Archive for the ‘BornInMalaysia’ category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

This is very weird…

December 17th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


This is bordering on impossible, but being Bolehland…..

The guy was arrested on 6 December and given remand for 9 days. The very next day, a police officer said the report against him was false. So, he should be released right? Wrong. He was still kept for 9 days and on top of that, was beaten! This is serious allegation indeed.

While we can praise the police for catching criminals, these kinds of black marks only damages their reputation. Kerana nila setitik, rosak susu sebelanga. I think the nila is more than just one titik (drop).

Maybe police officers need to undergo annual psychiatric evaluation to ensure they are of sound mind. Remember that one out of four Malaysian have some sort of mental health problem (That’s according to national institute of mental health).

A man detained on suspicion of sexual harassment was tortured and beaten despite the Police being aware that a false report was lodged against him.

S Isaikumar,28, lodged a report at the Seremban police headquarters. He was accompanied by his lawyer N Surendran.

Surendran said that Isaikumar (right) was arrested on Dec 6, 2009 and remanded for nine days based on a police report lodged against him for sexual harassment.

The following day, on Dec 7, Isaikumar was told by the investigating police officer that the charges made against him were based on a false report.

Nevertheless, the police only released Isaikumar (right) on Dec 14, during which time Isaikumar alleged he was assaulted and subject to humiliation by the police.

“Isaikumar was slapped, abused and beaten with PVC pipes by a group of police officers,” said Surendran.

He claimed that at one stage a female police officer sat on Isaikumar’s chest and inserted a shoe she was wearing into his mouth.

The police, he alleged, also took photos of Isaikumar in the nude, including photos of his genitals.

Surendran further claimed that his client was denied medical treatment despite running a fever.

Though the lockup where he was detained held seven prisoners, Isaikumar alleged they were given only three packets of food to be shared among them.

‘He was innocent’

Chief investigating officer, Inspector Ahmad Sobri Amir Salim, cleared Isaikumar of any wrongdoing in a letter on Dec 14, on the day of his release.

“Despite his innocence, Isaikumar went through an unnecessary and unwarranted nine days of remand, coupled with abuse by police officers,” said Surendran.

The lawyer said the case should be investigated by Bukit Aman because he felt the Seremban police would not conduct a fair inquiry.

Surendran called on inspector-general of police Musa Hassan to ‘clean up his own house’ as there have been many cases and reports of police brutality.

Meanwhile Parti Sosialis Malaysia secretary, S Arutchelvam, demanded Bukit Aman form a special team to investigate this latest report of police brutality.

Arutchelvam said that if there was no action within two weeks, PSM would take up the case with Bukit Aman.

He said the case clearly showed a “lack of police professionalism” where police were “victimising” an innocent citizen.

Isaikumar, Surendran and Arutchelvam were among a group who attempted to enter the IPK premises but were denied entry.

There was also an attempt to meet with the deputy chief police officer of Negri Sembilan, but an officer denied them permission.

Instead, the group was advised to lodge a report at the nearby Seremban town police station.

Among the political leaders present were Senawang state assemblyperson P Gunasekaran, Temiang assemblyperson Ng Chin Tsai, Negeri Sembilan PKR deputy chairman S Haridass and state PKR Youth deputy chief Norazizi Aziz.

Comments Off on This is very weird… »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian

Tags:

Info on police investigation, rights and bail

December 17th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Bookmark this category
Useful information on police investigation procedure and rights of citizens. Received via email.

 

Police Investigation
 
      
WHEN DOES INVESTIGATION BEGIN?

Investigation begins the moment you are arrested and before a charge is brought against you, in order to determine if there is any or enough evidence which can sustain the charge.

WILL YOU BE ARRESTED OR DETAINED DURING INVESTIGATION?

Any person who has been accused or connected with or suspected of committing an offence may be arrested by police. Where a seizable offence e.g. murder, robbery or theft is suspected to have been committed, a police officer may arrest the offender with or without warrant or order from the Public Prosecutor in the course of investigation.

After your arrest, you cannot be kept indefinitely in police custody pending police investigation. You must be brought before a Magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest or where the police need more time for their investigation, they must produce you before a Magistrate to request permission to detain you further for a term not exceeding 15 days in a whole.

Where further detention is unnecessary, you may be released on bail to ensure your appearance in Court at an appointed date. Bail, however, is not available in certain cases e.g. if you are charged with murder or drugs trafficking.

The police may also detain you up to 60 days on suspicion upon Ministerial satisfaction that you may be subject fit and proper to be detained under the authority of the Minister for up to usually 2 years each time. This is known as preventive detention. The laws that allow for prevention detention are the Internal Security Act, 1960, the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 and the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance, 1969.

ARE YOU OBLIGED TO ANSWER POLICE QUESTIONS?

Where you have not be been arrested but only called by the police for questioning, you are bound to state the truth and answer all questions put to you by the police investigating officers except those which have a tendency to expose you to a criminal charge, penalty or forfeiture (right from self-incrimination). Before recording your statement the police officer will have to explain to you your right from self-incrimination.

WHAT SEARCH POWERS DO THE POLICE HAVE?

Persons having the power to arrest may search any place entered by the person sought to be arrested and may effect an entrance by force if refused entry. An arrested person may be searched and any articles found which are reasonably believed to be evidence of the crime may be detained until his release. Any offensive weapon found on the arrested person may be seized. A person in lawful custody who is unable to give a reasonable account of himself due to incapacity may be searched to ascertain his name and address.

FOR HOW LONG CAN A PERSON REMAIN IN POLICE CUSTODY?

A police officer who has taken a person into police custody must be brought before a Magistrate without unnecessary delay. Police detention of the arrested person must not exceed 24 hours (excluding the time taken for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate Court) unless a remand order had earlier been obtained. Any violence used by a police officer to a person in his custody is a punishable offence. Any person who escapes from lawful custody may be pursued and arrested by the person from whose custody he fled.

 
Bail    

Basically there are two types of bail –

(i) police bail; and

(ii) court bail.

Police bail is granted when investigation cannot be completed. Instead of detaining the suspect longer, police bail is granted to ensure that the suspect will appear at the police station and report to the investigation officer at the appointed time. Usually, police bail takes the form of a bond by the surety without securities being furnished.

On the other hand, court bail means the release of a person from custody of the detaining authorities upon security being given for his appearance in Court on an appointed date.

Whether court bail will be granted would depend on the nature of the offence. For purpose of bail, offences are classified under (i) bailable (ii) non-bailable and (iii) unbailable offences. A bailable offence means bail has to be offered as of right. The court has no choice but to offer bail. Non-bailable means the court has a discretion to grant bail and when an offence is described as unbailable, no bail will be offered. Examples of bailable offences are voluntarily causing hurt, cheating and defamation. Examples of non-bailable offences are rape, theft, infanticide and causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means. For penal code offences, a complete list of bailable and non-bailable offences is found at column 5 of the First Schedule of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Bail will not be granted in unbailable offences. These are offences punishable with death or life imprisonment for instance drugs trafficking, murder, or kidnapping punishable under the Kidnapping Act.

However, there are exceptions and bail may be offered for any person under the age of 16 years or any woman or any sick or infirmed person accused of such of offence.

Conditions may be imposed in granting bail (only in respect of non-bailable offence) such as requiring the accused person to surrender his passport. Failure to comply with the condition imposed may result in an accused person being remanded until trial.

The purpose of bail is not to punish the accused person but to merely secure his attendance in Court on a given date. Thus the Court will normally take into account the following factors in deciding whether bail ought to be granted: –

• The nature of the offence with which he is charged;
• The apparent possibility of conviction;
• The likely sentence;
• His family lives and relationship within the community in which he lives;
• His previous criminal record (if any);

• His reputation, employment status and monetary conditions

A bail once granted may however be revoked if there is clear evidence that the accused person is interfering with the course of justice for example the destruction of evidence or tampering of witnesses.

Regards,

Sanjeev
National Chairman,
Police Affairs & Rehabilitation Bureau
Unity & Community Development Committee
Malaysian Indian Congress.

__._,_.__

Comments Off on Info on police investigation, rights and bail »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

UN 1965 International Convention of Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

December 16th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Interesting to know that our country has not signed nor ratified this particular convention. No prizes for guessing the reason, which makes it difficult to implement the convention in our laws and legislations.  As mentioned below, countries like Thailand and Laos are moving ahead in this matter.

The government must decide on its priorities with regards to inking the 1965 International Convention of Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

United Nations resident coordinator in Malaysia Kamal Maholtra said the government needs to decide internally and solve its constitutional contradiction before signing any UN convention.

“Apart from Article 153, there is a clause that provides for the equality and freedom to its citizens, therefore the government needs to decide on its priorities,” he told a press conference at the sidelines of a seminar in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

Kamal was asked if the signing of ICERD will contradict with section 153 of the federal constitution which guarantees the special privileges of the bumiputera.

Nevertheless, he said the government is in fact looking into other aspects of the six conventions recommended by the UN which has not been signed by Malaysia.

In his speech earlier, Kamal disclosed that the government has only signed three and ratified two of the nine core international human rights treaties.

Malaysia has only signed and ratified the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (Cedaw) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Both were signed with reservations in 1995.

“In addition, Malaysia has also signed but not yet ratified the 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,” Kamal said.

On the issue of sustaining human rights, the UN coordinator is of the view that a strong culture must be embedded within Malaysians and this should start with young children.

“Human rights education should also be a continuous effort and it would be best if the education curriculum entrenches human rights issues as well,” he said.

Meanwhile, UN human rights officer Pablo Espiniella explained that some governments have reservations to sign and ratify conventions because of the fear that they cannot fulfil the requirements and therefore have to face international repercussions.

“The process is as such where after the government has signed and ratified any convention, there should be moves and efforts to assimilate these principles into local laws and legislation,” he said.

However, he said, the UN will hold dialogues, provide support and expertise to the government to implement the principles of the conventions once they are recognised.

Pablo also said that with Thailand signing seven out of the nine human rights conventions and Laos closely catching up, he hopes that this momentum will encourage the Malaysian government to do the same.

Comments Off on UN 1965 International Convention of Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags:

Waytha, Public Enemy No 1

December 16th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


This is serious allegation indeed. All along, I thought “Dadah” was “musuh negara”, but it seems BTN says its Waythamoorthy. Hmm…were the presentation materials screened? Is it standardised across all camps?

Hindraf is dead set against the National Civics Bureau (BTN) courses as it demonises the movement’s chairperson P Waythamoorthy in its modules as Public Enemy No 1.

It’s political wing, the Human Rights Party’s pro-tem secretary-general P Uthayakumar alleged that the Nov 25, 2007 Hindraf protests are screened at BTN courses, and an image of Waythamoorthy is shown, captioned as ‘musuh utama negara’ (public enemy number one).

Meanwhile, DAP’s Kota Alam Shah assemblyperson, M Manoharan said he feared for Indian Malaysians as BTN trainees have systematically implemented Umno’s racist, religious and supremacist policies.

“The standard operating procedure is to implement (what is) taught at BTN courses. They are attemping to portray Indians as dangerous and violent people,” said Manoharan.

Comments Off on Waytha, Public Enemy No 1 »

Posted in BornInMalaysia, Indian

Tags:

PAS cannot compromise on its position

December 16th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I really can’t see how DAP and PAS can work together. Its still OK now since they are not the ruling coalition. But for how long this will remain status quo? If one cannot compromise, then its left to the other. Would DAP drop its Malaysia for Malaysian idea? Would it accept a middle path of one country two laws?

I don’t like the idea of an Islamic state. Its a bad, bad, idea to run a country according to a specific religion especially when the population is nearly equally divided. It may have been practical 1500 years ago, but not now. The leaders now are not as good as those in the history books. This would only lead to disaster as rights can be usurped, laws can be misinterpreted, rules dictated according to one faction.

Today the Tok Guru is around, so things can still be talked and negotiated. What if later some Taliban-style leaders lead the party? We can easily end up like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, or other Islamic countries that have loads internal problems.

PAS is immovable on its stance, same as DAP on its stance. Both opposite sides of the pole. This is a dead end.


Within Pakatan Rakyat, there is frequent objection to issues like hudud law or the Islamic state. How far is PAS willing to compromise? For example, DAP usually has a different opinion on these issues.

No man can have it easy all the time. Some times we fall ill. Even doctors fall ill. God has created the world this way – there are angels and demons, good and bad, heaven and earth. As Muslims, we live by the teachings of the Prophet. When someone is lazy, we preach about diligence. They then become hard-working. Cowards are told tales of bravery. They become brave. The wayward are taught about the pious (and) become religious.

There is no need (to quarrel). Say what you want, but listen to our reply. Don’t make accusations and (then) when I reply, you don’t listen. Tak boleh! (This won’t do). Islam means you should ask questions. If you don’t understand (our policies), ask.

So you mean that PAS cannot compromise on its position on hudud law and the Islamic state?

How can we compromise? This is our ibadat (religious obligation). If we reject the meaning of Islam, we are rejecting our ibadat. God created man to follow ibadat, which is not restricted to just praying.

So how will PAS go about this? Some younger people in DAP can accept PAS, but veterans like national chairperson Karpal Singh, are more adamant about the party’s secular position.

Tidak apa (It is no big deal). Karpal Singh is someone very senior. Sometimes, when people kacau (agitate) us, we have to look at them first. Sometimes, we look at them at say, ‘Let him be. He is old. Let’s respect him’.

People who speak like Karpal Singh are getting fewer. He is a watak lama (old player).

So Tok Guru, you are willing to talk…

Yes. We can discuss. I like it very much when people ask me questions. If I can answer, I will. If the topic is beyond me, I will ask the person to ask someone else.


Comments Off on PAS cannot compromise on its position »

Posted in BornInMalaysia

Tags: