|
 Tomorrow is World Human Rights Day.
Today the Malaysian Bar celebrates this important day.
Today we celebrate the fact that there are universally
recognised human rights standards.
This Day marks the anniversary of the adoption by the United
Nations General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Around
the world there is greater awareness of the importance of Human Rights and
freedom. In Malaysia, the Malaysian Bar celebrates this day today by
looking at our fundamental freedoms enshrined in our Constitution. In many other
societies, fundamental liberties, like freedom of expression and freedom of
assembly, are taken for granted. They are a given. In a developing society like
ours, we are still grappling with these concepts. Our definition of what
constitutes freedom of religion, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly
differ between ourselves, between ourselves and the government and even between
ourselves and the Courts.
No one doubts that the government has the right and duty to protect their
citizens and ensure their safety. However, in so doing, our fundamental freedoms
cannot become casualties. It is unnecessary, if properly managed.
The Bar Council has always considered the requirement for a permit as an
unnecessary fetter on the freedom to assemble enshrined in Article 10 of the
Federal Constitution. The right under the Constitution is the right “to assemble
peaceably and without arms.” The requirement for a permit, in our view, makes
this right illusory.
In this regard, I would agree with the call by Dato’ Zaid Ibrahim that we should
learn to manage such situations rather than coming down hard on it thus
escalating the problem.
BERSIH and Hindraf were refused permits, as I understand it, when in fact some
amount of give and take would have seen a win-win situation for everyone. There
ought to have been discussions between the police and the organisations as to
how the events could have proceeded in a controlled manner. There would then
have been less disruption, less inconvenience and no arrests.
In this regard, the recent response to the protesters of the Hindraf rally is
alarming. In these circumstances, the authorities must not visit the actions of
a few upon the many.
The attempted murder charges against 31, the opposition to & the refusal of
bail, the further arrest on the same charge, the sudden announcement of
purported terrorist connections, all smack of a show of force by the state
against the participants. Is all this really necessary? Do we need to regress to
those dark days when such methods were used to quell dissent? I sincerely hope
not. This is a new Malaysia. We know how to sift information. We know how to
reject unacceptable views.
This is where the authorities must play an even-handed role. Heavy handedness
against the people concerned is not the answer. As I have said, it is not
something that is acceptable in today’s Malaysia.
Unfortunately, with this shifting of focus, the messages of the BERSIH rally and
the Hindraf rally may be easily lost. The BERSIH rally was about free and fair
elections. That is easy to address. One of the demands made was that the
newspapers should give fair coverage to all parties in the elections; and what
is difficult about that? This is where the press comes in. The licensing
provisions in relation to the press may be the cause for the reticence of the
press to give fair coverage. This should be revisited.
As for the Hindraf rally, ultimately it is a cry for help from a group that
feels it is marginalised. Unfortunately the focus has shifted from this cry of
desperation to some extreme statements made and actions taken by a few. This is
unfortunate. Let me say here at once, we do not condone racist comments nor
extremism in any form.
Unfortunately, issues like marginalisation and poverty are rarely seen as human
rights issues. The factors that contribute to this situation, namely factors
like discrimination, lack of access to resources and opportunities and social
stigma, all contribute to a denial of human dignity and therefore ultimately to
a denial of human rights.
In this regard, the Bar Council calls upon the Government to set up a group of
experts to conduct a study into the grievances of people of all communities who
feel they are marginalised. This study should focus on first, identifying these
groups, and then studying the issue of their access to resources, with the
ultimate aim of providing recommendations for the uplifting of the quality of
their lives.
The Bar Council has been both criticised and praised for cancelling our Human
Rights walk.
With freedom comes responsibility. Likewise with leadership. When we involve the
public in our activities, we have a responsibility towards them. Hence, in the
most difficult decision we have ever had to make, we decided to call off the
walk.
But we will never give up on our struggle for our fundamental freedoms. However
this is not only the Bar Council’s struggle, it is everyone’s struggle.
Ultimately, I view this as a process. A process of negotiation with the
government. We have seen an opening up of democratic space. (This is why I hope
that the action against the Hindraf supporters does not become a set back.) We
see instances when our voices are heard. We see instances when they are not. We
have heard the Prime Minister’s call on Civil Society to be his eyes and ears.
The role of Civil Society is therefore recognised. We must keep pushing the
boundaries. We must keep negotiating with the government. This process of
negotiation can take many forms. Sometimes we talk, sometimes we walk.
On the part of Bar Council we have seen the channels of communication with the
government opening up and we will proceed to put forward our views.
Ultimately, we must aim for human rights to become part and parcel of our
vocabulary, our agenda and our nation’s psyche.
Ambiga Sreenevasan
 |
News 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Report: LAWASIA Fact-finding Mission to Pakistan
Malacca Bar: Conference on the Roadmap to Local Government Elections 
