Was Salleh Mohd Nor axed as Suhakam  commissioner because the Sarawak state government strongly objected to the Suhakam inquiry into Sarawak Native Customary Rights (NCR) land controversy which he headed and the draft report of the inquiry which is being drastically watered down causing delay in its release?  


Media Statement
by Lim Kit Siang

(Petaling Jaya,  Wednesday)Suhakam Commissioner Prof Hamdan Adnan told Malaysiakini yesterday that the Suhakam 2001 annual report would be made public in June after it has been submitted  to the June meeting of Parliament by the Foreign Ministry.

Hamdan has skirted the issue as to why Suhakam had contravened its statutory duty to submit its 2001 annual report to Parliament at the March/April meeting as required by Section 21(1) of the Human Rights of Commission 1999 Act, which specifically states:

“21. (1) The Commission shall not later than the first meeting of Parliament of the following year, submit an annual report to Parliament of all its activities during the year to which the report relates.”

Although Suhakam falls under the purview of the Foreign Ministry, this is for the purpose of allocation of Ministerial duties and does not shift the burden of complying with the statutory duty to  protect and promote human rights, including to submit its annual report to Parliament at the first meeting of the year, to the Foreign Ministry.

Can Suhakam disclaim responsibility of its statutory duty under Section 21(1) of its parent Act if the Foreign Ministry for some reason decides to sit on the Suhakam annual report and refuses to forward it to Parliament – as has happened in this case?

Hamdan said the Suhakam annual report 2001 is now with the Foreign Ministry.  Why should this be so.  

When Parliament debated and passed the Human Rights Commission Act in July 1999, and I took an active part in the proceedings, neither the government nor the  Minister “charged with the responsibility for human rights” (s.2  - it is significant that the Act does not refer to the Minister as  “charged with the responsibility for Suhakam”) was empowered to interfere with any aspect of Suhakam duty or function.

I would contend that the Foreign Minister has no statutory power,  right or locus standi  to submit the Suhakam report to Parliament, and that the Foreign Ministry should return the report to Suhakam for it to make the proper submission to Parliament as intended by Section 21(1) of the Suhakam Act.

The  Suhakam Commissioners should explain why  they so easily conceded their statutory power and duty  to  the Foreign Ministry, allowing it to  improperly and unlawfully interfere with the Suhakam’s statutory duty to submit its annual report to the first Parliamentary meeting of the year.

How could Suhakam command respect and confidence that it would without fear or favour protect and promote human rights in the country when it could not even defend and safeguard its statutory powers and duties from Executive interference and encroachment?

Hamdan, who is the chairman of the Suhakam Complaints and Inquiries Working Group, said Suhakam will decide on  Monday if it wants to hold an inquiry into the six reformasi  ISA detainees, Ezam Mohd Nor, Saari Sungib, Dr Badrulamin Bahron, Tian Chua, Lokman Noor Adam and Hishamuddin Rais,  who recently staged a 11-day hunger strike on the anniversary of their detention under the Internal Security Act.

This is a most shocking statement, as Suhakam had announced its decision last month to conduct an inquiry into the ISA detention of the reformasi six – which was in fact one of the factors leading to the calling-off of their hunger strike.

The second-term Suhakam must adhere to the earlier Suhakam decision to conduct an inquiry into the ISA detention of the reformasi six unless it could be rescinded by two-thirds of the Suhakam Commissioners in their meeting on Monday.

This is clearly spelt out in Section 7 (4) of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 which provides that members of the Commission “shall use their best endeavours to arrive at all decisions of the meeting by consensus failing which the decision by a two-thirds majority of the members present shall be required”. 

As the new Chairman of the Complaints and Inquiries Working Group, Hamdan should have finalized the details and mechanics for the public inquiry into the ISA detention of the reformasi six, instead of talking about whether an inquiry is to be held and waiting to see whether the earlier Suhakam decision for such an inquiry would be rescinded by two-thirds of Suhakam Commissioners on Monday.

In this connection, the question must be asked whether it is true that the reason why Datuk  Dr. Salleh Mohd Nor  was axed as Suhakam  commissioner and not reappointed although he was one of the three most industrious, conscientious and committed Suhakam Commissioners in the past two years, was  because the Sarawak state government strongly objected to the Suhakam inquiry into Sarawak Native Customary Rights (NCR) land controversy which he headed and the draft report of the inquiry which is being drastically watered down causing delay in its release.

In December last year, the then Deputy Chairman of the Suhakam Complaints and Inquiries Working Group, Tan Sri Anuar Zainal Abidin had announced in Kuching that a comprehensive report on a Suhakam fact-finding mission following memoranda of complaints by Sarawak natives affected by the Bakun dam project and native customary rights land (NCR) conflicts was expected to be ready in February this year after hearing and receiving  representation from the natives and the government authorities.

He said that the draft report would also be forwarded to the Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud once it was completed.

Among the complaints lodged with Suhakam and were the subject of investigations  by the Suhakam fact finding mission headed by Salleh Mohd Nor were  the resettlement of nearly 1,000 people to Sungai Asap due to the Bakun dam project; the problems faced by Penans relating to logging companies encroaching into their NCR land resulting in pollution of water supply and loss of food sources and hunting grounds left uncompensated;  the problems of the Ibans in Ulu Niah in their conflicts with oil palm companies, etc.

Hamdan should explain the status of the Salleh report of the Suhakam inquiry, why it has not been made public and to what extent the original Salleh report is being watered down – issues  which will raise new questions about  the independence and credibility of the second-term Suhakam.

(15/5/2002)


*Lim Kit Siang - DAP National Chairman