MALAYSIA: Six supporters of the Bersih 2.0 rally for electoral reforms remain in detention under the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969

Dear friends, 

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has learned that six leaders of the Parti Socialis Malaysia (PSM) remain in detention without trial under sections 3(1) and 4(1) of the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 (EO), which allows the police to detain suspects without trial for up to 60 days. They were first arrested on 25 June 2011 while traveling in a bus to Penang to promote the Bersih 2.0 rally for electoral reforms on 9 July 2011. They were released on 2 July but re-arrested the same day under the EO. The arrest and detention without trial of the six PSM leaders under the EO is a serious violation of the freedom of expression, the right to liberty, and the right to fair trial. 

CASE NARRATIVE: 

The six members of the Parti Socialis Malaysia (PSM) under detention are: Dr. Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj, a member of parliament; Mr. Sukumaran Munisamy, Mr. Letchumanan Aseer Patham, Mr. Choo Chon Kai, Ms. Sarasvathy Muthu and Mr. Sarat Babu Raman. 

Dr. Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj and the five others were first arrested when they were in a group of 31 persons on 25 June 2011 at the Sungai Dua toll plaza in Seberang Prai Utara. They were traveling in a bus from Sungai Petani towards Penang to promote the planned Bersih 2.0 rally on 9 July 2011. The rally was initiated by a coalition of over 60 civil society groups calling for electoral reforms for free and fair elections in Malaysia. This was just one of the many arrests that were happening all over the country as the Malaysian government attempted to prevent the rally from being held. 

On 26 June, 30 of them were ordered to be remanded until July 2 by the Butterworth Magistrate’s Court, while a 16-year-old teenager, S Ragu, was released unconditionally. On 1 July, the High Court upheld the Magistrate’s remand order. All 30 were detained for seven days to assist the police investigation under Section 122 of the Penal Code for allegedly waging war against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (Malaysia’s Supreme Head of State, the King) and for attempting to revive the Communist Party. 

After being released on 2 July 2011 from the IPD Kepala Batas, Penang, the six were re-arrested by the Bukit Aman police outside the station and have remained in detention since then. This time they are being held under the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 (EO), which allows for detention without trial. The EO provides the police with powers to detain a person for up to 60 days. After the initial 60-day detention period, the Home Ministry can make an order authorising further detention without trial for a period of up to two years. This order can be renewed indefinitely and is a blatant denial of the rights to civil liberties and circumvents the rule of law. 

On 6 July, the six detainees filed their habeas corpus application to challenge their unlawful detention, an application which is normally heard on an urgent basis, but the High Court decided that it will only be heard on 22 July. 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 

Bersih 2.0, a coalition of over 60 civil society groups planned to hold a rally on 9 July to demand electoral reforms for free and fair elections in Malaysia. In response, the Malaysian government disallowed the rally and carried out arrests and intimidation against the leaders and supporters of Bersih 2.0. According to the human rights organizations in Malaysia, at least 150 persons were arrested or summoned for investigation before the rally. At the same time, many people were harassed and intimidated by the police for wearing Bersih 2.0 t-shirts and distributing Bersih 2.0 leaflets. Bersih 2.0 was also declared an illegal organisation by the government. On 9 July, the rally was held despite the disapproval by the Malaysian police. Tens of thousands of people turned up, but faced a brutal crackdown by the police. Many protesters were injured, among them, Mr. Anwar Ibrahim, the parliamentary opposition leader. According to reports, over 1,600 people were arrested during the rally. They were all later released. 

In Malaysia, there are a number of draconian laws that provide for detention without trial. The most prominent of these laws are the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA), the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969, and the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures Act 1985). Until 1989, it was still possible to go for judicial review to challenge the reasons for detention, but then the law was amended and this right no longer exists when it comes to detention orders issued by the Minister. Hence, it is essential that the habeas corpus hearing of Dr. Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj and the five others is done immediately, noting also that they will have the right of appeal to the Court of Appeal, and thereafter the Federal Court if need be. Whilst the period that the police may detain a person under this detention without trial law is 60 days, there is nothing to prevent the Minister from issuing a two year detention order long before 60 days have expired. The issuance of such an order will deprive Dr. Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj and the five others the right to freedom even if they are successful in challenging the reasons for detention by the police. 

SUGGESTED ACTION 
Please send letters to the persons listed below calling for the immediate and unconditional release of Dr Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj, Choo Chon Kai, M. Sarasvathy, M. Sukumaran, A.P Letchumanan, R. Sarat Babu and all others currently being detained in Malaysia under the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969, the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA), the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 (DD(SPM)A) and other laws which allow detention without trial. Please urge that these laws be repealed. 

The Asian Human Rights Commission is sending a separate letter to the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. 

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER