Gerakan wants the Malaysian Human Rights Commission’s (Suhakam) annual report to be tabled and debated in Parliament, although it had never been allowed to do so since the commission’s incorporation in 1999.
Published 25 Apr 2016, 12:11 pm Updated 25 Apr 2016, 12:14 pm
Gerakan wants the Malaysian Human Rights Commission’s (Suhakam) annual report to be tabled and debated in Parliament, although it had never been allowed to do so since the commission’s incorporation in 1999.
In the 2015 annual report unveiled on April 20, Suhakam took a firm stand against the use of the Sedition Act.
Despite this, Gerakan’s central bureau of laws and human rights chairperson Baljit Singh welcomes the report.
“There are several critical views and concerns raised by the commission in its annual report; it should be tabled and debated in Parliament.
“How the commission had discharged its statutory duties as well as protect and promote human rights in the past 12 months should be made public,” Baljit said in a statement today.
“Suhakam has been submitting its annual human rights reports to Parliament since 2002 as required by the law, but it was unfortunate that those reports have never been debated in Parliament,” he said.
“Many concerns and recommendations highlighted by Suhakam failed to receive attention from lawmakers and often went unheeded by authorities; therefore remedial actions taken so far to improve human rights conditions on the ground were inadequate,” he said.
In its report, Suhakam has raised concerns of the use of the Sedition Act 1948, describing it as “unjustified”.
Suhakam chairperson Hasmy Agam also noted how elements of archaic laws, which have been abolished, were being incorporated into newly passed laws – including the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (Pota).
Baljit said Suhakam’s annual reports were the “centrepiece” in ensuring that the commission was effective in introducing and promoting human rights norms into Malaysia domestic landscape.
He added that Suhakam’s position within the country’s governance framework was delicate and highly important.
“Parliament should not concede easily its oversight responsibilities by failing to hold parliamentary debate on Suhakam’s annual reports,” said Baljit.
He urged MPs and the government to show more human rights sensitivity and commitment by tabling and debating the 2015 annual report in a special parliamentary session.
Baljit supported the call to form a permanent and bipartisan parliamentary committee to address issues raised by Suhakam, much like the Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee.
He also urged the government to review its 2016 budget allocation for Suhakam which has been cut by almost 50 per cent compared to previous years.
The human rights body, set up in 1999, had received about RM10 million annually.
“Suhakam is reportedly in deep financial stress due to the drastic budget cut; the move was unreasonable and punitive,” Baljit said.
