Archive for July, 2009

Police and your basic rights

Posted in Malaysia news with tags on July 30, 2009 by ckchew


1.1     Not in uniform, ask for identification

Say: “Please, show me your Police authority card”.

1.2     Police authority card

Red colour: Suspended Police Officer. He has no authority to do anything to you. Walk away.

Other colours:

•        Blue colour:   Rank of inspector and above

•        Yellow colour:  Below the rank of inspector

•        White colour:  Police reserve

Note his name and ID number

1.3     In uniform

Note his name and ID number on his uniform

1.4     Police vehicle

Note the number plate of the patrol car or motorcycle.


2.1     Your identificationPDRM_Bikes

Only give your name, ID card number and address.

2.2     The Police ask other questions

Politely ask “Am I under arrest?”

2.3     When are you under arrest

You are arrested if the Police: tell you “yes”;

•        do not allow you to leave/want to take you to the Police station; or

•        handcuff you.

If you are not under arrest, you may walk away/refuse to follow him back to the Police station or anywhere else, if asked.

2.4     When you cannot be arrested

The Police cannot arrest you just because you are a potential witness and want to take a statement from you

(112/Witness Statement).


3.1     112/Witness Statement

When the Police are investigating a case and think you have information/knowledge about the case, the Police may examine

you and take down your answers (112/Witness Statement).

3.2     Informal/ Formal Request

Most 4times, the Police make an informal request that you give a 112/Witness Statement. If the place and time is convenient to you, cooperate. If not, tell the Police you will do so at a convenient  place and time.

If you completely refuse to cooperate, the Police can issue a formal order in writing signed by an investigating officer (Police Order) to ask you to cooperate.

If you disobey a Police Order, you cannot be arrested. However, it is an offence and the Police may request the Magistrate to issue a warrant against you to compel you to cooperate.

3.3     Giving a 112/ Witness Statement

You have the right to ask a lawyer to accompany you. This is  advisable. In giving a 112/ Witness Statement, you may refuse to answer any question / remain silent if the answer is likely to expose you to a criminal offence.

•        Bring along a notebook or writing paper with you (Personal Notes).

•        Write down every question asked in your Personal Notes.

•        Make sure you understand every question asked.

•        Take your time and think carefully before writing answers in your Personal Notes.

•        Read your answers to the Police Officer questioning you.

•        Keep your Personal Notes for future reference.

3.4     Signing your 112/Witness Statement

Before signing your statement, read the questions and your answers written by the Police Officer carefully.

•        Compare the statement you are asked to sign with your Personal Notes.

•        You have the right to make any corrections/changes to the statement before signing.

•        Sign your signature immediately below the last sentence of your statement.


4.1     Ask: “Why am I under arrest?”

An arrest is unlawful if you are not informed of the reason.

4.2     Do not resist an arrest

The Police have the right to use reasonable force to arrest you if you resist.

4.3     Ask: “Which Police station are you taking me to?”

The arresting Police Officer must immediately take you to the nearest Police station and no other place.

4.4     What to do when arrested

You have the right to make a telephone call.

Call your family or friend or lawyer or the Legal Aid Centre (LAC).


•        you have been arrested;

•        the time, place and reason of the arrest;

•        the identity of the Police Officer; and

•        the Police station you will be taken to.

4.5      What happens after arrest

You may be detained up to 24 hours:

•        at the Police station, or

•        in a lock-up to “assist” Police investigation.


5.1      Right to contact lawyer

You have the right and should insist to contact/see your lawyer.

5.2      Clothing

You are allowed to have one set of clothing on you in the lock-up.

5.3      Personal belongings

The Police must record and put all your personal belongings in safe custody.

Your personal belongings must be returned to you upon your release.

5.4      Welfare

You are allowed to take bath two times a day.

If you are sick, you have the right to receive immediate medical attention.

You are to be given proper and adequate food and water during detention.

5.5      How long can the Police detain you

The Police can only detain you up to 24 hours for investigation.

The duty of the Police is to complete investigation within 24 hours and to release you as soon as possible.

If the Police cannot complete investigation within 24 hours, the Police must bring you before a

Magistrate for a remand order to extend your detention beyond 24 hours (“Remand Order”).


6.1     Who is a Magistrate

A Magistrate is a judicial officer. He/She has power to make a Remand Order to detain you for more than 24 hours.

6.2     Purpose of a Remand Order

It is to give more time to the Police to complete their investigation and decide whether there is evidence to charge you for an offence.

The Police cannot ask for a Remand Order only for the purpose of taking a statement from you.

6.3     How long is a Remand Order

When the Police bring you before a Magistrate for a Remand Order, the Police must give reasons to the Magistrate why it is necessary to detain you beyond 24 hours. The Magistrate’s duty is to consider carefully the reasons given by the Police.

The Police will usually ask for a further detention of 14 days or less.

The Magistrate, after careful consideration of the reasons given by the Police, has discretion:

•        not to make a Remand Order; or

•        make a Remand Order for a period shorter than that asked by the Police.

The Police can make more than one application for a Remand Order. Altogether, you cannot be detained longer than 15 days.

6.4     What to say when you are brought before a Magistrate for remand

Tell the Magistrate:

•        you want legal representation and to contact the LAC and your family;

•        you want medical treatment because you are sick or have been beaten;

•        if the Police had threatened or beaten you during your detention;

•        if you had been denied proper food/water/clothing, toilet or necessary medical attention during your detention;

•        whether the Police had carried out any investigation during your detention.

6.5     Ask for a shorter Remand Order from the Magistrate

Before the Magistrate makes the Remand Order, ask for a shorter remand period asked by the Police. Give reasons (Example: “I will co-operate with the Police in their investigation”, “I will be available” etc).


7.1     When can this be done

If you are at a place (example: karaoke/clubs/entertainment outlets) where the Police are conducting a raid or looking for something (example: drugs), the Police may search your body/bags without arresting you.

This must be done in the presence of a Police Officer who is an inspector or of a higher rank.

7.2     What to do

•        Do not allow the Police Officer to put his hands into your pockets or bags.

•        Volunteer to empty your pockets/bags in his presence so you can see all your belongings.

•        Take out your belongings one by one. Each time, say “Purse”, “keys”, “ID card”, etc.

•        When your pockets/bags are empty, turn your pockets/bags inside out.

7.3     Your rights

•        A female can only be body searched by a female Police Officer.

•        All body searches must be carried out with decency (Example: cannot touch your private parts).

•        There is no law requiring you to strip naked.


8.1     When Police can do so

•        The Police have power to search your body for any object relating to the suspected offence.

•        The body search must be conducted in a confined place. It is your right to be bodily searched in private.

8.2     Strip search

Even when arrested, there is no law allowing the Police to force you to strip naked.

If you are forced to strip naked/ threatened if you do not strip naked:

•        Protest.

•        Remember the Police Officer’s name.

•        Lodge a report after the incident.


9.1     Identity of the Police Officer questioning you

Note the name/rank of the Police Officer questioning you.

9.2     Right to remain silent

The Police Officer will first make friendly conversation/talk (example: ask you about your family and friends etc). Be polite. Do not be afraid to remain silent. This is your right.

9.3     Police want a written statement (113 Statement) from you

The Police Officer will ask you questions and then write down your answers. You are only obliged to give your full name, age, address and occupation (Personal Particulars).

Other than giving your Personal Particulars, you have the right to remain silent.

If you choose the right to remain silent, say: “I will answer in Court”.

9.4     Police cannot force you to make a 113 Statement

After giving your Personal Particulars, and the Police Officer wants you to say more things by threatening or forcing you into making a written statement:

•        stay calm and remain silent;

•        the Police Officer has no right to threaten, beat or force you into making a written statement.

If you have been threatened, beaten or forced, lodge a police report against the Police Officer at first opportunity. This is your right.

9.5     If you wish to give a 113 Statement

Follow the steps in paragraphs 3.3 and 3.4 above.

If you do not have a notebook/writing paper, request from the Police Officer.

Your 113 Statement can/will be used as evidence against you in Court to prove:

•        you have admitted / confessed to the criminal offence as charged; or

•        you have admitted / confessed certain facts that tend to show you are guilty of the offence as charged.

High Chaparral: ‘Solution meet’ on Saturday

Posted in Malaysia news with tags on July 30, 2009 by ckchew

The state government will meet residents of Kampung Buah Pala on Saturday to find a solution to the land problem.

The meeting at Kompleks Tun Abdul Razak (Komtar) at 2.30pm will be attended by Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and state exco members, said Penang Deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy.

“We will find a solution to the problem and hope to discuss it with residents,” he was quoted as saying by Bernama.

The state government would also present a proposal by Kampung Buah Pala project developer Nusmetro Ventures (P) Sdn Bhd.

“We hope to receive the draft proposal today or tomorrow so that we can study it,” he said.

Ramasamy however said that the meeting on Saturday will not involve the project developer.

Controversy erupted when the state government sold the 2.6 hectare land to Koperasi Pegawai Kerajaan Pulau Pinang Bhd which later appointed Nusmetro Ventures as project developer.

Nusmetro Ventures then obtained a court order demanding Kampung Buah Pala residents to vacate the land by Aug 3.

Ramasamy said if the proposal was not acceptable to residents, the state government would withdraw its approval for a housing project.

Why did MIC keep quiet in 2007?

On the statement by MIC president S Samy Vellu that the party was willing to pay RM3.2 million to settle the issue, he said it has to be discussed with the developer and koperasi as the land did not belong to the state government.

“If MIC wants to settle the issue by buying the Kampung Buah Pala land, they can talk to the developer and koperasi but RM3.2mil will not be enough as the price has since increased to about RM150mil,” he said.

Meanwhile, DAP questioned MIC’s ‘political game’ by attempting to portray themselves as the champions in this issue.

“If MIC was really interested in safeguarding the land, then it should have done so in 2007 when MIC exco member P Subbayah sat on the Penang BN panel which approved to sell the land to Koperasi Pegawai Kerajaan Pulau Pinang (KPKPP),” said the party’s labour chief A Sivanesan.

“If MIC had truly wanted to champion the rights of the residents then it should have done so in 2007 when the sale of the land went through. Now MIC is catching the tail-end of the problem and trying to solve it by putting the blame on the state government,” he said./ Mkini

ACA never used force, says former director

Posted in Malaysia news with tags , on July 29, 2009 by ckchew

EXCLUSIVE Teoh Beng Hock’s death has raised the question as to whether the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) uses force to extract information from witnesses.A former Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) senior officer has claimed that the corruption watchdog used to be a “civil and gentleman’s organisation” that has never been accused of abusing or assaulting witnesses or suspects.”We don’t work like the police. We don’t resort to using force to extract a confession. But I don’t know (what it is like) now,” said Mohamad Ramli Manan in an email interview with Malaysiakini on issues raised by Teoh’s death.

“If you are a good investigator, you don’t need a confession at all. You prove your case from other evidence.”

The ACA was upgraded to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) in January.

Ramli had stunned the nation in early 2007 when he alleged that then ACA director-general Zulkipli Mat Noor was involved in corruption and a sex offence.

Ramli had served as ACA deputy chief in three states – Kedah, Perak, Negeri Sembilan – before being appointed to head the agency in Kelantan, Malacca, Johor and Sabah.

Zulkipli was cleared by Attorney-General Chambers but his contract was not extended when it expired in March 2007.

Ramli said the ACA, created in 1967, had never resorted to handcuffing suspects or arrested persons. Unlike the police who deal with hardcore criminals, the anti-graft agency deals with white collar crimes where there is minimal risk of suspects escaping.

However, there was a departure from this practice early this year when two Perak Pakatan Rakyat state executive councillors were arrested.

“We were shocked to see that the exco members who had voluntarily surrendered to the MACC and other suspects were handcuffed for their remand proceedings.

“I would venture to say that the Perak exco suspects were handcuffed just to embarrass them. That speaks of the mentality of MACC officers compared to ACA officers.”

Ramli, who retired in 2006, agreed that the ACA had always practised selective investigation.

“They are so afraid to investigate Umno ministers, excos and menteris besar unless they get the green light from the top. Officers who try to do so might find themselves facing trouble.

“MACC would not dare to do what they have done in Selangor and Perak in any of the BN states. They would not dare to handcuff an Umno exco member. That is a fact which nobody can deny.”

‘Cloak and dagger operation’

Although it has yet to be proven that the MACC used force when interrogating Teoh, Ramli noticed the investigation methods carried out on Selangor Pakatan assemblypersons were not in accordance with investigation procedures.

He revealed that the ACA investigations were divided into two stages and that this procedure is still in effect at the MACC.

An inquiry paper is opened upon receipt of any information. The investigations are conducted in a “cloak and dagger” manner at this stage.

“Nobody knows (this is in progress); not even the targeted suspects know that we are investigating the case since the purpose is to determine the truth or falsity of the information,” said Ramli.

Only when the agency is convinced that the information is true, will a full scale investigation begin to secure all evidence to prove the alleged crime, he explained.

“In a full scale investigation, we are pretty sure that a corrupt offence had been committed. There is no such thing as a ‘fishing expedition’.

“We know how many witnesses have to be called up and what evidence is available and obtainable from them; where and what documentary evidence we have to take and we also know where these documents are being kept.”

Teoh’s case handled against norm

According to Ramli, the Director of Operation may issue an ‘Operation Order’ detailing, mapping out and strategising the investigation if the case involves high-profile figures.

While he was heading the Sabah ACA, Ramli was Director of Operations in a case allegedly involving former Land and Cooperative Development Minister Kasitah Gaddam.

Ramli said such operations start in the morning and end about 7pm to 8pm. At this time, the officers will decide which suspects are to be further detained or whether the questioning should end.

“By 9pm the Director of Operations will call for a meeting to evaluate all the evidence that we have obtained and to give instructions for the next day’s operations. This enables officers to get rest and prepare for the next day.”

In Teoh’s case, Ramli surmised from MACC director of investigation Mohd Shukri Abdul’s statements that the Pakatan representatives were being investigated based on general information – or the first stage that requires discreet inquiry.

“What they did is against established practice and procedures of investigation methodology […] I don’t know the actual facts of the case,” Ramli added.

“But if Shukri says they investigated based on general information received from anonymous sources or their informers, then an investigation through discreet inquiry is the proper investigative method.”

Kuek Ser Kuang Keng/ Mkini


Posted in Malaysia news with tags on July 29, 2009 by ckchew


49 tahun yang lalu, pada 1hb. Ogos 1960, Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) telah digubal di Parlimen Malaya oleh Parti Perikatan yang dianggotai oleh UMNO, MCA dan MIC.

Akta zalim ini telah digunakan oleh semua Perdana Menteri Malaysia, dari Tengku Abdul Rahman sehingga Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Ia telah digunakan terhadap semua kaum dan agama di negara ini. Ia berjaya membenteras gerakan mahasiswa, gerakan pekerja dan gerakan reformasi. Ia berjaya memenjarakan pemimpin politik pelbagai aliran dan idelogi politik.

Ia adalah senjata yang paling berbisa dimiliki oleh Parti Perikatan dulu dan Barisan Nasional sekarang untuk menentang hak demokrasi dan kebebasan rakyat.

Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) menyeru segala ahli parti dan barisan fron parti untuk turun beramai-ramai untuk menuntut akta zalim ISA dibubarkan, Kem kamunting ditutup dan tahanan dibebaskan. Jadikan 1 Ogas, sebagai tarikh memprotes akta yang maha zalim ini.

Hak berhimpun secara aman adalah hak demokrasi rakyat Malaysia dan PSM menyeru pihak polis untuk menghormati hak ini dan tidak membuat sebarang tindakan untuk mencabul hak ini.

Cukup sudah kesengsaraan ISA ! Marilah kita sama-sama menguburkan akta zalim ini.

Dikeluarkan Oleh,


Another death in police lockup: It’s the police that smear their image.

Posted in Malaysia news with tags on July 29, 2009 by ckchew

A woman has disputed the official account of her brother’s death, who died in police custody at the Sentul police station on July 16.

According to the police, R Gunasegaran, 31, had died from a drug abuse.

His sister, R Ganga Gowri, 32, disagreed with this version in her police report today in which she alleged that he may have died after being assaulted.

This was claimed by three witnesses who were said to be detained in the same lockup with Gunasegaran, she stated in her police report.

In view of this, Ganga Gowri is urging the authorities to perform a thorough and transparent investigation into the allegations.

She is also demanding that hospital authorities release the autopsy report if there is one, and for the police to initiate an inquest.

She was speaking at a press conference, organised by lawyer Harris Ibrahim and attended by six other lawyers.

“These (witnesses) are very afraid. They do not wish the authorities breathing down on them and shall remain anonymous.

“Should there be a transparent inquest, I have been given assurances that these people will surface,” said Ganga Gowri’s counsel M Visvanathan.

Visvanathan, said the witnesses alleged that Gunasegaran died within two to three hours of his arrest at about 7.30pm.

He added that the witnesses said that Gunasegaran was kicked in the chest, hit with a hose and a piece of wood.

However, Ganga Gowri had not examined the body for wounds, which is still at the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital mortuary.

Body still not claimed

She will not claim the body until a post-mortem and toxicology report is released.

Visvanathan said that although the standard practice by the authorities is to release the reports after two months, this had to be changed.

“It is insane to have the family claim the body and perform funeral rites and then wait for the post-mortem report, say for instance if the body had evidence of an assault whilst in detention,” added Harris.

Harris said the police should be fair and kind to the family of the deceased and allow them access to the reports in order for them to request for a second independent autopsy if necessary.

Bar Council Human Rights Committee chairperson Edmund Bon said there appears to be inconsistencies in the way the government deals with custodial deaths.

He said it was only with sufficient public pressure, where full blown investigations will be carried out, such as in the case of DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock, who incidentally was found dead on the same day as Gunasegaran.

He urged the government to heed repeated request by NGOs and civil societies for the establishment of a Coroners Court as magistrates conducting inquest, were not sufficiently trained in this area.

Police chief promises action

Meanwhile, KL police chief Muhammad Sabtu Osman said that the police will investigate the matter thoroughly to find the truth.

“We cannot let this matter just like that. We will investigate thoroughly,” he told reporters.

He added the police will have a look at the report lodged by the family.

“We will take action against any person found to have been involved in the detainee’s death, even if it involves my personnel,” he added.

Andrew Ong/Mkini

Pakatan talks roundly criticises police, IGP

Posted in Malaysia news with tags , on July 29, 2009 by ckchew

A roundtable discussion organised by Pakatan Rakyat decided unanimously today that the current Inspector General of Police Musa Hassan must step down and be replaced.

Among those present were members of parliament from DAP (15), PKR (10), PAS (2), one senator, non-governmental organisations and concerned citizens.

DAP veteran leader Lim Kit Siang  chaired the session in parliament while PR leader Anwar Ibrahim moderated the discussion.

The four resolutions proposed by PR are:

1. Current IGP Musa Hassan should not seek a further 2-year renewel of his tenure of service

2. Appointment of a new IGP

3. Prime Minister to include in his KPI for crime prevention all categories of crime proposed by the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission in its May 2005 report

4. Setting up of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC)

Lim, in his opening speech, called on the new IGP to break away from colonial past by introducing democratic policing to protect the people and not the regime in power.

“I moved the motion against Musa for being more of a lobbyist for police mega deals instead of being the police leader and for the ‘great lie’ that the real crime in Malaysia was not the worsening crime situation but a problem of misperception,” he said.

He also said that the re-appointment of Musa for another term would cast an adverse aspersion on all the senior police officers.

“As if there is not a single one out of the eight top police officers occupying key police positions below the post of IGP qualified or competent enough to become the new chief to provide leadership and culture and roll back the tide of crime in the past five years,” he explained.

People don’t feel safe

Citing a Home Ministry website poll where 97 percent of the respondents say they do not feel safe, he said that “the IGP should have resigned in ignominy” because of this.

Meanwhile, Anwar said that the government agencies, such as the PDRM, should not play up racial issues when they are hit with criticisms from all quarters.

“They should not construe it as an attack on another Malay leader. This is a nationwide problem and we need a stronger leader,” he said.

PAS treasurer Dr Hatta Ramli questioned the suitability of the police force current crop of leaders to replace to IGP, saying that they might probably have to “outsource” candidates.

Senator Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim said that setting up the IPCMC is the most critical to “protect the police against themselves”.

“There is no police force in the world known to have been able to police itself,” he said.

Former de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim added that changing the IGP might not necessarily solve the problem as the whole police force requires a major overhaul.

He said that lack of information and evidence also prevented criminals and corrupt politicians from being brought to book.

Yip Ai Tsin/Mkini

Pakatan speaker’s hearing on Sept 4

Posted in Malaysia news with tags on July 29, 2009 by ckchew

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has maintained Sept 4 for hearing ousted Perak speaker V Sivakumar’s judicial review application to declare vacant the state seats held by three independents who quit Pakatan Rakyat.

This comes after Sivakumar’s counsel Razlan Hadri Zulkifli informed Justice Lau Bee Lan in chambers today that lawyer Ranjit Singh, who is also acting for the former speaker, submitted an affidavit in court yesterday to support the application and to state that this case was still relevant.

“Copies of the affidavit were submitted to court and also the Attorney-General’s Chambers, which is representing the Election Commission who was also made a party to the legal action,” he said.

This was despite the Federal Court’s five-member bench ruling on April 9 that the three will remain state representatives as the EC was the rightful body to declare a seat vacant.

Razlan Hadri said in the affidavit, the lawyer maintained that it was the speaker who had the powers to determine whether a casual vacancy occurred.

“This is still a live issue despite what representatives from the AG’s Chambers could be contending. The apex court’s decision does not affect this application. We may expect the chambers to give a reply in the coming days.

“However, Justice Lau agreed to maintain Sept 4 for hearing despite an indication there will be preliminary objections,” he said.

Representing the EC from the AG’s chambers were Senior Federal Counsel Suzana Atan and Andi Razali Jaya.

On May 28, Sivakumar’s lead counsel Sulaiman Abdullah told the court that the matter was still a live issue as it does not mean that one cannot question EC’s decision not to declare a vacancy of the three seats, as he felt the final arbiter to decide such a discrepancy should be the court.

Suit against BN-friendly independents

Sivakumar had filed a judicial review application on March 10 in his personal capacity, and named the three Barisan Nasional-friendly independents namely Mohd Osman Jailu (Changkat Jering), Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang).

On the same day, three ousted Pakatan Rakyat excos A Sivanesan (Sungkai), Tai Sing Ng (Kuala Sepetang) and Chen Fook Chye (Keranji) along with three voters, one each from the constituency of Behrang, Changkat Jering and Jelapang filed a similar application.

The three voters are Ahmad Sabri Wahab, Ahmad Latip Ariffin and Foo Hong Wai representing the three constituencies.

All six named Radzi, Osman, Hee and EC as respondents.

Sivakumar, in his application, wants to compel the EC to declare the three seats of Behrang, Changkat Jering and Jelapang vacant and call for by-elections to be held.

He also asked the three assemblypersons to present authorities to show that they are still elected representatives for their constituencies.

Hafiz Yatim/Mkini