken on whoever break the laws
without favour. What we want are impartial laws as the constitution has made
it clear that all are equal before the law," he said.

In his speech, Abu Talib said most of Suhakam's findings and recommendations
had yet to be implemented by the government.

"As an advisory body without executive power there is nothing that Suhakam
can do to ensure government's response and action to what it recommended. As
a result, human rights violations continue to occur almost on daily basis,"
he said.

He said only the government was able to ensure that the police and other
agencies respect human rights while maintaining peace and security, and that
the judicial system was independent and effective in providing access to
justice to all citizens.

"They can allow citizens to freely voice their concerns on important issues
such as misuse of public funds, abuse of power, selective enforcement of the
law and illegal practices.

"By not allowing citizens to freely voice their concerns on such issues, we
are encouraging whispering campaigns that will ultimately result in social
and public unrest," he added. -- BERNAMA

[pywong]

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/112492

Suhakam must campaign for its rights
Steven Gan | Sep 9, 09 4:38pm

COMMENT

The following is an abstract of a speech given today at Suhakam's conference
on 'Human Rights in Malaysia: The last 10 years'.

I was reluctant to speak at this event. Reluctant, because I was afraid I
would say the same thing after all these years. Reluctant, because I cannot
claim to speak on behalf of human rights groups in this country. Reluctant,
because I knew I would be harsh on Suhakam.

But the organisers were insistent. Perhaps it was because I've been a
witness to Suhakam's growth. After all, Suhakam and Malaysiakini are born in
the same year.

The Suhakam Act was passed 10 years ago today, while Malaysiakini went
'live' two months after - Nov 20, 1999. We were the first media organisation
to do an extensive interview with Suhakam's first chairperson Musa Hitam
(right).

Since then, Malaysiakini has provided Suhakam so much coverage that we have
become, more or less, its official media. Indeed, we have been
fellow-travellers, and what a journey it has been these past 10 years.

Long struggle for press freedom

Months before Suhakam and Malaysiakini came into existence, print
journalists had handed a petition to the then home minister, Abdullah Ahmad
Badawi, calling for press freedom.

They mooted a self-regulatory regime - an independent press council - if at
least the licensing clause of the Printing Presses and Publications Act was
repealed.

In response, the government moved ahead with the council proposal, but not
the demand for repeal.

To this, we strongly object - a press council cannot operate in an
environment where restrictive press laws remain. We do not want yet another
layer of control over the media.

Since then, journalists have followed up on their petition with memorandum
after memorandum to Suhakam, often around May 3 - World Press Freedom Day.
Only last month, a media watchdog made yet another plea to Suhakam.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/110987

It has been 10 years - our message remains the same. It is essential for
Suhakam to promote freedom of expression as the central element in our push
towards an information society.

What has Suhakam accomplished?

I was asked some years ago at a forum to spell out what the commission has
accomplished on press freedom since its inception.

My answer: three things - nothing, nothing and nothing. Before, you lynch
me, the emphasis here is on 'accomplish', not 'has done'.

Yes, Suhakam has done quite a bit on press freedom. It organised a workshop
in 2002 and following that made a number of recommendations to the
government.

As expected, the government failed to accede to such requests. But that's
not new. Time and again, Suhakam's recommendations have been ignored.

That, I believe, is Suhakam's greatest failure. Suhakam cannot remain silent
when its recommendations are treated with contempt by the government. More
so, when Parliament refuses to even discuss its annual report.

Clearly, Suhakam is being used by the government like a trophy wife - nice
to bring along to dinner parties just to prove critics wrong about its lack
of respect for human rights, but at all other times, is kept under lock and
key.

Stake in press freedom

I have said this often enough: press freedom is like toothpaste - once it is
out, it's difficult to put it back into the tube.

Our job as journalists is to squeeze a blob of press freedom out from the
tube. Suhakam's job is to lend us a hand. And the government's job is not
stand in our way.

Press freedom is as much a lifeblood to journalists as it is to Suhakam.

Suhakam, too, has a stake in press freedom. Without it, the commission will
find itself shut out when dealing with a hostile government that has the
media under its thumb.

I have mostly restricted my speech on the issue of press freedom because
it's an issue with which I'm familiar. But the same can be said about the
lack of progress made in many other areas of human rights.

In particular, rights involving the truly vulnerable groups - indigenous
peoples, squatters, detainees and foreign workers. It's not surprising that
detainees continue to die in custody and Malaysia is blacklisted as a
country involved in human trafficking. And all this has taken place under
Suhakam's watch.

For a full account on how Suhakam has failed, you can refer to the press
statement of the 42 NGOs which have boycotted this conference. They are more
eloquent than I am on that score.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/112417

An excuse, not a reason

If there is one recommendation that I can give Suhakam, it is this - it
needs to campaign for its own rights.

More than 10 years ago, journalists were lamenting the state of the media
and blaming the laws which have muzzled them. My answer to that was "that's
an excuse, not a reason".

Suhakam cannot continue to claim that its hands are tied, that it is not
empowered to do more, and that its role is merely to advise, not to
admonish. These are excuses, not reasons.

In fighting for its rights, Suhakam must do it collectively - all 16
commissioners, with one voice. Don't let one or two commissioners do all the
talking because eventually the government will single them out - look at
what happened to Anuar Zainal Abidin (left), Hamdan Adnan and Mehrun Siraj,
whose tenure was not extended.

Suhakam must speak up as one. Here, I'm not talking about 1Malaysia, but
1Suhakam. And if the government decides to sack all of the commissioners,
then Suhakam would have indeed achieved something.

Until Suhakam can gain its rights to carry out its mission, it cannot hope
to do a proper job in advancing human rights in Malaysia. And hopefully, I
won't need to recycle this speech in 10 years' time.
----------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN GAN is editor-in-chief of Malaysiakini.
____

http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/news_lite.php?id=439224

1Malaysia Embraces Human Rights - SUHAKAM
September 09, 2009 17:09 PM

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 9 (Bernama) -- The 1Malaysia concept embraces the
principles of human rights in ensuring a life of dignity for all, said Human
Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman.

He said it was the realisation of this pro-human rights landmark policy that
the people looked forward to.

"Let's not letters written to the government went unanswered while police
reports ignored after this," he told reporters after delivering a keynote
address at the Malaysian Human Rights Conference 2009 with the theme "Human
Rights in Malaysia: The Last 10 Years" here on Wednesday.

Abu Talib said the government wielded the power to ensure that its agencies
provide efficient services with the interest of the people becoming their
top priority.

"It (1Malaysia) is tied to the people's interest, human rights and the
people's rights. The rights are not only determined by the laws but must
also integrate between the government and the people," he added.

Abu Talib said the laws must not only constitute good laws but must also be
enforced by good people without favour.

"In line with human rights, actions must be taken on whoever break the laws
without favour. What we want are impartial laws as the constitution has made
it clear that all are equal before the law," he said.

In his speech, Abu Talib said most of Suhakam's findings and recommendations
had yet to be implemented by the government.

"As an advisory body without executive power there is nothing that Suhakam
can do to ensure government's response and action to what it recommended. As
a result, human rights violations continue to occur almost on daily basis,"
he said.

He said only the government was able to ensure that the police and other
agencies respect human rights while maintaining peace and security, and that
the judicial system was independent and effective in providing access to
justice to all citizens.

"They can allow citizens to freely voice their concerns on important issues
such as misuse of public funds, abuse of power, selective enforcement of the
law and illegal practices.

"By not allowing citizens to freely voice their concerns on such issues, we
are encouraging whispering campaigns that will ultimately result in social
and public unrest," he added. -- BERNAMA

[pywong]

Suhakam: Cops must cooperate, we have the power

Posted by admin
Friday, 11 September 2009 17:02

On Aug 29, the panel of inquiry was told that almost all the police officers involved had refused to provide written authenticated statements. The police officers had also refused to authenticate the few written statements that were provided.

By YENG AI CHUN, The Star

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has the power to compel witnesses to have their statements recorded and affirmed before or during a hearing.

Commissioner Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who announced this in an interlocutory decision (see full decision below), said the Suhakam Act -- being a human rights statute -- stands close to legislation such as the Constitution and should be treated sui generis, attracting interpretations of its provisions in a liberal, fair and large fashion.

“Section 14 (1) (a) grants Suhakam the power to record the statements of witnesses, whether they are civilians or police officers,” he said at the public inquiry into the arrest and detention of five lawyers of the Kuala Lumpur Legal Aid Centre at the Brickfields police station earlier this year. Malaysiatoday.... (http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/26744/84/)

[pywong]

Suhakam's plan: No action if this govt stays in power
Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:03
E-mail Print

By Stephanie Sta Maria

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) turns 10 this year. For the past decade, it has fought for human rights in the country but has still wound up being called a “toothless tiger” for its inability to bring about a significant change.



Last week all 16 of its commissioners, some of whom had been serving Suhakam since its inception, stepped down to make way for a fresh team.

In an exclusive interview with FMT, Suhakam's former vice-chairman Simon Sipaun talks about Suhakam's role, challenges and future.

FMT: What does Suhakam have to show for itself after 10 years?

Simon: Suhakam has four roles. The first is to educate the public on human rights and we have done well as more Malaysians are now more aware of human rights issues and Suhakam.

Our second role is to advise the government on existing or proposed laws that violate human rights, like the Internal Security Act (ISA). We still have a long way more to go here. None of our annual reports have been debated in Parliament and the government has constantly turned a deaf ear to our recommendations. So while Suhakam has performed its duties, the results are yet to be seen.

The third role is advising the government on international human right treaties and instruments. When Suhakam first started, the government ratified two instruments. Ten years later, that figure hasn't changed. Again we have done our part but the government hasn't done its part.

The fourth role is to investigate complaints of human rights violations and to propose solutions. We have done this to the best of our abilities, but we are only a recommendatory body and have no decision-making powers. Although we've not done too badly in this area, our main challenge is the authorities not taking our recommendations seriously.

Is Suhakam's reputation as a “toothless tiger” a fair one?

The problem is that no one knew anything about Suhakam until it was created and very few understood our exact role. So when they heard that Suhakam deals with human rights violations, their expectations were very high and they were very disappointed to find out that we are only an advisory body.

So in a way, we are a toothless tiger. Then again, we were never meant to be a tiger with teeth. In my opinion, Suhakam cannot be a tiger based on the existing law. If Suhakam was really meant to be effective, then the government should have consulted the public, the civil society and human rights activists before creating it.

What is the current criteria of selection of commissioners?

The old law states that 'members of the commission shall be appointed from among prominent personalities including those from various religious and racial backgrounds'. Of course this is very subjective. What do you mean by prominent? People are well-known for both the good and bad that they have done.

Under the amended law, this clause has been improved to read 'the members of the commission will be appointed from among men and women of various religious, political and racial backgrounds who have knowledge of or practical experience in human rights matters'.

This amendment has made the selection process more specific and transparent. The government approaches various non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and asks them to submit nominations based on the above criteria. This name list is scrutinised by the committee which will then advise the prime minister on the final selection. As for how the committee members are selected, I myself am not too sure.

What are the biggest human rights issues in Malaysia?

Definitely the ISA and the Emergency Ordinance Act. The fact that the latter still exists indicates that Malaysia is still in a state of emergency. This is serious because the Act is invoked even when the conditions that gave rise to its creation no longer exist.

For instance, there was a recent incident in Perak where the police shot dead a couple. The families wanted to sue the police and the government for abuse of power, but the government invoked a section under the Emergency Law which states that if a police officer shoots to kill someone whom he believes is a threat to security, he cannot be prosecuted. Malaysia is no longer in a state of emergency but yet the Act is still being used.

This is why you have Simpang Renggam. People are being put away simply because they are assumed to be a threat to security, and then they are forgotten.

Racism is another threat to human rights today because it is becoming institutionalised. The treatment of the Orang Asli is akin to apartheid.

What needs to happen for Suhakam to carry out all its roles effectively?

The establishment of a National Human Rights Action Plan. It's a plan of action by the government that will expose it to human rights issues and put it on the same wavelength as us. The human rights bodies in other countries have already implemented this plan and their governments are more receptive towards their recommendations.

We proposed this plan to the government in 2002 but was told that the federal constitution is sufficient to protect and promote human rights. I disagree because more often than not, government enforcement agencies are the violators of human rights. The concept of human rights violation is foreign to them as they have never had their rights violated before.

Do you see this plan coming into place soon?

Not if the current government remains in power. FreeMalaysiaToday.... (http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/fmt-english/news/general/4957-no-action-if-current-govt-stays-in-power)