MALAYSIA: Rights Body Faces Downgrade by UN

By Baradan Kuppusamy Reprint | | Print |

Baradan Kuppusamy

KUALA LUMPUR , Jul 31 2008 (IPS) - The Malaysian Human Rights Commission or ‘Suhakam’ risks a downgrade by the United Nations for failing to proactively defend human rights, combat an alarming rise in rights abuse of students, minorities and indigenous people.

Civil society critics are slamming the government-funded organisation, managed by former civil servants and individuals close to the political establishment, of becoming a mouthpiece for authorities.

They say if the government does not urgently amend Suhakam’s founding laws and make it truly independent, it is at risk of being downgraded to Grade B by the International Coordinating Committee (ICC) of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights.

In April, the U.N. body conducted a comprehensive review of Suhakam’s human rights compliance and found it is not up to par with the Paris Principles. As a result Suhakam has been given one year to improve in several core areas -investigation, compliance and enforcement of decisions and independence of governance.

“This possible downgrading is a serious slap on the face of Suhakam and the government,” said Yap Swee Seng, executive director of SUARAM, a leading rights non-government organisation (NGO).

If downgraded, Suhakam loses its right to participate in United Nations Human Rights Council sessions.

It would also be stripped of its full membership in the Asia Pacific Forum and be relegated to a non-voting member.

“Both are serious embarrassments and would make a mockery of Malaysia’s 2006 pledge to the U.N. that it will take proactive and innovative measures to promote and protect human rights,” Yap told IPS.

In 1993, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Paris Principles which assigns Grade A status for full compliance, Grade B for observer status and Grade C for non-compliance.

“The ICC also said the two-year tenure of Suhakam commissioners was too short and additionally highlighted the need to ensure different segments of society are fairly represented,” Yap said. “The ICC also said it is important for Suhakam to engage more closely with international human rights systems.”

In response to the ICC report over 40 NGOs jointly called on the government, in a memorandum, to immediately amend the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 to make Suhakam a truly independent and effective organisation by putting it under a parliament select committee.

Currently Suhakam reports to the prime minister’s office.

“The ICC’s warning to downgrade Suhakam indicates their grave concern with regards to the Malaysian government’s management of Suhakam,” said Ragu Kesavan, vice-chairman of the Malaysian Bar Council representing 13,000 lawyers in the country.

“Suhakam has fallen short in its mission to promote and protect human rights,” he told IPS in an interview.

The Paris Principles are the international standards for an independent and effective national human rights organisation. In its April review, the ICC gave notice to Suhakam to “provide, in writing, within one year documentary evidence deemed necessary to establish its continued conformity with the Paris Principles.” Failure would mean Suhakam’s possible downgrade.

“It is a mechanism to shame nationally and internationally and to press for major improvements,” said Yap. “It should not be seen as interference in domestic affairs. It is for the larger good of Malaysia.”

“Suhakam has to act now to make urgent changes or face these penalties,” Yap said. “The core concerns are independence, transparency and effectiveness.” He added that the ‘’recommendations are a timely reminder that the Suhakam was not established for dressing up purposes but to improve on the government’s poor human rights record’’.

“The credibility and the stature of Malaysia as a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council will suffer if the government does not act immediately to resolve the grouses,” he added.

“These will require a major overhaul, amendment to the law establishing Suhakam, appointing individuals of the highest integrity to run it and placing under parliament and not the executive,” Yap said.

Currently Suhakam has powers to visit places of detention, make recommendations, issue public statements on human rights, conduct programmes and seminars and workshops. But It has no powers to compel implementation of any of its recommendations and many of its reports are gathering dust in government archives.

Responding, Suhakam chairman Abu Talib Othman dismissed the criticism that Suhakam is a lame duck, saying the government had considered Suhakam recommendations in areas like gender inequality, education and free and fair elections.

“Our mandate is to only advise, it is the decision of the government to implement our recommendations,” he said in a statement on Jul. 29.

Suhakam vice-chairman Simon Sipaun said the possible ICC downgrading was “unjustified” because Suhakam had improved and was freely carrying out its mission without government interference.

“It is not fair for ICC to judge our performance from a distance,” said another Suhakam commissioner Chiam Heng Keng. “The ICC should come down to the ground to see how we work.”

Yap however said the ICC action should not be taken defensively but seen as an “an excellent opportunity” for the authorities to show they have the political will to change, to protect and promote human rights.