/CORRECTED REPEAT/RIGHTS-MALAYSIA: Terrorism Bill Brings Too Many Risks

By Baradan Kuppusamy Reprint | | Print |

Baradan Kuppusamy

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 13 2003 (IPS) - Too loose a definition of terrorism and the new powers it gives to police and prosecutors to arrest and prosecute in the name of fighting terrorism are among too big risks that come with the bill passed by Malaysia’s lower House of Parliament last week, activists say.

Despite strong protests, the Dewan Rakyat or Lower House of Parliament passed last week a powerful new amendment to the Penal Code, widely described as the terrorism bill.

Any act that is "prejudicial to national security or public safety" is one of several definitions of terrorism under the measure. But critics say such definitions are too dangerously vague and further erode human rights and democratic freedom in a country like Malaysia, where open dissent is often restricted.

Under the law – the upper house will give a pro-forma approval and then it becomes gazetted – journalists, lawyers, accountants and even company secretaries are in danger of being charged with "aiding and abetting" terrorists in the normal course of their professional work.

If they had provided service for a person who turns out to be a terrorist and if the terrorists go on to commit an act of "terrorism" that kills a bystander, the professionals could face the death penalty. Terrorist acts that do not kill civilians are punishable with jail terms ranging from seven to 30 years.

The new law also defines suicide bombing as a terrorist act and allows police to arrest without warrants if they suspect a terrorism link.

But critics say there is no real need for a new law, given the plethora other security measures in this country.

"There is really no need for this law as there are over a dozen other laws that are more than adequate to investigate terrorist acts and prosecute a person, ‘ said ‘Elizabeth Wong, secretary general of the National Human Rights Society or HAKAM.

"What worries us is that under the new law, the standard of proof required for conviction is frighteningly low," she told IPS. "There is nothing to mitigate the harshness of these measures and the possibility remains that such laws may be open to abuse."

Parliament also passed the anti-money laundering bill and other changes to the Criminal Procedure Code that gives prosecutors the power to intercept, detain and open any postal article if related to a terrorism offence.

They can also listen to any conversations and intercept any message through any form of telecommunication and enter any premises and install any device to intercept communication if linked to a terrorism offence.

Even as Parliament approved these measures, police arrested 13 Malaysian students, whom intelligence officials suspect to have links with terrorist groups, upon their return from Pakistan on Monday. The students, who had studied at famous Islamic ‘madrasah’ in Karachi, were arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) that allows for indefinite detention without trial.

Where before the ISA was employed to arrest dozens of suspected militants who are being held without trial, the terrorism law will now take precedent. Where before such detainees are "rehabilitated" and later released, often with restrictions, now they face long jail terms or the death penalty under the bill.

Where before any act of attempted violent overthrow of legitimate authority was seen as a political offence requiring detention, re-education and rehabilitation, now it is construed as a terrorist act that is punishable with death.

The government however argues that the new measures are timely and meets the needs of a society facing the threat of terrorism.

Officials say the new law would enable Malaysia to accede to the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in December 1999 and comply with the U.N. Security Council resolutions on counter-terrorism measures after the Sep. 11 attacks.

During debate in parliament, Law Minister Dr Rais Yatim said that adequate legislative measures were needed to combat the frightening new phenomenon of terrorism. "We need to tighten the law, provide clear definition and tough punishment to deter would-be terrorists," he said. "The government rejects charges it was hasty. We did an in-depth study."

But opposition lawmakers said the legislation has no safeguards against abuse and does not strike a balance between combating crime and protecting human rights.

"There must be proper check and balances," said lawmaker Teresa Kok who unsuccessfully moved an emergency motion to delay the bill and send it to a select committee for revision. "The new law has no restraining clauses."

Critics add that Malaysia cannot use the United Nations as an excuse to enact tough laws because the country had paid little respect to the international body by failing to sign and ratify other important U.N. conventions.

They cited as examples the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, and Body Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment.

One fear is that the definition of a "terrorist act" in the new bill is too "loose, imprecise and ambiguous" that any criminal act could now be described as a "terrorist act".

"There is a danger the government would resort to using the terrorist law because sentencing is more draconian and the burden of proof much easier," Elizabeth said. "The law gives great scope to the government to suppress political dissent."

Lawyers and accountants add that a subsection of the law would penalise them if they "knowingly or have reasonable grounds to believe" that their services would be "used by or benefit" terrorists.

The law requires lawyers and accountants to ensure that a potential client is not a terrorist before they are accepted as clients. "Going by the broad requirements even a lawyer defending a suspected terrorist in court could be guilty of an offence under this section," one lawyer remarked to IPS.

Journalists fear that the law would be used to compel them to reveal sources for their stories. Unlike lawyers and accountants who have legal protection when discharging their duties, journalists have none but rely on convention and a code of ethics that has no legislative weight.

"Under the guise of fighting terrorism, the government has amended the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code to strengthen the powers of the police and prosecutors," rights activist S Arulchelvam told IPS. "Even detention without trial pales before such measures.”