Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Oppression of Human Rights and Violation of Human Rights

It has never been the intention of being defensive or critical on the issues of Human Rights but in the most modest way we need also appreciate the generally peaceful situation we Malaysian are living in.

Lately numerous catcalls on the Royal Malaysian Police actions perceived as an oppressor to human rights. How about those citizen which their human rights are being violated and deprived of their peaceful and harmonious life ? Is it fair and moral to just generalize the organization as the oppressor? Did it not the oppressed turned violator to the non associate citizen? Let us be impartial and moderate about the conclusion on oppression of human rights and violation of human rights.

Sensibly no sane human being will harm or hurt another human being. Which group or groups of the community that felt oppressed and which are those violated? What are the the root causes for one to succumb the feeling of oppressed or violated? What are the issues? Feeling, is an opinion based more on emotion than on reason. How one can justify of being oppressed of his rights? Oppression and violation of human rights can be seen in two distinctions namely, the physical and mental. Physical abuse commonly relates to manhandling or body contact while the mental distress, describe a range of symptoms and experiences of a person's internal life that are commonly held to be troubling, confusing or out of the ordinary.

The issue at hand is not the definition but the root causes. While enshrined under Part II - Fundamental Liberties, Article 10 of the Constitution, under the same article which also permits to legislate preventive laws. Understanding from the particular article, liberation is still not total.

What about the Criminal Procedure Code on the right to a counsel? Section 28A provides the legal right but again the same section permits the authority to use its discretion on the merit of the case. If we look at both the Constitution and CPC, allowed the use of discretionary powers or prerogatives. Any act that perceived "ultra vires", actions should have been taken under the Law of Tort, which covers damage, injury, wrongful act done willfully,negligent or circumstances involving strict liability.

SUHAKAM should have recommended their findings to the aggrieved party or parties to proceed in the court of law. This action not only as a deterrent to the respective authority but also not to form any doubt on the impartiality of the report.

Suhakam highlights breaches

How about the citizen, not in any part associated with the oppressed group? Their free movement being curtailed, their peace of mind perverted, ain't their rights not being violated by the oppressed group? Who will be their defenders, if not the authority? At this point, what will be the best action for authority, both groups are aggrieved? Again the popular action "prerogative."

Conclusively, fundamental liberties is still not a total liberation not only to the perspective of the law, but also to other non associated fellow citizen and the non citizen if any.


arifomar said...

salam. menarik semua posting. tq

warongkopi56 said...

Assalamua'laikum Tuan,

Selamat datang dan T.Kasih