Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

In our inaugural ‘Talking Rights’ segment in the May/June 2007 PRAXIS edition, the Human Rights Committee (HRC) spoke to Cynthia Gabriel of CARAM Asia, a regional non-governmental organisation. This time, we feature Long Seh Lih, and speak to her (by e-mail) regarding the role of SUHAKAM and the Bar (both statutory bodies), and the United Nations (an inter-governmental organisation) in promoting human rights.

Seh Lih was called to the Malaysian Bar in 2003. Her views do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations.

HRC : Please give us a brief introduction of yourself.

LSL : I am a Human Rights Officer with the United Nations (UN) and formerly an officer with SUHAKAM. I believe in human rights and I work towards my own professional redundancy, that is, a situation where there is full respect for human rights and I would, gladly, be without a job. Afghanistan has been my humble abode and my work place for the past two years and it has been an enriching and eye-opening experience.

HRC : Tell us a bit about your stint in SUHAKAM.

LSL : Working within SUHAKAM, knowing and understanding the task of the Commission thought me to appreciate the role of a national human rights institution. It also made me realise the immense potential of SUHAKAM in promoting and protecting human rights in Malaysia.

But two years after separation from SUHAKAM, the one thing which I must mention is the criticism leveled against the Commission. While I admit that some censure is grounded and called for, some criticisms are precipitated by the misconstrued role of SUHAKAM not only by the general public but also human rights organisations and activists. There is a general lack of understanding of the actual role of SUHAKAM as a national human rights institution and this has, to a certain extent, resulted in disengagement of SUHAKAM.

SUHAKAM is largely vested with most of the powers envisaged in the Paris Principles - SUHAKAM has the power to promote human rights, advice and assist the government in formulating legislation and administrative directives, recommend to the Government the subscription and accession of international human rights treaties and inquire into complaints of infringements of human rights and its powers to conduct inquiries. In 2006, SUHAKAM using its quasi-jurisdictional function concluded two public inquiries.

HRC : Yes, but are these enough?

LSL : SUHAKAM has been described, both in words and in image, as a ‘toothless tiger’ and others have stated that enforcement powers of SUHAKAM is nothing more than a flight of fancy. Indeed, a cursory examination of the 1999 Act shows that the common denominator of SUHAKAM’s functions and powers is its advisory and recommendatory role. At this juncture, let us not forget that the duty of implementing human rights rests with the Government. From the 1978 document and the Paris Principles, national human rights institutions were never meant to assume or take over the role of States being the primary guardian of human rights. The role of any national human rights institution is necessarily a primary supervisory and advisory body to ensure the Government promotes and protects the human rights. Any power of a national human rights institution is remedial and not punitive.

However, this does not suggest that the role of SUHAKAM is merely to churn out grandiose recommendations and no more. I was once asked whether the power to recommend is a real power. I will allude to the UN National Human Rights Institutions Handbook and assert that the power to recommend can only be effective if it confers upon the national human rights institution the ability to perform a certain act or to compel such performance by an individual or an entity. A national human rights institution should be given adequate powers for the effective discharge of its responsibilities. This could include conciliation of complaints, submission of amicus curiae briefs, engaging and increased lobbying with Government agencies and functioning as a first point of contact for accurate data on human rights violations and achievements. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission of Australia and the Hong Kong Equal Opportunities Commission conciliate complaints and submit amicus curiae briefs in Court cases concerning human rights issues.

HRC : Do you think SUHAKAM can do more for human rights in Malaysia? If so, in what areas and how?

LSL : The answer will be a resounding yes. I will speak in general terms - SUHAKAM can certainly do more, even within its much lamented limited statutory powers. Ultimately, an amendment to the 1999 Act would be ideal but until then, I believe that there is room to maneuver within the boundaries of SUHAKAM’s powers. The key is a shift in approach from within SUHAKAM and from the outside. For external interlocutors, I would like to see a change in how civil society organisations and NGOs perceive SUHAKAM. To continue to treat and dismiss SUHAKAM as mere ‘window dressing’ or ‘retirement home’ and a library for reports brings no benefit to SUHAKAM or the human rights situation in Malaysia. SUHAKAM should be esteemed and treated as an effective mechanism to ensure that violators of human rights are held accountable and those responsible to respect human rights do so. Yes, such treatment also requires a corresponding shift within SUHAKAM - to have a more sharpened vision and commitment. With both these factors in play, I have no doubt that its powers can be prevailed upon to effect positive changes.

HRC : What about the UN?

LSL : Living in a country where there is no conflict, the one new experience working in the UN in Afghanistan is dealing with the military. With the heavy military presence in Afghanistan, discussions with military personnel is inevitable and a whole new experience for me. Needless to say, military jargon and the many acronyms became familiar language to me. I also begin to see the realism of humanitarian space or the shrinking thereof and the importance of preserving this vital space for aid workers in a conflict environment.

I also began to have renewed respect for the fragility of life and the very essence of the human right to life. If I should for a minute reflect that my security as an officer of an international organisation is vulnerable, I am almost immediately reminded of how more precarious an Afghan woman is. I see women and girls fighting to stay alive because of violence faced by them in their homes and within the community. The right to life, human dignity and liberty takes a very tangible form in a woman beaten by family members that she sees no way out of her torment but through self-immolation, in a woman beaten by her husband but has no where to seek shelter and in a girl child sold to a 40 year old man as settlement of debt owed by the family. My work also takes me to visit mass grave sites and it is a serious reminder of the atrocities that we as human beings are capable of inflicting upon others.

However, work in a post-conflict country is not only about harrowing experiences. The success stories, although few and far between and the willingness of the ordinary Afghan to forge ahead and rebuild the country, makes the work worth the while. I admire the tenacity of the Afghan man on the street and the unrecognised efforts of the Afghan woman behind the mud walls - they are not afraid of working hard.

HRC: How does your experience compare with Malaysia?

LSL : Whilst being in a rather insecure environment makes me appreciate the peace and security we have in Malaysia, it awakens certain disenchantment over the sluggish advancement of human rights in Malaysia. We enjoy economic stability, infrastructure is exceptional and there is seemingly peaceful co-existence amongst Malaysians. Thus, with the conducive environment of stability, modernity and wealth, the progress of human rights should have catapulted forward, making Malaysia the new paradigm for human rights amongst developing nations. Instead, we have dragged our heels and by ‘we’, I refer to not only the Government as the primary protector of human rights but also the citizens of Malaysia who more often than not, prefer to remain indifferent to human rights issues. The reluctance to rock the proverbial ‘rice bowl’ is prevalent where it would not be inaccurate to say that Malaysians prefer to not stand up for a right lest business and economic amity is ruffled. Certainly economic prosperity and development is important but it should not be used as a pretext for indifference. What good is economic gain if Malaysian women still suffer violence at the hands of her husband? What good is wealth if we live under the constant fear of being detained without fair trial safeguards? It is timely that we move away from the indifferent thinking that human rights do not concern each and everyone of us. Human rights by its name implicate all of us because we are human beings.

HRC : Speaking about Malaysians - what do you think Malaysians can do about human rights in the country, particularly lawyers?

LSL : All Malaysians regardless of age, creed, race, gender can play a pivotal role in improving the human rights situation in Malaysia. Human rights will not change without the will and effort of the people. To bring about positive changes, first and foremost, Malaysians should make an effort to be more aware of their rights. The most powerful tool of empowerment is having the knowledge of what rights we possess. Without knowing what rights we are entitled to, we will not be able to demand the respect of those rights. Being aware of our human rights does not involve extensive studying - it merely requires an examination within ourselves of the inherent rights that we are born with. Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights encapsulates this principle by asserting that every person is ‘born free and equal with dignity and rights and is endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in the spirit of brotherhood’.

This duty to be aware and conscious of human rights is even more compelling for lawyers. Lawyers take an oath to uphold justice and justice requires the respect of rule of law and human rights. This calling is not only for lawyers sitting in a particular committee but all lawyers. Lawyers have the potential and opportunity to make an impact on the human rights situation in Malaysia. Whilst human rights is not only about the law, it is one branch of the law that is relatively undeveloped and continuously evolving within which this opportunity should be seized by lawyers. It takes little effort to play a part as many such opportunities are within reach - SUHAKAM and the Bar Council and its Human Rights Committee are accessible platforms. These organisations are instrumental and play a significant role in bringing about change in human rights Malaysia. They offer a myriad of opportunities for lawyers to contribute towards the promotion and protection of human rights in Malaysia, whether in terms of conducting research, legal aid, providing human rights advice, taking part in campaigns and education programmes or even to share thoughts and ideas in meetings. All that is needed is for lawyers to take the first step and broaden our focus beyond our run-of-the-mill daily routine.

Having said all this, human rights boils down to one core fundamental nature - respect. Respect for our sameness, our difference and for each other because we are human beings regardless of our similarities or difference. It would be meaningless if we call ourselves human rights lawyers or human rights activists if we cannot treat each other with dignity and decency.

HRC : You sound like you really believe in this nebulous concept of ‘human rights’.

LSL : I began to take a keen interest in human rights when I was pursuing my LLM in the University of Maastricht, the Netherlands. I felt that it was my clarion call and more so when I started working in the field of human rights. I believe in human rights because I believe that the realisation of the fullest protection of the whole spectrum of rights is possible. I believe that human beings are essentially good and that if we respect each other for our differences, peace and harmony is achievable. By no means am I saying that solutions to problems should be encountered with idealism. Rather, human rights is based upon idealistic goals with realistic solutions. Whilst it is a long arduous journey ahead and it may take a generation or two to change mindsets, I believe that the end goal is within reach. This is what fuels my passion in human rights.

HRC : Is human rights all gloomy?

LSL : Definitely not. Working in the field of human rights is actually rewarding and gratifying. I will admit that the work tends to expose an unattractive angle of society and human behaviour. I have often questioned how a fellow human being can act in such an odious way towards another fellow human being. Nevertheless, the brighter side of human rights work is the fact that there are success stories. To be able to take one woman from her violent environment or to help one child expedite his or her case in Court is sufficient inspirational sustenance. Besides, being in a position to be able to bring about changes and being the vehicle for the voiceless and the powerless makes the work meaningful and far from gloomy.

Those working for human rights will quickly realise that visible changes are slow and most of the time imperceptible. This is because human rights is about changing mindsets and pushing the boundaries. But despite this intangible gain, the work is always exciting as it is an interesting challenge to find solutions to seemingly complex problems.

HRC : Any personal life-changing story to inspire us?

LSL : I do not have a dramatic narrative but I would say that uprooting my rather comfortable life in Malaysia and coming to Afghanistan has had an impact on my life. Certainly my lifestyle has changed in terms of what is normally taken for granted in Malaysia such as walking on the street and shopping. I certainly have renewed enjoyment for these ordinary tasks that I carry out with much less frequency.

The increasing insecurity has changed my perspective on life. This may sound cliché but the tendency to fixate on minute things seems inconsequential now, with a focus on the broader and more important things in life such as family and friends. Also, living in Afghanistan has certainly given real meaning to the expression ‘no person is an island’. Being in a difficult environment, the people around you become your support system, it keeps you going and certainly makes life more bearable. In a conflict environment where the security situation can deteriorate in a blink of an eye, you have only your friends to count on. Regardless of the many contingency plans put in place to ensure security, at the end of the day, it is the people around us that will help us and it is us who others count on.

HRC : So, what is human rights work in your eyes?

LSL : Human rights work is not only about litigation or about arguing points of human rights law in Court. Human rights is multi-disciplinary within which human rights litigation is only one facet of it. Whilst litigation has an influence on the Judiciary and legal jurisprudence, for any real improvement to take place, the promotion and protection of human rights should be tackled from all angles.

Firstly, human rights include advocacy work – to raise awareness of human rights. This entails educating the general public or specific sectors of society about human rights. Such work range from holding seminars and workshops, publication and distribution of leaflets, booklets, posters, even articles on human rights to teaching human rights in schools and at universities.

Human rights are about changing mindsets. Therefore, the work would inevitably involve some form of lobbying Government officials, Parliament and other interlocutors to amend laws or policies in line with human rights standards and providing advice on the accession to international human rights treaties. This would also include capacity building of Government officials and other interlocutors. This could come in the form of provision of training and close co-operation.

Human rights work also includes research work and documentation of human rights violations. Conducting research on human rights and producing cross-cutting analysis provides a reliable foundation which the human rights movement can rely on. A balanced research addressing the realities on the ground will prove invaluable, for instance in trying to change the mindsets of persons in authority who have the power to bring about changes in law or policy. Closely linked is the importance of documenting human rights abuses. Accurate and verified information about human rights violations is imperative as it is a source of information that can be used as a human rights benchmark, resource for research, formulation of policies and laws and legal reform.

Lastly, perhaps one of the more important aspects of human rights work is the resolution of individual complaints of human rights violations. It is perhaps one of the more interesting parts of human rights work. Investigating and verifying human rights violations, followed by finding a resolution to the complaint helps the individual.

HRC : What does the future hold for Malaysia with regard to human rights?

LSL : I think the future for Malaysia in terms of human rights is encouraging. I say this because Malaysia has the potential and the capacity to take greater strides in improving the human rights situation. There is certainly more space for human rights advocates in Malaysia and some efforts to improve the human rights of the Malaysian citizen – the Act establishing a similar mechanism to the IPCMC is said to be at its final stages and so is the legislation for persons with disabilities, there is more debate on the ISA and the general public is certainly more aware of their rights and are not afraid to stand up for their rights. These may be small beginnings but it certainly signifies positive changes which would hopefully be the start of bigger things to come. Indeed, improvement of our human rights record should progress at a quicker rate. As I said earlier, with the infrastructure and stability, I see no reason why Malaysia cannot make significant strides in the area of human rights.

Furthermore, not only should we realise this potential but we should be aware that Malaysia is regarded as an exemplary nation by most developing nations such as Afghanistan. The people of Afghanistan have high regard for Malaysia, particularly our achievements and how a multi-ethnic society lives in peace. I certainly feel proud each time an Afghan displays admiration for Malaysia. As such, it becomes even more important for Malaysia to be the standard-setting nation in field of human rights as no doubt, other nations will follow suit. At the same time, the high regard that Afghans have for Malaysia also means that every time a media article reports that some person has been detained under the ISA or that the independence of the Judiciary is in question, I certainly feel embarrassed that a nation held in such high regard commit the same mistakes as a country struggling to curb insurgents and provide basic needs.

HRC : Some lessons learnt from the Afghan experience?

LSL : Two lessons – corruption is malevolent and ethnic division hinders progress. Corruption is malignant to any form of progress or development in a country. The fragmented system of Government and the Judiciary in Afghanistan is largely the result of corruption. Corruption weakens the functionality and credibility of Government agencies and the other pillars of democracy. A corrupt State is not only a financial drain but it deters private investment, impedes development, stability and security and most certainly retards the protection of human rights. Although corruption is not as rife in Malaysia, it exists to some varying degree. Therefore, if there is no sincere commitment to fight corruption through a genuine pledge by the Government and implementation of cross-cutting reforms in the public sector, Police, Judiciary and Parliament, any development achieved thus far would be whittled away and the country would regress.

Secondly, fragmentation of society along ethnic lines, entrenched by unequal treatment of all ethnic groups obstructs peace and progress. Unless and until the people move beyond ethnicity, it would be difficult to progress as a nation. Like Afghanistan, Malaysia is also a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural nation, though the ethnic divisions may not be that deep-rooted or disruptive. However, there is an underlying tension between ethnic groups in Malaysia and this tension should be addressed if we are to progress as one nation. A Malaysia Malaysian by no means necessitates abandonment of our respective cultures or language. It does however require equal treatment of all ethnic groups and equal respect - which requires a step beyond tolerance - of the different cultures through not only theoretical - a guarantee of equality in the constitution and laws, without caveats - but it should be made a reality at the ground or implementation level.

HRC : A trick question. Do you think the human rights situation in Malaysia will improve if the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) coalition comes into power as the Federal Government? Why or why not?

LSL : Well, I do not have a crystal ball and unfortunately I cannot be guided by the past performance of PR. I think after 12 General Elections, we all recognise that manifestos and election promises are no more than words. However, with PR forming the State Governments in Kelantan, Perak, Kedah, Penang and Selangor, it has the opportunity to improve the human situation in that particular State or constituency. PR should exploit this opportunity to close the gap between word and deed. If Members of Parliament and State representatives work for the of the people and in furtherance of human rights, then whichever ruling party forming the seat of the Federal Government or a State Government will be able to improve the human rights situation of Malaysia. Action speaks louder than words and the voters are certainly not blind.

HRC : Since you did not properly answer the last question, how do you see the role of the Bar in promoting and protecting human rights and what more should the Bar do in this area?

LSL : The Bar is tasked with the responsibility to uphold and defend justice, rule of law and fair trial rights. This can be done through a number of different ways - observing trials, advocacy, cooperating with human rights partners, undertaking human rights cases, strengthening the legal aid programme for indigent persons and providing training in human rights. Specifically as the professional body for lawyers, the Bar has to ensure that lawyers discharge their responsibilities as agents of the administration of justice in a fair and just manner. And in turn, the Bar has the responsibility to ensure that lawyers are able to perform their work without intimidation and harassment and are able to freely express their opinions and beliefs.

The Bar is heading in the right direction and should keep up its good work in the area of human rights. Perhaps activism in the area of human rights for more lawyers - there are lawyers working on human rights but more lawyers should be convinced to contribute effectively and meaningfully to human rights. Human rights should not be taken up because it is ‘in vogue’ but greater commitment to human rights beyond lip service or for self promotion is needed. This is necessary not only for lawyers but for all of us in a position to make a change. Perhaps increased training in the area of human rights and formalised human rights education could be one way to do so.