Bar Council to shun the government panel headed by ex-IGP Hanif Omar, and instead take part in Suhakam's probe on human rights violations at the Bersih rally.
PETALING JAYA: The Bar Council has rejected having two similar inquiries to investigate human rights violations during the Bersih 3.0 rally as it “serves no purpose”.
Bar Council vice-president Christopher Leong said that it was improper for the government’s Independent Advisory Panel, headed by former IGP Hanif Omar, to proceed with the inquiry when Suhakam was already doing the same thing.
“What purpose would it serve to have two inquiries? asked Leong.
When asked if the council would boycott Hanif’s panel, he said: “The Bar Council had stated earlier that it would take part in the Suhakam inquiry. Therefore we do not see what useful purpose would be served in duplicating the process and expending double the resources.”
“It is incongruous that the panel is proceeding with the inquiry when Suhakam, a statutory and independent commission, has stated that it would undertake such an inquiry,” said Leong, adding the responsibility to probe police violence and other issues during the April 28 should lie with Suhakam.
“Suhakam is the proper body to undertake the inquiry – it has the experience, statutory mandate and legal framework to do so. The Suhakam Act 1999 provides for this,” he said.
Yesterday, Hanif Omar announced that 10 terms of reference have been set for the inquiry following its first meeting with the Home Ministry last Friday. Among others, the panel seeks to establish if there was random, widespread and wanton physical assault and brutality by police on the public and journalists.
The panel will also seek to establish if there were unlawful and unwarranted arrests of public and media professionals and whether any were assaulted and beaten. Also in the terms of reference is to review police’s standard operating procedure for crowd and assembly control.
Besides Hanif, other members of the panel are former chief justice of Borneo Steve Shim Lip Kiong, Kumpulan Akhbar Sinar Harian managing director Husammuddin Yaacub, Sin Chiew group legal advisor Liew Peng Chuan, Petronas corporate affairs senior general manager Medan Abdullah and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia psychologist Prof Dr Rozmi Ismail.
Hanif had reportedly said that he was “prepared to meet the Bar Council or any other parties” for mutual benefit.
Panel has no legal standing
Leong repeated that the Bar Council’s stand is that Hanif should not be a member on the panel based on his ‘anti-Bersih’ views, and because the panel has no legal standing.
“This is not about his integrity. The Bar Council does not in fact question his integrity and respect that Tun had given invaluable service to the country. It is unfortunately about the perception of independence and public confidence in the panel.”
Leong added, however, that the Bar Council “is always amenable” to meet Hanif to discuss the matter.
The 10 terms of reference are:
To establish the cause of the disorders at and around Dataran Merdeka, and in areas leading to it, as well as the nature of the actual disorders, that were reported to have occurred from 3pm on April 28.
To establish whether any unlawful or negligent acts, or omissions, were caused or urged to be caused by parties involved.
To establish whether enforcement agencies had adhered to proper and lawful procedures and action at all times particularly in the use of force.
To establish whether there was random, widespread and wanton physical assault and brutality by the police on members of the public and media professionals.
To establish whether there was lawful confiscation and/or destruction of photographs and video recordings made by the public and media professionals, and damage caused to their equipment.
To establish whether there were unlawful arrests of members of the public and media professionals and whether any persons were physically assaulted and beaten, and suffered serious injuries whilst in the care and custody of the police.
To establish whether there was an unlawful denial of access for lawyers to their arrested clients.
To establish the steps taken by the organisers of Bersih 3.0 to ensure that their planned massive rally would remain peaceful throughout the rally and disperse peacefully thereafter.
To review police standard operating procedures in respect of crowd and assembly control, and of addressing disorderly conduct and riots.
To examine any other matter to establish the truth.
PETALING JAYA: The Bar Council has rejected having two similar inquiries to investigate human rights violations during the Bersih 3.0 rally as it “serves no purpose”.Bar Council vice-president Christopher Leong said that it was improper for the government’s Independent Advisory Panel, headed by former IGP Hanif Omar, to proceed with the inquiry when Suhakam was already doing the same thing.
“What purpose would it serve to have two inquiries? asked Leong.
When asked if the council would boycott Hanif’s panel, he said: “The Bar Council had stated earlier that it would take part in the Suhakam inquiry. Therefore we do not see what useful purpose would be served in duplicating the process and expending double the resources.”
“It is incongruous that the panel is proceeding with the inquiry when Suhakam, a statutory and independent commission, has stated that it would undertake such an inquiry,” said Leong, adding the responsibility to probe police violence and other issues during the April 28 should lie with Suhakam.
“Suhakam is the proper body to undertake the inquiry – it has the experience, statutory mandate and legal framework to do so. The Suhakam Act 1999 provides for this,” he said.
Yesterday, Hanif Omar announced that 10 terms of reference have been set for the inquiry following its first meeting with the Home Ministry last Friday. Among others, the panel seeks to establish if there was random, widespread and wanton physical assault and brutality by police on the public and journalists.
The panel will also seek to establish if there were unlawful and unwarranted arrests of public and media professionals and whether any were assaulted and beaten. Also in the terms of reference is to review police’s standard operating procedure for crowd and assembly control.
Besides Hanif, other members of the panel are former chief justice of Borneo Steve Shim Lip Kiong, Kumpulan Akhbar Sinar Harian managing director Husammuddin Yaacub, Sin Chiew group legal advisor Liew Peng Chuan, Petronas corporate affairs senior general manager Medan Abdullah and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia psychologist Prof Dr Rozmi Ismail.
Hanif had reportedly said that he was “prepared to meet the Bar Council or any other parties” for mutual benefit.
Panel has no legal standing
Leong repeated that the Bar Council’s stand is that Hanif should not be a member on the panel based on his ‘anti-Bersih’ views, and because the panel has no legal standing.
“This is not about his integrity. The Bar Council does not in fact question his integrity and respect that Tun had given invaluable service to the country. It is unfortunately about the perception of independence and public confidence in the panel.”
Leong added, however, that the Bar Council “is always amenable” to meet Hanif to discuss the matter.
The 10 terms of reference are:
To establish the cause of the disorders at and around Dataran Merdeka, and in areas leading to it, as well as the nature of the actual disorders, that were reported to have occurred from 3pm on April 28.
To establish whether any unlawful or negligent acts, or omissions, were caused or urged to be caused by parties involved.
To establish whether enforcement agencies had adhered to proper and lawful procedures and action at all times particularly in the use of force.
To establish whether there was random, widespread and wanton physical assault and brutality by the police on members of the public and media professionals.
To establish whether there was lawful confiscation and/or destruction of photographs and video recordings made by the public and media professionals, and damage caused to their equipment.
To establish whether there were unlawful arrests of members of the public and media professionals and whether any persons were physically assaulted and beaten, and suffered serious injuries whilst in the care and custody of the police.
To establish whether there was an unlawful denial of access for lawyers to their arrested clients.
To establish the steps taken by the organisers of Bersih 3.0 to ensure that their planned massive rally would remain peaceful throughout the rally and disperse peacefully thereafter.
To review police standard operating procedures in respect of crowd and assembly control, and of addressing disorderly conduct and riots.
To examine any other matter to establish the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment