RAJA PETRA's DETENTION ORDER MALA FIDE SAYS COUNSEL - malaysiakini

SHAH ALAM, Oct 22 – A lawyer representing Raja Petra Kamaruddin told the High Court here today that his client’s detention order under Section 8 of the Internal Security Act issued by the Internal Security Minister was mala fide.

Azhar Azizan Harun said there was an obvious inference that the detention was not prompted by concerns about national security but a desire to silence a vocal and influential critic of the government as well as the political parties and individuals in the government.

“The applicant has at times been critical of the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and the respondent (Internal Security Minister), among others. This has been undermining the political interests of Umno and Barisan Nasional (BN) as can be seen from the shift of voter support,” he said.

He also said Raja Petra had never been told of the reasons for his arrest or detention except for the document which he was asked to sign at the Jalan Travers police station on Sept 12, which merely states that he had insulted Islam and that he was a threat to national security.

“Under Section 8(1) of the ISA, the respondent has to be satisfied that the detention was necessary to prevent the detainee from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia.

“The respondent therefore must look at all facts and circumstances to form an opinion that the applicant was a threat to national security before he could be satisfied that the applicant’s detention was necessary to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia.

“The applicant also is innocent of any crime; he has been charged with various offences and the trials are still pending. As there is no act which is alleged to be done in the future which could prejudice the security of Malaysia, the Section 8 detention order is obviously an exercise of power which was mala fide in nature,” he said.

Malik Imtiaz Sarwar who also represented Raja Petra, said if one of the bases of the detention was because he had intentionally, willfully and recklessly published articles on Malaysia Today that insulted the Muslims, why had he not been charged with the offence of insulting Islam by the religious authorities for that matter.

He said there was no “fatwa” that the applicant had insulted Islam or had in any way acted contrary to the principles of Islam.

“The matter of whether the applicant had insulted Islam is a matter within the exclusive domain of the Selangor religious authorities. The respondent cannot usurp that function. Though the respondent does have authority over matters of security under the ISA, this authority does not empower the respondent to determine issues pertaining to matters of Islam.

“It would be necessary for the respondent to acquire confirmation from the state religious authorities or the state syariah courts that the action complained of is an insult to Islam or is otherwise in contravention to Islam before he can take steps under the ISA.

“On this ground alone, the detention ought be declared unlawful,” he said.

Raja Petra is applying for the writ of habeas corpus to secure his release from detention under the ISA on the ground that his detention was unlawful and unconstitutional. He named the minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, as the respondent.

His wife, Mable @ Marina Lee, and two daughters – Sarah, 19, and Suraya, 34, – and several supporters were seen in court.Meanwwhile, Senior Federal Counsel Abdul Wahab Mohamad submitted that the detention order made under Section 8 of the Act was valid and in accordance with the law.

“If the decision was made upon a proper evaluation in the facts and surrounding circumstances and after due deliberation -- that was all which could be required for the issue of an order based on subjective satisfaction in the present case – this is what the minister has done,” he said.

Another senior federal counsel, Dusuki Mokhtar, said although the applicant had yet to be convicted of the charges that he was facing, it did not hinder the power of the minister to issue the detention order, and the power of the minister and Attorney General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail should be well distinguished.

“So just as the attorney general has power to institute proceedings but not the power to order detention, the minister has power to order detention but not to institute proceedings. Just as it is not within the power of the attorney general to consider making an order of detention, it is also not within the power of the minister to consider the institution of criminal proceedings,” he said.

Judge Datuk Syed Ahmad Helmy Syed Ahmad fixed Nov 7 for decision on the habeas corpus application.– Bernama