While admitting that the promise was delayed and that there was nothing recent in it – considered one of his pre-election guarantees last May was to repeal a lot of laws used to silence dissent amongst Malaysians – the Prime Minister said immediate motion was needed on the matter.
In early October, 12 people were arrested under the Security Offenses Act for alleged links with the now-defunct Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a Sri Lankan Tamil political organization lively in the course of the civil war. Malaysian authorities have denied that the arrests prompted the choice to amend the Security Crimes Act.
Mahathir said the federal government may not completely abolish the law but would “make changes in such a way that elements which might be considered draconian, akin to arrest and detention without trial, are modified” to stop abuses.
Firdaus Husni, chief human rights strategist on the Malaysian Center for Constitutionalism and Human Rights, said Mahathir’s government was slow to introduce laws.
The government’s position on these draconian regulations has modified since they got here into force
“Parliamentary scrutiny and control mechanisms have not been used, and while cooperation with civil society is more open on the proposed law reform, it is inconsistent,” she said.
“The Pakatan Harapan manifesto talks about introducing a ‘green paper’ as a step towards meaningful engagement between government and civil society, but we have not yet seen this in practice.”
Shortly after Pakatan Harapan ousted Barisan Nasional within the May 2018 elections, the brand new government imposed a moratorium on the appliance of laws akin to the Crime Prevention Act, the Prevention of Terrorism Act and the Sedition Act.
She also promised to sign several core UN rights conventions, including an anti-discrimination treaty.
But after two days of sectarian violence broke out last yr over the proposed relocation of a Hindu temple near the national capital, the federal government lifted the moratorium to regulate the situation.
A month later, it announced that it could not ratify the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) – apparently in response to pressure from the bulk Malay population and opposition politicians who played on fears that the treaty would strip ethnic special affirmative motion privileges.
More recently, in April, the federal government withdrew its decision to affix the International Criminal Court by ratifying the Rome Statute, citing widespread confusion amongst voters in regards to the nature of the treaty.
“These moves show that what appeared to be a commitment to law reform is in fact little more than lip service,” Firdaus said. “The government has an obligation to ensure national security and the safety of its citizens, but this should not be at the expense of the human rights of society.”
Whatever momentum the federal government gained after its electoral victory was lost last yr after it turned its back on ICERD, said human rights lawyer Surendra Ananth.
“Since then, the government has succumbed to public pressure. More importantly, no attempt has been made to correct the many inconsistencies associated with the ratification of these human rights conventions.
“The government could have better dealt with ICERD and the Rome Statute by disseminating information on the compatibility of these conventions with our Federal Constitution.
The phenomenon of race- and religion-based opposition parties spreading disinformation in Malaysia is key to explaining why “nothing much will be done”, said political scientist James Chin of the University of Tasmania’s Asia Institute.
“The Pakatan Harapan core leadership is afraid of this opposition combination. In Malaysia, any reforms can be seen as anti-Malay or anti-Muslim, and Pakatan Harapan knows that they cannot beat the racist opposition parties in this game.”
Doubts over who can be the subsequent prime minister have made matters worse – current leader Mahathir, 92, has promised to present solution to incumbent prime minister Anwar Ibrahim before the subsequent elections, but a handover date has not yet been set, leaving room for internal disputes and fights over authorities.
Amnesty International Malaysia’s executive director Shamini Darshni Kaliemuthu noted the “lack of political zeal to bring about meaningful change, including higher collaboration with civil society actors to advance the human rights agenda.”
She noted that reforms haven’t yet been introduced in areas akin to protecting and expanding freedom of expression by amending or repealing laws akin to the Communications and Multimedia Act and the Official Secrets Act.
While Mahathir’s government has made some progress – appointing a more racially diverse cadre of top government officials, lowering the voting age to 18 and repealing anti-fake news laws – it could actually do more, says human rights lawyer New Sin Yew.
“The government’s position on these draconian laws has changed since they came into government, unlike when it was in opposition. When they were in opposition, they opposed these laws, claiming that they were contrary to human rights. Now we hear a different story.”
Playing politics and pandering to right-wing groups would only discourage Pakatan Harapan supporters, New said.
“Right-wing groups will attack them regardless of what they do. This is their task because the opposition.”
This article appeared within the print edition of the South China Morning Post as: Prime Minister’s pledge to reform law ‘nothing greater than platitudes’
