Skip to main content

Rajeshvari and Article 5 of the Federal Constitution 1957

Article 5. Liberty of the person.

(1) No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.

(2) Where complaint is made to a High Court or any judge thereof that a person is being unlawfully detained the court shall inquire into the complaint and, unless satisfied that the detention is lawful, shall order him to be produced before the court and release him.

(3) Where a person is arrested he shall be informed as soon as may be of the grounds of his arrest and shall be allowed to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.

(4) Where a person is arrested and not released he shall without unreasonable delay, and in any case within twenty-four hours (excluding the time of any necessary journey) be produced before a magistrate and shall not be further detained in custody without the magistrate's authority:

Provided that this Clause shall not apply to the arrest or detention of any person under the existing law relating to restricted residence, and all the provisions of this Clause shall be deemed to have been an integral part of this Article as from Merdeka Day:

Provided further that in its application to a person, other than a citizen, who is arrested or detained under the law relating to immigration, this Clause shall be read as if there were substituted for the words "without unreasonable delay, and in any case within twenty-four hours (excluding the time of any necessary journey)" the words "within fourteen days":

And provided further that in the case of an arrest for an offence which is triable by a Syariah court, references in this Clause to a magistrate shall be construed as including references to a judge of a Syariah court.

(5) Clauses (3) and (4) do not apply to an enemy alien.

_________________________________________________________
Suhakam raps Immigration
Source:

PETALING JAYA: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) has lambasted the Immigration Department for allowing a citizen to be held in an Immigration depot for 11 months.
Commissioner Datuk Dr Denison Jayasooria said that what had happened to 22-year-old M. Rajeshvari was a great travesty.

The Star reported yesterday that Rajeshvari spent an agonising 11 months at the Lenggeng Immigration depot for illegals because she could not remember her identity card number when police checked her at a coffee shop in the capital and that she was not fluent in Bahasa Malaysia.

She was also six months’ pregnant at the time and gave birth to a boy while in detention.

Dr Denison said: “One should get to the root of how the verification was done. Holding a citizen like that is a violation of human rights.

“If language was a problem, they should have had an interpreter to get to the bottom of it. If it were not for the intervention of the clinic and a voluntary organisation, she would still be in there.

He noted that there could be various reasons for her inability to communicate, adding that Rajeshvari may have been terrified, not of sound mind or not confident.

“What safeguards are there? How can such a thing be avoided?” Dr Denison said, adding the Immigration Department must be held accountable and that an apology was not enough.

The Star received countless calls from members of the public and other interested parties about Rajeshvari's plight, some offering jobs and help.

Women’s Aid Organisation executive director Ivy Josiah said the Home Ministry had to review the entire raiding and detention mechanism as it was in danger of violating human rights.
“There has to be a mechanism for such detained people to seek redress and ensure that this kind of mistake never happens again.

“When you detain people, you take away their freedom. You must make sure they have regular access to lawyers, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and Suhakam,” Josiah said.

However, Immigration Department enforcement chief Datuk Ishak Mohamed said that the burden of proof of citizenship was on the person suspected of being an illegal immigrant.

“The new Criminal Procedure Code also allows the suspect to make phone calls to anyone who can help,” he said, pointing out that the police had picked her up, not Immigration officials.

“But, please, don’t tell me that after 22 years, you cannot speak Bahasa Malaysia? You mean she would not know how to sing Negaraku either?” he added.

Rajeshvari was released from the depot in Seremban on Friday after Malaysian Indian Youth Council vice-president Andrew Raju got her birth certificate details from her primary school in Kampar.

Comments:
Is there any infringements of fundamental human rights on Rajeshvari?

The justification given by the authority does it comply with Article 5 of our Federal Constitution?

What is the duty of the authority when they detained a person who is suspected as an illegal immigrant?

The basic search that they have to do is to determine whether that particular person is actually an illegal immigrant not to transfer the burden of proof to the suspect expecting the suspect to tell the truth.

In this case, Rajeshvari's situation is pitiful and clear violation of human right. Is sinful to the authority to detain a person who cannot converse in Bahasa and give a clear identity to prove that she is a Malaysian.

How about the special children, illiterate and unsound mind persons? Do the authority have the clear guidelines and mechanisms to determine the identity of Malaysians and illegal immigrants?

What we are expecting from the authority to use commonsenses and have a proper guidelines not to penalise the innocent persons like Rajeshvari and her new born child.

Rajeshvari is only 22 years old and we do not know what had triggered her. What we can do as the caring Malaysians, to assist her to overcome this difficult situation. We need to think about the stigma that she and the baby have to carry throughout their life. It's sad to happen. Very sad.

We hope the authority will handle this kind situation very delicately in near future to avoid any violations of human rights under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution.

May god bless Rajeshvari and her child always!

Comments

Anonymous said…
There are hundred and thousands of illegal Indons moving freely but there is no action. Why abusing Indian ?
Anonymous said…
We are treated as imigriants not the indon's. What rubbish is this!
Anonymous said…
We are living as a 3rd class citizen with no freedom of speach. Negara ku is not an issue translater is.
the DG of immigration in his most intellectual statement said that rajeshvary was wrong in that sense being malaysian she cannot speak malay, let me ask you, you been malaysian for long time can u speak chiness, indian, punjabi or iban??

Being stupid is one thing but being stupid and being a DG of very important organizations is another thing!!!\

Go down in the field and see ur own eye what is is the problem that many ordinary plp having. a bit of human right concern would have free the poor women..but !!
Anonymous said…
about the enemy alien, can u explain further to me..bcoz i cant understand it properly..thanks

Popular posts from this blog

Sedition Act 1948 should have been repealed a long time ago. But why?

THE Sedition Act 1948 is a legislative measure that was enacted in Malaysia during the colonial era, designed to curb any form of speech or expression that was deemed to be seditious in nature with the aim of maintaining public order and security. The Sedition Act has been subject to much debate and criticism, with some arguing that it is a violation of freedom of speech and expression. Despite this, the Act remains in force in Malaysia to this day, albeit with some amendments made over the years. Although I concur with the abolition of this Act, it is imperative that a comparable new legislation be enacted to address the escalating prevalence of racially and religiously bigoted remarks that have been unsettling our distinctive multicultural and multi-religious society as of late. An instance that exemplifies the prudent decision-making of the governing body is the substitution of the Internal Security Act of 1960 with the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). This rep

THE HISTORY OF TERRORISM: MORE THAN 200 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT

The history of terrorism dates back at least 1500 years when Jewish resistance groups (66 - 72 A.D.) known as Zealots killed Roman soldiers and destroyed Roman property. The term assassin comes from a Shi'ite Muslim sect (Nizari Isma'ilis - also known as hashashins "hashish-eaters") fighting Sunni Muslims (1090 - 1275) and during Medieval Christendom resisting occupation during the Crusades (1095-1291). The hashashins were known to spread terror in the form of murder, including women and children. The brotherhood of Assassins committed terror so as to gain paradise and seventy-two virgins if killed and to receive unlimited hashish while on earth. The modern development of terrorism began during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror (1793 - 1794). During this period the term terrorism was first coined. Through the past two hundred years, terrorism has been used to achieve political ends and has developed as a tool for liberation, oppression, and i

Terrorism in Africa

According to state.gov, ISIS was defeated a few years ago. However, the organization's presence and existence remain conspicuous in Africa. Ongoing conflicts in Somalia, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso demonstrate that ISIS has shifted its focus away from Iraq and Syria. Although ISIS lacks a clear hierarchy like Al-Qaeda, its followers and supporters wholeheartedly believe in its strong ideology. In 2014, the United States led the formation of a broad international coalition known as 'The Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS' to combat the organization during the height of the Syrian and Iraqi conflict. The primary objectives of this 83-member coalition are to degrade and defeat ISIS, which poses a threat to international peace and security. ISIS has brought thousands of foreign fighters from around the world to combat zones like Syria and Iraq, and it has used technology to promote its violent extremist ideology and instigate terrorist attacks. For example, t