THE calls by civil liberty movements in Malaysia to repeal security laws such as the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA), the Prevention of Crime Act (POCA) and the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) have become a source of concern for the Government.
Under the Part 2 of the
Federal Constitution, Malaysians do enjoy the fundamental liberties like
protection against retrospective criminal laws and repeated trials, equality
and freedom of speech, assembly and association.
The question is whether these
liberties can be used to undermine the peace and security of this nation or
not.
I am strong believer of the
rule of law. The law must protect the people. According to the World Justice
Project’s definition of the rule of law is encompassed with accountability,
just laws, open government and accessible and impartial dispute resolution.
But for the hate preachers,
terrorists and their sympathisers, the rule of law is irrelevant to them. They
are in a different belief system which has no regard to universal human rights
requirements.
Oddly enough, these nefarious
people rely on fundamental rights which are enshrined as in our Federal
Constitution and United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights to
defend their rights and seek protection.
I could not understand their
justification where they are contradicting their own belief system by relying
on the rule of law to defend their action which against the interest of this
nation.
So, what should the present
Government do then? Shield these perpetrators whose intention is to destroy the
nation or to protect the people and the nation as in whole?
The
Malaysian Bar Council
The Malaysian Bar president
Karen Cheah Yee Lynn has released a statement requesting the Government to
repeal SOSMA. She stated that national security is not an excuse to limit our
fundamental liberties.
She also stated that Malaysia,
as a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2022–24 term,
should seize this opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to human rights protection
by repealing SOSMA and other preventive detention laws such as the Prevention
of Terrorism Act 2015 (POTA) and the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA).
Furthermore, Cheah also
emphasised that human rights and national security are not mutually exclusive
or incompatible. They are, on the contrary, interconnected and complementary.
She also declared that there should be no additional attempts to revive debates
on preventative detention legislation.
But I wish to disagree with
Cheah’s assertion by citing my past articles and emphasising that developed
countries such as Singapore and the UK themselves value preventive legislation
such as SOSMA. They are aware of the threats posed by terrorists and recognise
that it is their duty to safeguard the nation as a whole rather than to protect
nefarious people like terrorists who have no regard to the rule of law.
Again, there is nothing wrong
with such laws. The problem is that certain bad apples within the enforcement
agency and some unscrupulous politicians tend to abuse these preventive laws for
their selfish political gain.
However, removing such laws is
not a solution; rather, it will result in severe security breaches that will
destabilise our nation in the future.
The
UK and hate preachers
The current security dilemma
faced by Malaysia is very much similar with the situation in United Kingdom
(UK) now. Before the London bombing in 2005, the UK security forces, through
their network of intelligence, received some information regarding terrorist
threats but failed to take the warning seriously.
The perception is changed
utterly after the bombings in London. Later the investigation reports have
indicated that the terrorists involved with such attacks have been
indoctrinated with Salafi ideology hate preachers.
These hate preachers, who are
wanted by Jordan and Egypt, were given political asylum by the UK and later
they become the ideological masters for the present and future home-grown
terrorists in the country.
The contemporary paradigm of
global terrorist attacks is well linked with hate preachers. The recent London
and Manchester attacks are connected to hate preachers in UK. The role of the
hate preachers is to instigate their supporters and followers, especially the
young people and new converts, to get involved with terrorist related
activities.
Generally, these hate
preachers disguise themselves as the innocent or genuine preachers but their
motives will be unknown to their acquaintances. These preachers will filter and
choose listeners or followers by selecting the “sinful”.
They will not necessarily get
involved with the attacks directly but serve as the inspirational figures to
motivate and urge their herd to commit the act.
The current UK security
debacle started many years ago. The influx of foreign radical hate preachers
who were allowed to stay and continue their “noble” activities in UK is the
primary cause of the current problem.
The people who sanctioned
these hate preachers to be in the UK probably never anticipated such atrocities
which took placed in London or in Manchester.
Most of them are policymakers
who have no knowledge on security matters. In addition, they decide delicate
matters on the basis of human rights, which is wrong approach to take on. These
radical hate preachers are like “termites”. They destroy a nation using the locals
themselves!
Omar Bakri Muhammad and
Mustafa Kamel Mustafa, also known as Abu Hamza, had been convicted for
radicalising British born young Muslims and new converts. Furthermore, they
also play a crucial role to groom another local radical hate preacher, Anjem
Choudary, a former solicitor, to continue their cause to radicalise Muslims in
UK.
With the help of Omar, Anjem
founded al-Muhajiroun. This organisation was banned under the UK Terrorism Act
2000 because of its terror related activities. The Woolwich attacker, Michael
Adebolajo and Khuram Butt, the London Bridge terrorist are associated with
al-Muhajiroun.
All the current attacks which
happened in UK directly or indirectly are connected to these people. Therefore,
more of such attacks are imminent in UK. These hate preachers probably have
created sleeper cells throughout UK and future attacks can happen anywhere and
anytime.
Even though in past the UK
security forces have arrested and prosecuted successfully these terrorists but
the attacks still occurred because of the influence of people like Omar, Abu
Hamza and Anjem in UK. Therefore, the intelligence and security forces in the
UK need to play a proactive role by getting help from Muslim stakeholders in
the country.
The cooperation from this
community is vital to counter this threat in there and they should not demonise
this community as a whole. – March 31, 2022
Source:https://focusmalaysia.my/sosma-striking-a-balance-between-human-rights-and-national-security-part-1/
Comments