Monday, 15-Oct-2001 3:44 PM

Court to make decision on Habeas Corpus application on Wednesday

On 25 April 2001, families of five Reformasi activists arrested under the Internal Security Act – Lokman Nor Adman, Saari Sungib, Tian Chua, Hishamuddin Rais and Raja Petra Kamarudin – filed Writs of Habeas Corpus in the Kuala Lumpur High Court declaring the arrest of the five as illegal. The High Court, however, ruled their arrest as valid and that the police had not acted in bad faith (mala fide) as claimed by the families.

The families of the five, one of whom (Raja Petra) has since been released, then filed Petitions of Appeal on 17 May 2001. In their appeals, supported by Affidavits signed by all ten ISA detainees, they revealed that their interrogation had nothing to do with the reason of their arrest as announced by the Inspector General of Police (IGP).

The IGP had announced that the ten had planned to bring in bombs, guns, grenade launchers, and much more, to create chaos during the planned 14 April 2001 or “Black 14” demonstration. But they were never asked about any of this during their interrogation claimed the detainees.

Today, the Kuala Lumpur Federal Court was told that the five ISA detainees were arrested because of their alleged involvement in the Reformasi Movement. According to the police, the five had planned to hold a demonstration called “Black 14” on 14 April 2001 – the anniversary on Anwar Ibrahim’s sentencing in the first (corruption) trial on 14 April 1999. The Judge who had sentenced Anwar on 14 April 1999 was Augustine Paul.

The Federal Court was further told that, since the High Court Judge hearing the Writ of Habeas Corpus application from the five ISA detainees and Reformasi activists, Augustine Paul, was the same Judge in the Anwar trial, he should have recused himself from hearing the application.

Since those arrested were aligned to Anwar Ibrahim and were associated with the Reformasi Movement, which is a movement in support of Anwar Ibrahim, argued the defence, this can be viewed as a conflict of interest and the Judge should, therefore, not have heard the case.

The Judge could, in fact, be viewed as anti-Reformasi because of his involvement in the Anwar Ibrahim trial and, by hearing the case against the five ISA detainees and Reformasi supporters, this could mean they would not be getting a fair hearing.

The Kuala Lumpur Federal Court adjourned after hearing the arguments from both the defence and prosecution and will make its decision on Wednesday, 17 October 2001, whether the decision of the High Court could be considered defective due to the Judge’s alleged conflict of interest.

The Chief Justice, Tan Sri Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah, sat with four other Judges, Tan Sri Datuk Steve Shim Lip Kiong, Tan Sri Dato Wan Adnan Wan Ismail, Dato Hj Malek Hj Daud, and Dato Siti Norma Yaakob.

The defence was led by Counsel Haji Sulaiman Abdullah and supported by Sivarasa Rasiah, Christopher Leong, Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, and Moganambal Murugappan.

This case is seen as a landmark case for its outcome will determine the future of Malaysia’s Internal Security Act that currently gives the police wide powers of arrest and indefinite detention without trial plus detention before any crime is actually committed, even in the absence of evidence.