P. Uthayakumar refuses to attend ISA rehabilitation programme by Police Special Branch which is in violation of Article 95 of the U.N standard Minimum Rules.
Mr. P. Uthayakumar was on 10/07/08 requires to attend a rehabilitation programme organized by the Police Special Branch and to be conducted by Associate Professor Dr. Mohammad Agus bin Yusof of the National University of Malaysia (UKM). On two previous occasions last month and again this month a Police Special Branch Acting Commissioner of Police (ACP), Superintendent of Police and a DSP wanted to rehabilitate Uthayakumar but Uthayakumar refused to meet them. Uthayakumar’s position is that this is in violation of Article 95 of the United Nations (U.N) Standard Minimum Rules for the treatment of prisoners which provides that prisoners without charge are not to be subjected to Rehabilitation.
Further Uthayakumar’s detention is in violation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948 of which Malaysia is a signatory, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1976, Article 3, 10, 11(1) of the U.D.H.R specifically provides that there shall be no detention without trial, provides the right to personal liberty and to a fair trial and that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
Especially after having studied law and practiced law for sixteen years and also an active legal practitioner and himself a human and civil rights Lawyer Mr. Uthayakumar is unable to accept any form of sentence to imprisonment for a term of two years and continuing indefinitely at the pleasure of the Executive without trial and not having been found guilty by a court of law. What more to be rehabilitated after the Judgment of Prime Minister Badawi of Malaysia who acted as Judge, Jury, Prosecutor and Executioner.
Mr. Uthayakumar’s struggle is against the marginalisation, discrimination, oppression, suppression, equality and inequal opportunities and the permanent colonialisation of the ethnic minority Indians in Malaysia through lawful and peaceful means. Badawi and the UMNO controlled government of Malaysia refused to even reply to the hundreds of letters, memorandums, and protest notes and running into thousands of pages scores of civil suits, it would appear that it would be a crime to champion equality and equal opportunities, Malaysian Bar Resolutions, hundreds of police reports etc. and when having exhausted all these avenues over a period of sixteen years of peaceful campaigning Uthayakumar organised a 100,000 Hindraf peaceful assembly at the Kuala Lumpur City Centre on 25/07/2007. The Badawi regime took this as a threat to their authoritarian rule especially so in view of the then imminently impending general elections which we believe had to be postponed to 08/03/2008. Badawi’s excuse was that Uthayakumar and the three other Hindraf lawyers were threat to “national security”. Badawi’s reason for not having them prosecuted in an open court of law was their said detention was based on “intelligence information” which could not be tendered in open court, meaning there is no credible evidence and/or Uthayakumar and Hindraf has an avalanche of evidence as the aforementioned thousands of pages of documents and photographs which the Badawi regime can not or would not be able rebut.
Thus Uthayakumar and the other 3 Hindraf lawyers have now been detained for eight months now.
P. Uthayakumar’s and Hindraf’s legal and peaceful struggle would continue irrespective until the rule of law is observed and justice is served. People power “Makkal Sakthi” will prevail one day.
Thank you,
P. Waytha Moorthy
Chairman
Comments
From a supporter from London
The word 'rehabilitation' implicitly suggests that a problem has occurred in the first instance and, consequently, that a recovery program is needed to restore the person suffering this problem to his or her original state. What crime then did Uthayakumar commit to lead the police to consider that he needed rehabilitation? There are numerous inconsistencies with this and whichever way you examine it the analysis points to a huge miscarriage of justice against Uthayakumar that is state sponsored.
1. The Internal Security Act is a political weapon used by the Government to curtail dissent in Malaysia. There was no charge brought against Uthayakumar. How then do the police consider that he needs rehabilitation?
2. Are the police acting on the Government's orders and are we witnessing, yet again, the blurring of boundaries between the police and the Executive? Do we have an independent police force or a puppy dog police force?
3. Is the act of campaigning for equal rights one that needs rehabilitation? How can Malaysia stand up to the Western world and insist on being counted as a progressive nation when it will not allow the concept of human rights to exist freely.
Drug addicts undergo rehabilitation programs to wean themselves off their addiction. Criminals go to jail because they have committed a crime and prison is the place where they are rehabilitated before being let out to take their place in an ordered society. In Malaysia you are jailed for championing the principles of natural justice. How can we ever strive for a place on the world stage?
Jayanthi Manning
London
Valga Thiru Uthaya!
Mr. Uthaya, you are a great role model for all of us. This is the spirit we wish to see in each of us in indian community in malaysia. GOD will surely bless all your good deeds and sacrifices with fruitful results. GOD bless you.