SHOOTOUT AT HIGH NOON Mahatir you are under arrest says Shariff Najib

Operation Lalang Revisited

The more serious event involving the direct abuse of human rights occurred in 1987. Just the year before there was yet another patent abuse of human rights in form of the Memali incident (See box). The 27 October political crackdown on opposition leaders and social activists known by its police code name, "Operation Lalang" (weeding operation) saw the infamous arrest of 106 persons under the ISA and the revoking of the publishing licenses of two dailies, The Star and the Sin Chew Jit Poh and two weeklies, The Sunday Star and Watan. As this event is possibly the most significant in Malaysian political history since the May 13, 1969 ethnic riots, it bears some recounting.

Karpal: among the 106 detained in 1987

Among the more prominent detainees were the opposition leader and DAP Secretary-General Lim Kit Siang, ALIRAN President Chandra Muzaffar, DAP Deputy Chairman Karpal Singh, MCA Vice President and Perak Chief Chan Kit Chee, Dong Jiao Zhong (Chinese Education Associations) Chairman Lim Fong Seng, Publicity Chief of the Civil Rights Committee, Kua Kia Soong. PAS Youth Chief Halim Arshat, UMNO MP for Pasir Mas Ibrahim Ali and UMNO Youth Education Chairman Mohamed Fahmi Ibrahim. Although most of the detainees were released either conditionally or unconditionally, 40 were issued detention order of two years. Included were Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh plus five other party colleagues, a number of PAS members and many social activists. A categorization of the initially named detainees, numbering 97, gives the following breakdown: political parties: 37; social movements: 23; individuals: 37 (Saravanamuttu, 1989:239).

The political developments which brought this second largest ISA swoop in Malaysian history (exceeded only by the number detained during the May 13 riots) were sparked ostensibly by mounting political tensions having strong racial overtones. According to the White Paper explaining the arrests, various groups who had played up "sensitive issues" and thus created "racial tension" in the country had exploited the government's liberal and tolerant attitude. This racial tension made the arrests necessary and further, forced the government to act "swiftly and firmly" to contain the situation. (As cited in AI, 1988: 10).

The Memali SiegeA team of 200 policemen under orders from Acting Prime Minister an Home Minister Musa Hitam lay siege on kampung (village) houses in Memali, Kedah, occupied by an Islamic sect of about 400 people led by one Ibrahim Mahmud a.k.a. Ibrahim Libya. The police action left 14 civilians and four policemen dead. The villagers were armed with a few hunting rifles and spears and other rudimentary weapons. The police used heavy armored vehicles to mow down the houses. At the height of the assault some villagers, men and women, came out in the open in a state of frenzy and hysteria. Thirty-six persons involved in the incident were arrested under the ISA on January 1986 but later released in June. The government published a White Paper and showed an official video recording of the incident on national television.ARENA, 1992: 25

The sensitive issues were brought on by what appeared innocuously enough as Education Ministry appointments of some 100 senior assistants and principals to vernacular Chinese schools. This provoked a storm of protest when it was learnt that those appointed were not Chinese (Mandarin)-educated. Politicians from the MCA, the DAP and GERAKAN, the major Chinese-based parties joined the protests and on 11 October 1987, the Dong Jiao Zhong (Chinese educationists) held a 2,000-strong gathering at the Hanainese Association Building, beside the Thian Hou Temple in Kuala Lumpur, which evoked racially provocative speeches from the Chinese politicians present. The meeting resolved to call a three-day boycott in Chinese schools if the government did not settle the appointments issue.

In the event, even though the boycott was called off, albeit at the eleventh hour, the stage was set for a mirror response from the Malays, led by UMNO Youth. A mass rally of 10,000 was held at the TPCA Stadium in Kuala Lumpur and, by then, UMNO politicians had began to condemn MCA leaders for their collusion with the Dong Jiao Zhong and the opposition DAP. Amidst calls from both sides for the resignations of MCA Deputy President and Labour Minister Lee Kim Sai and UMNO Education Minister Anwar Ibrahim, UMNO announced the holding of a mammoth rally in KL to celebrate its 41st Anniversary, which it was claimed would see the attendance of half a million members.

The proposed UMNO rally was the ostensible reason for the Inspector General of Police to precipitate the 27 October crackdown. Had the rally been held it was not improbable that racial riots could be sparked by the incendiary speeches of UMNO politicians. To make matters worse, a tinder box situation was already created by the rampage of a Malay soldier (a.w.o.l.) who killed a Malay and two Chinese with an M16 rifle in the Chow Kit area -- also the scene of the May 13 bloodbath -- straddling two large Chinese and Malay communities. The pundits have it that the Prime Minster had to have a quid pro quo for cancelling the UMNO rally. Hence the arrests of prominent Chinese politicians. In retrospect, some of the culprits like Lee Kim Sai escaped arrest while many opposition members and activists with nothing to do with racial incitement were put in. Most of the government party people also saw early release while the dissidents generally served detention terms up to two years (Appendix 1).

In any case, the incident provided Mahathir's government with the excuse to further tighten the executive stranglehold on politics by further restricting fundamental liberties. In the following year, the Printing Presses and Publishing Act was given more bite by a requirement that printers and publishers had now to apply for new licenses annually whereas they were only required to renew them yearly before. In addition if any license is revoked, it could not be challenged in court. A prison term was added that publication of false news could land a publisher in jail for up to three years. Amendments were also made to the Police Act making it practically impossible to hold any political meeting, including a party's annual general meeting, without a police permit. An illegal meeting could earn the person concerned a fine of RM10, 000 and a jail term of one year. (New Straits Times, 5 December 1987, Aliran Monthly, 1988, Vol. 8:3).

And the dispossessed cried for mercy.
Yet, no one heard.
“ reformasi” They yelled.

And the tyrants cried “ISA THEM KUGAN THEM!”
“Starve and beseige them!”
“Use all necessary force to bring them to submission!”

And to the world the tyrants raged: “Security!”
And the sycophants cried in defense of the tyrants.

Then Conscience spoke and asked.
“Who will secure the starved, beseiged and dispossessed?”
Silence.
“Accountability!”

Corrupt political leadership does not attractive men of outstanding integrity; neither can it be expected to enact effective laws to maintain high integrity in government. That truism has practically reduced our options to only one – a change of political leadership. That is, if we are still serious about restoring the rule of law and the pursuit of excellence for the country. ”He is not immune from action under the law. Investigation can be made if he had acted beyond the scope of his official duties,” 

Malott: I don’t have a clue why the judge ruled the way he did. It really was surprising. There are so many well-documented reports of political interference and misuse of the judicial system.  For example, not just Anwar but also the case of Ramli Yusoff and the failure to seriously investigate and prosecute the deaths that  occurred at MACC. Earlier in the trial, this judge reversed his own decision on whether the DNA taken from the comb and towel that Anwar used in jail was admissible, and it seems clear there was pressure on him to do so. Otherwise, why would he reverse himself? But now he ruled in Anwar’s favor. It was a shock. As I said in my op-ed, the government might have decided that Anwar was a bigger threat to them in jail because he would be a rallying point for the opposition. We can all speculate, but only the judge knows why he did what he did.related articlehttp://engagemalaysia.wordpress.com/2010/07/31/mahahtir-to-be-charged-the-godfather-mahahir-knew-the-whole-cabinet-should-be-charged-with-neglige a lot of pressure on Najib to appeal, coming from the mahathir group in UMNO, who are afraid of what will happen if the opposition comes to power.  Gani Patail and the prosecutors also have lost face, so they might be inclined to want to appeal.  Some people might think that they can find a more compliant judge the next time. But the reaction not just from inside Malaysia but also from overseas will be strong if the government appeals and puts Anwar and his family through this againrelated articlehttp://engagemalaysia.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/%E2%80%9Cthe
-conspirator%E2%80%9Dlets-attack-mahatir-dirty-tricks-departmentget-him-convicted-now/
If it does, what will it do to Najib's and the Malaysian government's reputation, the country's image to investors? Will the repercussions be deep and long-lasting given global corporate captains such as Richard Branson have already expressed exasperation and obvious disgust over the Anwar prosecution?

 

 The prosecution of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, who is  under arrest in the United Kingdom on human-rights charges, has  changed the order of business  and possibly worldwide -- for the better.

 On Oct. 9, a London court ruled that Pinochet's extradition to Spain may  proceed. Pinochet will be able to appeal the decision before facing charges of torture and conspiracy brought nearly a year ago by a Spanish  judge. The case may cause other tyrants to think twice before committing  human-rights abuses. It surely will deter some tyrants -- past, present and  future -- from jetting around the world, as Pinochet did, to be celebrated  by their admirers. They never again will know for sure where a judge may  await them with an arrest warrant. While the charges brought by the  Spanish judge Baltasar Garzon originally focused on crimes committed in  Chile against Spanish citizens, they now rest entirely on acts of torture  and conspiracy committed in Chile, by Chileans, against Chileans. The  British courts have ruled that, since all the countries involved signed a  treaty known as the Convention Against Torture, those accused of torture  can be tried in any country, and the case can proceed even if it involves  no criminal acts committed in Spain, or against Spanish citizens.  Pinochet's case also has delivered a blow to the legal concept known as  ``sovereign immunity,'' which held that heads of state may not be tried for  criminal acts committed as part of their official duties. Pinochet's  invocation of this principle in his defense was rejected by British courts on  the grounds that torture can't be considered a legitimate government  function. The Pinochet case has had a positive effect in Chile, denting the  Chilean armed forces' impunity. During Chile's transition to civilian rule,  the military sheltered itself from prosecution for human-rights violations   during the 1973-1990 dictatorship. But in July, Chile's Supreme Court ruled  that the military's 1978 self-amnesty did not include ``disappearances'' -- as  the regime's kidnapping and murder of its victims is known -- in which  remains were never found.

  This opened the way for prosecutions against the Chilean army officers  involved in the ``Caravan of Death,'' which roamed Chile killing political  prisoners in the days after the 1973 military coup. In September, a former  head of the secret police and member of the military junta was arrested in  connection with the 1982 murder of Tucapel Jiminez, a prominent Chilean  union leader and critic of the dictatorship's economic policies. The  accused is the highest-ranking officer of the dictatorship to be charged in  Chile with human-rights violations. The Pinochet dictatorship extended its  reign of terror worldwide. It spearheaded the formation of ``Operation  Condor,'' a network of South American dictatorships that agreed to assist  one another in hunting down dissidents. Its agents assassinated opponents   in Europe and the United States, most notoriously the former Chilean  ambassador Orlando Letelier and his colleague Ronni Karpen Moffitt in  Washington in 1976. It is fitting that Pinochet, who didn't respect borders  when he was engaging in terrorism, is now being brought to justice by  international law that transcends borders. It is not only Chile's former  military tyrants who will sit uneasy as a result of the Pinochet case. From  the moment Pinochet was arrested, cries went up from ``democratic''  countries that, while this time it was Pinochet, the next time it could be a  British or American official against whom international human-rights law  was invoked. In fact, the United States has dodged this possibility by  refusing to sign the Convention Against Torture. The heart of the Pinochet  case is that no one is above the law, and this should apply equally to  dictators and presidents worldwide.are

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Mian Raza Rabbani on Tuesday demanded the government arrest former president Pervez Musharraf by charging him under article 6 of the constitution.

Speaking on a point of order during the Senate session, he represented a 10-point charge sheet against former the president, saying that it was alarming he was announcing for his return to Pakistan.

The House also resounded with voices of Balochistan lawmakers about a sense of deprivation prevailing in the province while Senator Humayun Khan Mandokhel walked out from the House to stage a sit-in outside parliament for the entire session.

Rabbani said that Musharraf not only breached the constitution twice during his dictatorship but also committed aggression against the judiciary. “Musharraf arrested judges and dismissed them from service,” he added.

The PPP senator said it was important to mention here that the Supreme Court had given verdict against the illegal constitutional act of November 3 of former president Musharraf while parliament also did not give protection to the Legal Framework Order (LFO) in the parliamentary history of the country.

He said it was difficult to believe that the former president handed over the Shamsi airbase to the US without any written agreement as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defence did not have any written agreement in this regard. “Musharraf was risk for the national security,” he claimed.

Rabbani said that Musharraf was responsible for the missing persons across the country while he started Balochistan operation during his tenure.

He alleged that Musharraf was involved in the killings of the former prime minister Benazir Bhutto while he was the killer of former Balochistan chief minister Nawab Akbar Bugti. He also held the former president responsible for the law and order situation in the country.

Rabbani alleged that Musharraf tried to weaken the federation during his tenure, saying he was involved in fanning differences among administrative units of the federation. “The charge sheet against the former president was too long,” he added.

The former minister said it was important that the federal government should file an FIR against Musharraf under the Article 6 of the constitution. “It was the responsibility of the federal government to arrest Musharraf on his return,” he added.

Rabbani said if the government did not register an FIR against Musharraf then there should be no place for Article 6 in the constitution.

PML-N’s Senator Raja Zafarul Haq said that Musharraf was a major criminal of the country while it was the demand of the Upper House that he should be hanged under Article 6 of the constitution. “I agree with Rabbani,” he added.

ANP Senator Zahid Khan said that Musharraf was responsible for the present situation of the country while he introduced war against terrorism in the country. “The ANP believes that he should be arrested on his arrival,” he added.

JUI-F’s Senator Dr Khalid Soomro said the JUI-F would support the government if it takes action against Musharraf.

National Party’s Senator Dr Abdul Malik, while supporting the charge sheet of Senator Rabbani, demanded that the senators should bring a charge sheet against Musharraf in form of a resolution.

Earlier, Senators from Balochistan talked about what they termed discrimination with their province in the employment as well as in the development projects.

The House could not take up a bill of the Law Ministry as Leader of the House Syed Nayyer Hussain Bokhari told the House that as the Federal Law Minister Moula Bux Chandio no more holds the ministry, the bill should be deferred.

The Upper House Tuesday gave warm welcome to the parliamentary delegation of the India while the parliamentary leaders of all the parties suggested that both the countries should settle dispute through the process of dialogue. Senate Chairman Farooq H Neak, on the behalf of the Senate and the people of Pakistan, welcomed the guests in the Upper House.