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

©The Sun (Used by permission)
by Husna Yusop & Giam Say Khoon

• Rasah MP Loke: Don't bulldoze DNA Bill through

KUALA LUMPUR (Aug 26, 2008) : Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar tabled the Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Identification Bill 2008 for second reading in the Dewan Rakyat today despite protests by opposition MPs.

Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah) led the protests when she asked Deputy Speaker Datuk Ronald Kiandee why the government was being hasty in tabling the bill when the Universities and University Colleges (Amendment) Act was supposed to be tabled first.

“The UUCA Act was given to the MPs in July but the DNA Bill was only tabled for first reading last week on Aug 18. Is this made with mala fide intentions? Is the government having any side motive to this?

“We need time to discuss the Bill and make consultations. The Bar Council also wants to give its input,” she said, in asking for an explanation on the reason for Bill being brought forward and given priority.

Kiandee however said it was nothing against the law as the Standing Order gives the government the right to give priority to and expedite any particular bill which it deemed necessary.

“You have to accept the government’s decision in this matter. The law allows the government to apply its discretion here,” he said to repeated calls by Fong, saying “ada udang di sebalik batu!” (there is a hidden motive involved.)

Kiandee then suggested perhaps it was Fong who has a hidden motive for strongly objecting the tabling of the bill.

Salahuddin Ayub (PAS-Kubang Kerian) then appealed for Kiandee to consider the preparation made by the MPs as most of them had prepared to debate the UUCA Act.

“Can you please consider our preparations, the homework that we have done? We were just informed about this change (the sequence of the bills to be debated) today but we have been preparing ourselves to discuss the UUCA Act,” he said.

For the record, according to today's (Tuesday) and Monday's order paper, the DNA Bill comes first before the UUCA Act after the National Kenaf and Tobacco Board Bill.

But in last week’s order paper, the UUCA Act comes first before the DNA Bill.

Kiandee said preparation is another matter and the BN MPs too were preparing for the UUCA Act but as the chair, he held the right to allow the ministry to table the bill as it is permitted by the law.

Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) then said: “Mr Speaker must look at the interest of all the MPs, not only at one side of the House.

"The BN MPs have been given a briefing by the Inspector-General of Police recently but we were not invited.”

Kiandee said the briefing had nothing to do with the DNA Bill and asked for Syed Hamid to continue tabling the bill which was opened for debate later.

At the parliament lobby later, Syed Hamid explained the DNA Bill was originally meant to come after the Kenaf and Tobacco Board Bill, but as he was not feeling well earlier, he had applied to the Parliament for it to be debated later.

“There is no sinister motive. Don’t interpret it as having sinister motive.

“It is not intended, as I see, for a particular person and that person is not charged for this Act. That person was charged out of police investigation as they were satisfied that there is a prima facie case and it is up to the court to decide.

“We are not going to use this act to make a person chargeable. That (act) is for general purpose, (so) look forward to it,” he told reporters.

He said the Kenaf Bill was deferred last week to make some amendments and it was passed today.

“So, I followed with the DNA Bill.”

“You (reporters) must remember that this thing (the Bill) has been outstanding for the last eight years and it is not something that is new.

“I think the MPs were concentrating on Permatang Pauh (by-election), they did not even listen to what I was saying.... that it is not only meant for crime but for all sorts of human investigation like missing person, kidnapped persons and disasters,” he added.

Rasah MP Loke: Don't bulldoze DNA Bill through

by Giam Say Khoon

KUALA LUMPUR (Aug 26, 08): DAP-Rasah MP Loke Siew Fook lamented today that the DNA Bill should not be bulldozed to pass by the government.

"We were saddened and shocked by the government's decision to expedite the passing of the DNA Bill which was supposed to be debated after the debate of the amendment of the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971.

"We believed that the reason for the government to move the (DNA) Bill forward was politically-motivated," he told a press conference at the parliament lobby after receiving a memorandum and briefing by the Bar Council's human rights committee yesterday.

"Does the government want to bulldoze the Bill before the Budget 2009 on Friday and use it against (Parti Keadilan Rakyat de facto leader) Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim who is involved in a sodomy case?," he asked.

Loke added that the Bill contained elements of making the country a police state.

"We doubt that the police in taking care of the DNA samples and we are worried that the DNA samples will be abused by the authorities.

"We are scared that if the Bill is to be passed in the next few days, we will have no other ways to channel our views or change the clauses in the Bill," he said, adding that the debate of the Bill should be put on hold and set up a select committee to study about the Bill specifically.

Meanwhile, the Bar Council's Human Rights committee chairman Edmund Bon raised the council's concerns over the Bill:

> There are no safeguards in relation to the storage and testing of DNA samples and the way of the samples are to be handled;

> There is no provision for the accused to do his or her own independent DNA test from the same sample;

> Categories of persons from whom samples may be taken from are too arbitrary and wide;

> Criteria and power safeguards are lacking in relation to the suspected persons as the proposed method of solely relying on the authority of the police to obtain the sample is dangerous;

> Privacy rights are illusory with the criminalisation of the refusal to give a non-intimate sample;

> The retroactive application of the law on persons presently serving a term of imprisonment is highly unfair as no one who has been charged or convicted prior to the passing of the Act should be affected by the law;

> The destruction of the sample is at the discretion of the DNA bank director, which is unacceptable and it does not meet the international standards;

> The law ousts the jurisdiction of the courts to weigh the evidence, the conclusive evidence unfairly limits the rights of the accused to question the credibility of the DNA profiling; and

> Without proper data protection regime in the Constitution, the power to export DNA profiles to foreign law enforcement agencies should be curtailed.

Bon also proposed that the Bill should be withdrawn and have a proper public consultation with experts in the field, amend the Constitution to add privacy rights, and ratify the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.

Comments (1)

Subscribe to this comment's feed