MARUAH Singapore

Joint Media Statement – 27/10/2019

On the occasion of October 27, the anniversary of Operation Lallang in 1987, when about 106 persons were arrested and detained under a draconian Detention Without Trial law, we the 16 undersigned organisations and groups call on Malaysia to abolish all existing Detention Without Trial laws, including the Prevention of Crimes Act 1949 (POCA), Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015(POTA) and Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985.

In the 1987 Operation Lallang, about 106 persons, including human rights defenders, women activist, politicians, worker rights activist, religious groups and others were arrested and detained without trial under the Detention Without Trial law, the Internal Security Act 1960.

The Detention without Trial law, then and now, does not allow its victims to challenge the alleged reasons for which they have been detained and/or restricted in court – no judicial review.

The police arrest and the Minister orders the Detention/Restrictions, whereby now in place of the Minister, for POCA and POTA, this power is given to the Prevention of Crime Board  and Prevention of Terrorism Board respectively.

Detention Orders could be made indefinitely, two years at a time. Likewise Restriction Orders.

Restriction Orders could including being restricted to a particular village/town/district, not being able to leave place of residence after certain time and not being able to access the internet. If there is a breach of any of the restrictions, it is a crime punishable by law.

Some DWT laws repealed but Detention Without Trial came back stronger

Malaysia, under the previous Barisan Nasional government, repealed the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) and the Emergency (Public Order And Prevention. Of Crime) Ordinance 1969, but thereafter brought in Detention Without Trial by amendment into POCA, and enacted a new DWT law being the POTA.

POCA, which was previously a law restricted to triad gangster groups that commit violent crimes, have now had its scope broadened. It now can be used against any persons who is suspected of committing any crime in the Pernal Code. POCA’s First Schedule, item 2 today reads as follows, ‘2. Persons who belong to or consort with any group, body, gang or association of two or more persons who associate for purposes which include the commission of offences under the Penal Code.’ 

POCA can also be used against those suspected in terrorism activities, human trafficking, smuggling of persons and even drug trafficking, amongst others.

Torture of DWT victims

Under these Detention Without Trial laws, even though there is really no necessity for any confessions or evidence gathering, as there will be no trial anyway, and there is no way to challenge in court the reasons for detention, reports of torture has been alleged by victims, usually human rights or political activists who are brave to do so, as many an ordinary detainee is just too fearful of further repercussions or retaliation to speak up.

Irene Xavier, social activist, arrested on 31 Oct 1987 – “I shall always remember how on the ninth day of my detention, I was beaten with a stick. It was the most humiliating experience in my life. I was forced to stand there while an inspector of the Special Branch beat me with a stick – to remind me that they were not going to treat women more leniently. I was truly in a state of shock.”

Chow Chee Keong, social activist, arrested on 28 Oct 1987 – An interrogator tried to burn his genitals with a burning rolled-up piece of newspaper. They pulled his hair, stepped hard on his fingers and toes with their booted feet and whacked his back with rolled-up bundles of newspapers.

Abdul Rahman Hamzah, a former Sarawak State Assemblyman and political secretary to the former Sarawak Chief Minister, arrested on 20 Sept 1988 – They threw ashtrays at him and beat and poked at him with a broom. He had to do endless strenuous exercises like duck-walking, leap-frogging, crawling on all fours and “swimming” on the floor. All these were aimed at destroying his self-esteem and reducing him to a helpless wreck. If he stopped from exhaustion, they kicked him. They put a large tin over his head and hit it hard with a stick. The sound within was deafening and he suffered cuts and bruises all over his head and face. He was also given the notorious “wet treatment”. They pushed his face into a filthy squat-type toilet and flushed it repeatedly.

The incidence of torture of Detention Without Trial victims may be difficult to prove, but the fact that it exist is probable, taking also the consideration of the number of death in police custody and/or death in detention centers.

The Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) after inquiring into the case of Syed Mohd Azlan Syed Mohamed Nur, who died in police custody, found that police officers had intentionally used violence resulting in the death. They recommended action be taken again these officers for murder.

Recently, it was reported that 10 prison warders have been arrested and remanded in connection with the death of a prisoner, who was found dead in his cell, with blunt force trauma wounds to his head and body.(Malay Mail, 23/10/2019).

Detention Without Trial But No Fair Trial Thereafter makes justifications used for Detention lame

The fact that one is detained without trial, does not mean they cannot be charged and tried in court. As an example, section 19G of POCA states, ‘The detention of any person under this Part shall be without prejudice to the taking of any criminal proceeding against that person, whether during or after the period of his detention.’

The fact that we do not hear of such trials and convictions, during or thereafter their detention without trial makes one question the validity of reasons used for their detentions without trial.

Violation of Human Rights – The Right to Fair Trial

Those detained under DWT laws are denied their right to a fair trial.

Article 10 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, ‘Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.’

Article 11(1) states, ‘Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.’

Article 9 states ‘No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.’

Victims of DWT laws are subjected to arbitrary administrative detention, and even arbitrary administrative restrictions.

THEREFORE, we

–          Call for the Immediate repeal of all Detention Without Trial Laws, and urge that all persons be accorded the right to a fair trial;

–          Call for the immediate and unconditional release of all victims of Detention Without Trial; and

–          Call for Malaysia to respect human rights.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of the 16 groups listed below

ALIRAN

EMPOWER Malaysia

Japan Innocence and Death Penalty Research Center

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility

MARUAH, Singapore

Marvi Rural Development Organization (MRDO), Pakistan

Odhikar, Bangladesh

Persatuan Komuniti Prihatin Selangor & KL (PRIHATIN)

Radanar Ayar Association, Myanmar

Sahabat Rakyat 人民之友 மக்கள் தோழர்கள்

SUARAM

Teoh Beng Hock Trust for Democracy

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM)

Programme Against Custodial Torture & Impunity  (PACTI)

MARUAH states that the Singapore government needs to take more active action to address the issue of modern slavery in Singapore. A study by the Walk Free Foundation found that there is an estimated 19,000 people (or 3.4% of the population) in Singapore who are entrapped in slave-like conditions, placing Singapore in 97^th place out of 167 countries in the 2018 Global Slavery Index (GSI). The definition of modern slavery used in the report includes practices like forced labour, debt bondage, forced marriage, slavery and slavery-like practices, and human trafficking.

MARUAH severely condemns the phenomenon of modern slavery, which is a crime of outrageous abuses in human rights. Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that “No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.” Today, slavery takes on various forms – sometimes quite different from the typical practices of being caged and abused – yet they retain many aspects of these practices. Victims continue to work in abysmal conditions – in isolation without contact with their loved ones, no rest days, and in some cases, being starved, beaten, and denied full salary. The conditions under which some of them work are inhumane and torturous, with little to no freedom and rights.

Unbeknownst to many, Singapore is a hotspot for human trafficking activities, with migrant workers being the most vulnerable to such illegal activities. The 2019 US Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report places Singapore in Tier 2, out of three categories. The report stated that foreign work permit holders, who make up more than a quarter of the total labour force in Singapore, are especially vulnerable to trafficking through debt bondage and threats. Based on standards provided by the International Labour Office and the European Commission, any individual who has encountered deceptive recruitment, exploitation and coercion is considered to have been trafficked.

There has been an increasing body of work on migrant workers in Singapore, including a research study jointly done by the SMU and a non-profit organization, Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2). The study found that many migrant workers incur large amounts of debt to recruitment agents in their home countries in order to secure a job in Singapore, only to realise that they have been deceived of the actual working conditions and salary when they reach Singapore. Often, these migrant workers end up receiving a much lower salary than promised and have to work long hours with no off days. However, these workers lack bargaining power and often accept such poor conditions due to the deep fear (or explicit threats) of deportation, which would mean they lose their income, have debts they cannot clear, families to feed and children in school.

Foreign domestic workers were also found to be vulnerable to forced labour and human rights abuses by another study conducted by the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) and Liberty Shared as their work takes place in the private realm away from public scrutiny. The supply chains need stricter regulations and governance to address the loopholes that still exist, such as the situation that many migrant workers are reluctant to testify in court or make claims against their employers due to the fear of deportation. A 2015 study by the Singapore Management University (SMU) found that nearly two thirds of migrant workers with injuries or salary claims, brought to the notice of the Ministry of Manpower, had been threatened with deportation.

Besides migrant workers, another group that can fall prey to modern slavery conditions, is the low-income population. In 2018, Member of Parliament (MP) Zainal Sapari identified a situation which he termed “slavery of the poor” in one of his parliamentary speeches. He argued that low-income workers, especially those working in the cleaning, security and landscape sectors, are prone to being taken advantage of by employers because of the limited job options they have and lack of knowledge of their rights. He also noted that many of these workers will never have the means to retire, which he argues to be a form of slavery in itself as they are entrapped in such circumstances for life. The recent Minimum Income Standards study conducted by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, did show that some elderly in Singapore would never have the means to retire, as similar view that MP Mr Zainal too shared,  due to inadequate sustainable work incomes, savings and public assistance transfers. MARUAH appreciates Mr Zainal’s efforts in raising this issue in Parliament and for fighting for the rights of low-income workers in Singapore.

According to the 2018 GSI, Singapore scored a grade of CCC[1] in the Government Response Rating, with countries that fall under this rating described as having a “limited response to modern slavery, with limited victim support services”. Singapore was also specifically mentioned in the report repeatedly as one of the countries that is taking relatively little action when compared to the scale of the problem and amount of resources available. Being labelled as having a weak response relative to GDP sends a wrong signal to the international community that we, in Singapore, show little regard for human rights issues, especially the severe violations that occur within modern slavery.

MARUAH is disappointed with Singapore’s poor rating in the 2018 GSI. MARUAH urges the Singapore government to recognize the fact that modern slavery is taking place in the country. As a high-income economy with high levels of resources, the government is obliged to do more to protect the rights of the groups that are susceptible to modern slavery, including migrant workers and the low-income (elderly) population in Singapore.

MARUAH Singapore

For more information, the full report of the 2018 Global Slavery Index can be accessed here: https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/

---

[1] The Government Response Rating is based on a score out of a maximum of 100; the best rating being AAA and the worst, D. Singapore scored 32.8/100, which puts it under the rating CCC. The full description of the rating CCC is: The government has a limited response to modern slavery, with limited victim support services, a criminal justice framework that criminalises some forms of modern slavery, and has policies that provide some protection for those vulnerable to modern slavery. There may be evidence of a National Action Plan and/or national coordination body. There may be evidence that some government policies and practices may criminalise and/or deport victims and/or facilitate slavery. Services may be largely provided by IOs/NGOs with international funding, with limited government funding or in-kind support. For more information on the ratings, please refer to https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/2018/methodology/government-response/

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), there are more than 70 million displaced persons in the world today, including 25.9 million refugees who are escaping war and persecution. These numbers come at an unprecedented level and represent the desperation of those who have been forced to flee violence at home. On World Refugee Day, MARUAH would like to express solidarity with all the refugees worldwide who are on their arduous and precarious journeys to safety.

Close to home, the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar has created more than 700,000 refugees since 2017, leading to a refugee crisis in Southeast Asia. ASEAN’s lackluster response to the refugee crisis has been met with international criticism, especially after reports of thousands of refugees being stranded at sea. However, since then, a few countries like Malaysia and Indonesia have provided temporary shelter to the refugees. The ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance (AHA Centre) has also provided relief materials to displaced persons in the Rakhine State, and is currently preparing to aid in repatriation of the refugees. Currently, only two ASEAN states (Cambodia and the Philippines) are signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention, which recognizes the obligations of States to protect the rights of refugees.

In a world of increasing violence and climate-related disasters, addressing the refugee crisis is a global responsibility and an obligation under international law. Refugees are amongst the most vulnerable groups of people in the world and we ought to protect them, not turn our backs against them. As part of the international community, MARUAH believes that Singapore has a responsibility in responding to this humanitarian crisis. MARUAH would also like to sincerely thank all the countries that have warmly received these refugees and given them an opportunity to a better future.

MARUAH Singapore

A Whitewash

ASEAN Civil Societies and Rohingya Organisations Issue A Joint Statement on ASEAN – ERAT Preliminary Needs Assessment for Repatriation in Rakhine State, Myanmar

In response to the recent leaked report from ASEAN’s Emergency Response and Action Team (ERAT), a ‘preliminary needs assessment’ which drastically overestimated the ease and equity with which Rohingya can return to Burma, we (Civil Societies from ASEAN and Rohingya Organisations) call upon leaders and representatives from ASEAN nations to insist upon re-evaluation, re-planning, and work towards implementation of a just and safe plan for the Rohingya.

The report at times reads more as if it is designed to please the Government of Myanmar than a product from members of a reputable institution. There is no mention of the well documented genocide perpetrated by the Myanmar security forces that drove 740,000 Rohingya to Bangladesh in 2017. There is no mention of rape, murder, torture, killing of children and the burning of homes. There is no mention of the hundreds of villages burnt as documented in satellite images by HRW and the UN, as well as from first person accounts.  Instead, the report consists of a summary of the technical details of the return process with some minor technical recommendations. Myanmar appears to want to create a new narrative that the conflict was inter-ethnic, that they are ready to accept returnees, conditions are conducive to do so, and that the only obstacle for return is Bangladesh. It seems as if the report was done to help ASEAN member countries to ignore the hurt, pain, harm, loss of lives, loss of dignity caused to the Rohinyga people. This is an erasure of facts. Those agreeing with the report, including ASEAN member countries, will be complicit in this lie. This report will become the cornerstone of the Government of Myanmar’s stance. We say that ASEAN’s credibility is on the line unless they reject the report and distance themselves from it.

These are the facts: approximately 87,000 Rohingya fled after 9^th October 2016; a further 740,000 fled after 25^th August 2017; a total of 827,000 refugees landed in Bangladesh; and today there are approximately 1.2 million Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. Yet this report cites 500,000. We ask where this figure come from and what is the source

The report also makes the false premise that the conflict was inter-ethnic. Most blatantly, there isno mention of Tatmadaw’s disproportionate ‘clearance operations’ or allegations and findings of genocide. While the Border Guard Police (BGP) were responsible for violence in 2017, the report claims that villagers feel safer with high BGP security presence. The report says contrary to common perceptions, ‘The local community actually felt safe with the presence of Border Guard Police (BGP).’ Still in Maungdaw Township and other villages Rohingya and Rakhines work and socialize together, contradicting the assessment team’s simplistic, government informed views that the perceived threats are between communities rather than between security forces and civilians. There is an omission of the fact that the inclusion of border guard police in transit camp management structure heightened fear and risks of abuses against a vulnerable population. Recent events such as security forces firing upon civilians in central and northern Rakhine, clearly, show that security forces pose a greater threat to communities more so than just a just “inconvenient” security.

At the same time, there has been an intense ongoing conflict between the Arakan Army and the Tatmadaw throughout Rakhine with over 100 clashes since January 2019 and over 30,000 people displaced. This means that any repatriation is unfeasible, but the assessment team chose to omit the fear the Rohingyas are feeling, in the report.

The report also fails to address policies and laws which violate the Rohingya’s fundamental human rights and jeopardize the viability of their return. The report does not address the lack of freedom of movement – people have to possess the right ID card. This card is related to the collection of Biometric Data which is not collected from any other ethnic group in the country. Rohingyas are justifiably suspicious of this, even if the assessment team does not recognise this in the report. For instance, there is the risk this data can be abused by the Government of Myanmar in the future to identify Rohingya who have moved and so transport them back to live only in Rakhine. There is no reference to the fact that the Citizenship Law must be changed based on the report from the Kofi Annan led Advisory Commission on Rakhine State. Relocation is condoned and there is no mention of the area or land, apriority issue for Rohingya. In addition, the report does not raise access to humanitarian aid, media and international community as these are concern of the Rohingyas.

It is not clear where Relocation Sites will be but according to the plans, they will result in very large villages that will have a problem accessing services and livelihoods especially as most returnees will be paddy farmers. This would mean serious barriers to accessing services and livelihoods. This problem is compounded by the fact that returnees will be resettled in areas away from their original village and cannot access other fields.

When combined, these issues suggest an internment for the Rohingya rather than ‘transit’ camps. We have seen this play out and it continues to this day in central Rakhine State. The underlying unaddressed omission is the fact that it is extremely unlikely that a large number of people will be returning from Bangladesh without significant changes in the situation in Rakhine State.This report deals only with the technical details for an assessment, ignoring the people, their fears, a review of the ‘transit plans’, the administrative processes and accessibility for the Rohingyas. In other words, this report has failed to include crucial facts, ignored the human rights and humanitarian rights of the Rohingyas. It is a propaganda to make the Government of Myanmar look better, that it has plans and setting the stage for any failure of the plans as the fault of the Rohingya and the government of Bangladesh, that is currently carrying this problem for the people

We say:

1.     for the credibility of ASEAN this report should be rejected and not endorsed. If a future comprehensive assessment is agreed upon in it must be in collaboration with UN experts who have the requisite expertise and neutrality.

2.     leaders of ASEAN nations must insist that these issues are raised and addressed by the AHA Centre in order to ensure that the Rohingya can be returned to Burma in a way which is humane and just.

3.     leaders of ASEAN nations must also insist that the Rohingya still living in Burma including 128,000 in IDP camps must have their rights, including citizenship and freedom of movement, restored and protected before plans to relocate the refugee population can begin.

4.     the safety, rights, and dignity of the returned are essential to the viability and longevity of the endeavour of returning Rohingya. Moving forward without these aspects as considerations is unethical, wasteful, and will ultimately leave all stakeholders addressing the same problems down the line as history will repeat itself if not addressed well, now.

If Myanmar ejects addressing these calls, they prove only that they have no interest in solving the problems which their security forces have created, often at the expense of other ASEAN and South Asian nations. It is our sincerest hope that all parties will take the time to come together and re-evaluate moving forward to resolve these issues in a way which considers the safety, rights and dignity of those most affected while taking the time to listen to them directly.

This statement is undersigned by:

1.     ALTSEAN-Burma

2.     Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)

3.     Arakan Rohingya Development Association-Australia (ARDA-Australia)

4.     Arakan Rohingya National Organisation (ARNO)

5.     Burmese Muslim Association (BMA)

6.     British Rohingya Community UK

7.     Burma Human Rights Network (BHRN)

8.     Burmese Rohingya Association Japan

9.     Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK)

10. Canadian Burmese Rohingya Organisations (CBRO)

11. Central Queensland Rohingya Community

12. Centre for Human Rights Research and Advocacy (CENTHRA)

13. European Rohingya Council (ERC)

14. Global Peace Mission Malaysia

15. Initiative for Human Rights in Asia

16. Komite Nesional Untuk Solidaritas Rohingya (KNSR)

17. MARUAH (Singapore)

18. Myanmar Ethnic Rohingya Human Rights Organisation Malaysia (MERHROM)

19. Rohingya Advocacy Network in Japan (RANJ)

20. Rohingya Intellectuals Community Association Australia (RICAA)

21. Rohingya Society in Malaysia (RSM)

22. Rohingya Women Welfare Society (RWWS)

23. Wadah Pencerdasan Umat Malaysia

Media Contact

Kyaw Win

Executive Director

Burma Human Rights Network (BHRN)

E: kyawwin78@gmail.com

T: +44(0) 740 345 2378

Razia Sultana

Founder

Rohingya Women Welfare Soceity (RWWS)

E: rsmimi15@gmail.com

T: +880 1818 4666078

Tun Khin

President

Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK)

E: tunkhin80@gmail.com

T: +44 7376 823227