Monday, April 7, 2014
Lest we Forget: Statutory Rape, Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik & Lim Guan Eng
DOCUMENT - MALAYSIA: THE TRIAL OF OPPOSITION PARLIAMENTARIAN LIM GUAN ENG: AN UPDATE
AI Index: ASA 28/03/97
Date: March 1997
Distr: SC/CO/GR
MALAYSIA
The trial of opposition parliamentarian
Lim Guan Eng:
an update
With the verdict on the trial of Malaysian parliamentarian Lim Guan Engdue
to be delivered shortly, Amnesty International reiterates its concern
that Lim Guan Eng could face up to six years in jail and be disqualified
from Parliament.
Amnesty
International considers that the charges against Lim Guan Eng were
politically motivated, designed to intimidate dissenting voices and to
limit debate on an issue of genuine public concern. Amnesty
International believes that if convicted, Lim Guan Eng would be a
prisoner of conscience imprisoned solely for the peaceful expression of
his political views.
Lim
Guan Eng, a member of parliament for Kota Melaka (Malacca) and Deputy
Secretary General of the opposition Democratic Action Party (DAP), was
charged in 1995 under the Sedition Act and the Printing Presses and
Publications Act . His trial opened in January 1996 and concluded on 28
February 1997 at the Malacca High Court. Judge Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah
is expected to deliver his judgement on 28 April 1997.
Members
of parliament who are jailed for a year, or who are fined more than
RM2,000 (approximately US$780), automatically forfeit their
parliamentary seats. In addition to Amnesty Internationals concern that
Lim Guan Eng could be imprisoned, the organisation is also concerned
that, if he is convicted, Lim Guan Engs constituents will be denied
their elected representative simply because he spoke out on their
behalf.
This
is not the first time that Lim Guan Eng has faced imprisonment for the
peaceful expression of his opinion. Along with his father, DAP leader
Lim Kit Siang, he was detained without charge or trial under the
Internal Security Act (ISA) from 1987 till 1989.
The charges
Malaysian
police arrested and charged Lim Guan Eng after he publicly criticized
the government's handling of allegations of statutory rape against the
former Chief Minister of Malacca, Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Tamby Chik in
1994. In January 1995 Lim Guan Eng stated that 'double standards' were
being applied in the statutory rape case. Attorney General Mohtar
Abdullah had decided not to prosecute Rahim Tamby Chik, while the
underaged alleged victim, a fifteen-year old Muslim schoolgirl, was
placed under 'protective custody'.
On
28 February 1995 Lim Guan Eng was accused under Section 4(1) (b) of the
Sedition Act of prompting 'disaffection with the administration of
justice in Malaysia'. If found guilty he faces up to three years in
jail, a RM5,000 (approximately US$1,960) fine or both. In addition, on
17 March 1995 Lim Guan Eng was charged under Section 8A (1) of the
Printing Presses and Publications Act for 'maliciously printing' a
pamphlet containing allegedly 'false information' specifically because
he had used the term 'imprisoned victim' in reference to the alleged
rape victim. This charge carries a jail term of three years, a fine not
exceeding RM20,000 (approximately US$7,894) or both.
The trial
Lim
Guan Eng's trial was lengthy in part because of legal deliberations
over the standard of proof required in this and other criminal cases.
His trial was suspended in March 1996 pending a general ruling,
delivered by the Federal Court in July 1996, that the standard of proof
required at the end of a prosecution's case, and before an accused is
required to make his/her defence, was that of "beyond reasonable doubt"
and not the previously upheld standard of "prima facie"- on the face of things - evidence.
However
following the Federal Court's ruling Judge Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah
ruled that the prosecution had in fact proved both charges against Lim
Guan Eng "beyond reasonable doubt" and that the defence had a case to
answer. Regarding Lim Guan Eng's allegedly seditious verbal statements
the judge ruled that the report of a single junior police officer,
unsupported by an audio recording, constituted sufficient evidence to
proceed. Regarding the charges of printing 'false information' the judge
ruled that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt evidence
suggesting that the phrase
'imprisoned
victim' was false - apparently ignoring assertions that the statutory
rape victim had been detained by police for ten days without parental
consent.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The statutory rape case
Lim
Guan Eng's statements in early 1995 reflected widespread public
disquiet over the handling of the statutory rape case, and the fact that
the victim and not the alleged perpetrator appeared to have been
punished. Before Lim made his statements local newspapers and women's
groups openly criticized Attorney General Mohtar Abdullah's public
disclosure, in apparent violation of the Evidence Act, of the victim's
sexual history when he announced in October 1994 that charges would not
be pursued against Rahim Tamby Chik due to 'insufficient evidence'[1].
Criticism
focused on the fact that the police appeared to have detained the girl
for ten days before gaining her father's permission to place her in
'protective custody' in a home for 'wayward' girls for a period of three
years. In November 1994 the daughter of Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad, Marina Mahathir, described the authorities' treatment of the
girl as appearing to be a 'mockery of justice' in comments published in
an article.
Unresolved
concerns over the Attorney Generals' handling of statutory rape case
were rekindled during Lim Guan Eng's trial when the victim confirmed
that she had indeed had a sexual relationship with Rahim Tamby Chik. It
remained unclear why, whilst in police custody, the girl lodged police
reports against other men with whom she admitted having a sexual
relationship, but did not lodge a report against Rahim Tamby Chik - who
was not charged or detained as is the usual practice in statutory rape
cases. The other men involved, who admitted guilt, were brought to court
and bound over for good behaviour.
Following
the statutory rape allegations and unrelated charges of corruption
Rahim Tamby Chik resigned all his official posts. In January 1996 the
Supreme Council of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the
dominant party in the ruling National Front coalition, decided to
reinstate him as UMNO Youth leader after Attorney General Mohtar dropped
charges against him involving corrupt land deals. However, during UMNO
national elections held in October 1996 party members voted Rahim Tamby
Chik out as Youth leader.
Dissent and the use of restrictive legislation
The
government continues to use an array of restrictive legislation,
including the Sedition Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act
and the Internal Security Act (which allows for indefinite detention
without charge or trial) for political purposes which far exceed the
primary justifications put forward by their colonial originators -
namely that these Acts served to preserve security and social stability
at times of national emergency.
Although
the UMNO-led ruling coalition maintains an overwhelming parliamentary
majority and remains politically secure Prime Minister Mahathir's
government asserts that Malaysias rapid economic growth and its racial
and religious harmony can only be safeguarded if the government
continues to uphold an authoritarian stance towards dissenting opinion.
Prime Minister Mahathir is also an advocate of so-called 'Asian values'
that stress respect for authority, and the rights of the community above
those of the individual.
Efforts
by opposition politicians to carry out their duty to publicly question
government actions, as well as attempts by Malaysian non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) to comment on 'sensitive' social issues, risk the
arbitrary exercise of Executive power - including prosecution and
threats of imprisonment.
The
sedition charges against Lim Guan Eng, apart from being an apparent
move to silence a leading critic, appear to be part of an established
government strategy of selectively using repressive laws in prominent
cases to engender a wider public reluctance to criticize the
authorities. A similar intimidatory stance was reflected in December
1996 when the government threatened to use the ISA against those seeking
to organise an NGO forum to discuss alleged abuses of police powers.
Threatened with detention without charge or trial, the organizers
suspended the forum indefinitely.
Members
of the government and ruling coalition have also publicly criticised
those regarded as dissenters after questioning their patriotism. In
December 1996 Prime Minister Mahathir accused some Malaysian NGOs of
acting in collaboration with foreigners to undermine the countrys
international reputation and described them as 'traitors' and
'leftists'. Similarly in November 1996 in a parliamentary speech a
senior UMNO parliamentarian accused Lim Guan Eng of being a 'traitor'
because he had allegedly referred his case to the Geneva-based
Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) thereby 'damaging Malaysias
international image'.
Within
this context Amnesty International is concerned that Lim Guan Eng will
once again be imprisoned and that he will lose his parliamentary seat.
0 orang berkata:
Post a Comment