The New Year Raid: Letters to the Inspector General of Police

1. Persatuan Kebangsaan Hak Asasi Manusia
(National Human Rights Society)
10th Floor, Wisma Harwant, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman, 50100 Kuala Lumpur

(Tel / Fax) 60-3-2693 8828

www.hakam.org | hakam@hakam.org

Tan Sri Mohd Bakri Omar

Inspector General of Police
Ibu Pejabat Polis DiRaja Malaysia
Bukit Aman

50560 Kuala Lumpur

01 January 2006

(Via Mail and Fax)

Dear Sir,

RE : Arrests of 380 persons by Brickfields Police Station on 01 January 2006

It is with grave concern that we write with reference to the mass police raid conducted by the Brickfields Police Station on 01 January 2006 at (1) an entertainment venue, i.e. Paul’s Place off Old Klang Road and (2) a roadside eatery situated along the street where Paul’s Place is situated.

Unprofessional and evasive police conduct

Upon speaking to a detainee at the Brickfields Police Station, I called the Brickfields police station twice (2) only to have the phone put down on me.

Regarding the first call, I had asked for the Investigating Officer (IO). My phonecall was transferred to an officer who refused to say anything regarding the reasons for the arrests or to state his name, afterwhich he put the phone down.

Regarding the second call, I was once again asked for the IO and was transferred to the Bilik Gerakan instead who claimed they knew nothing about the raid. They said they would transfer my call to the Criminal Division. My phone call was cut off instead.

I am most concern that a major police station of Kuala Lumpur treats enquiries from the public in this offensive manner, and officers in this said station does not comprehend what is an Investigating Officer is, and feigns ignorance regarding a major raid it has conducted when it is visually evident there were 380 persons sitting inside their compound.

Reasons for arrests and unrelated police investigation procedures

The details that we received, informed by the police to persons detained and journalists, regarding the reasons of arrests are varied and arbitrary. They are as follows :-

i) That they were in a gathering of more than 5 persons, thus they were in an alleged ‘illegal’ gathering ;

ii) That they were in an alleged ‘Black Metal’ music concert;

iii) That they were allegedly dressed indecently ;

iv) That the place allegedly had no permit to allow for entertainment ;

v) That they were allegedly drinking.

We urge clarity on the above points, and ask that your office gives consideration to the following questions :-

a) Have there been new laws passed recently that disallow 5 or more persons to eat and drink at a foodstall ; or to be at a private music gig ? Is it standard operating procedure for those arrested for alleged illegal gathering to undergo urine tests ?

b) Which laws of the Federation criminalise particular genre of music ? Is it now standard operating procedure to subject those arrested at music concerts to urine tests ?

c) Which laws of the Federation criminalise wearing black t-shirts, black pants/shorts and tank-tops ? Is it standard operating procedure to test those who are found wearing these allegedly indecent articles of clothing to urine tests ?

d) If the venue allegedly lacked an entertainment license, why did the police arrest all patrons found in the venue and those who were having food and drinks at the street stall ? Is it now standard operating procedure to conduct urine tests on those found in these places ?

e) Under which section of what law disallows drinking of alcohol, standing or sitting in an enclosed static venue, and is it now police practice to arrest those allegedly found to be drinking and subject them to urine tests ?

Classification as arbitrary detention

It is disconcerting to find that ultimately the police raid at Paul’s Place and the street eatery is another incident of « Arrest First, Question Later ».

Further, one lawyer was informed that she was arrested to (i) provide a Special Branch with a statement. After she refused, she was informed that she was arrested to (ii) facilitate a 112 (witness) statement. This is a clear indication of abuse of police procedures and powers.

There are laws in place that forbid arrest and detention of a person without just cause and the arrests of the new year falls more unfortunately under the classification of arbitrary detention.

We look forward to a comprehensive explanation from your office, and we urge an expeditious investigation into the conduct of ALL officers involved in conducting the police raid, in particular that of the Officer-In-Charge of Police District (Brickfields).

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Elizabeth Wong

Secretary-General

National Human Rights Society

cc.
– National Human Rights Commission

– United Nations Commission on Human Rights Working Group on Arbitrary Detention

– Suara Rakyat Malaysia

======================

SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA
Address: 383, 1st Floor, Jalan 5/59, 46000 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Telephone: +6 03 7784 3525
Fax: +6 03 7784 3526
Email: suaram@suaram.org
Web: www.suaram.org

1hb. Januari 2006

Kepada,

1) Tan Sri Mohd Bakri Bin Hj. Omar
Ketua Polis Negara,
Ibupejabat Polis DiRaja Malaysia (PDRM)
Bukit Aman 50560 Kuala Lumpur

2) Tuan ACP Mohd Dzuraidi,
Ketua Polis Daerah Brickfields,
Kuala Lumpur

Tan Sri IGP dan Tuan KPD,

PENCABULAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA DAN SALAHGUNA KUASA POLIS
PENAHANAN BERAMAI-RAMAI TAHUN BARU DI PAUL’S PLACE DAN KAWASAN SEKITAR

Pihak kami ingin mengutarakan satu operasi polis yang dijalankan pada malam tahun baru ‚Äì malam Ahad sekitar jam 11 malam di Paul’s Place dan kawasan berdekatan dengannya dimana lebihkurang 380 orang telah ditahan polis.

Kami telah mendapat pelbagai aduan daripada mangsa dan amat dukacita dengan tindakan polis dimana keadaan dan cara penahanan ini dibuat mengambarkan bahawa operasi ini telahpun dirancang sebelum (planned and calculated). Kesemua mereka yang ditahan telah dibawa ke Balai polis Brickfields.

Kami ingin mengutarakan beberapa isu yang pada pendapat kami telah mencabul hak asasi manusia dan merupakan salahguna kuasa polis.

1. Polis membuat penahanan secara sewenang-wenangnya tanpa alasan yang kukuh. Sebab penahanan tidak jelas dimana diberitahu antaranya bahawa ia adalah perhimpunan haram, tiada permit hiburan dan berpakaian tidak senonoh. Apabila pihak Timbalan KPD ditanya oleh Peguam, beliau tidak dapat memberikan sebab penahanan. Ini dengan sendiri melanggar prosedur kerana setiap oang yang ditahan perlu diberitahu alasan mengapa mereka ditahan. Kebanyakan mereka yang ditahan pula memberitahu bahawa mereka tidak diberitahu mengapa mereka ditahan semasa penahanan dibuat.

2. Jika sebab-sebab diatas adalah sebab penahanan polis, pihak kami tidak faham mengapa kesemua mereka yang ditahan harus menjalani ujian air kencing untuk mengenalpasti samada mereka telah mengambil dadah. Polis harus mempunyai sebab yang munasabah untuk membuat sebarang tangkapan dan dalam isu ini nampaknya polis mengambil polisi ‘ tangkap dulu, siasat kemudian’. Maka tindakan mengambil ujian air kencing nampaknya satu tindakan memancing tanpa mempunyai sebab kukuh. Tindakan ini mencabul hak kebebasan rakyat dalam satu sistem demokratik.

3. Kami juga difahamkan bahawa ramai orang yang berada di kawasan sekitar turut ditahan tanpa sebab yang tidak jelas. Ini dengan jelas mengatakan bahawa walaupun mereka tidak terlibat mengambil bahagian dalam ” perhimpunan haram” tetapi mereka turut ditahan polis. Kami diberitahu bahawa separuh daripada mereka yang ditahan diluar premis.

4. Kami juga diberitahu bahawa antara alasan penahanan adalah baju atau pakaian yang dipakai oleh mangsa tahanan kerana dikatakan tidak senonoh. Setiap seorang individu mempunyai hak untuk memakai sebarang pakaian kecuali pakaian tersebut mencabul hak orang lain, orang ramai atau melanggar sebarang undang-undang. Pihak polis tidak boleh sewenang-wenang menahan orang awam berdasarkan lobi pihak-pihak tertentu yang tidak suka dengan pakaian yang dipakai oleh individu lain.

5. Ada juga segelintir yang ditahan diberitahu bahawa mereka ditahan kerana sebagai saksi. Ini dengan jelas adalah penahanan tidak sah kerana mengapa saksi ditahan polis.

6. Kami juga difahamkan bahawa salah seorang yang ditahan kemudian telah dibawa untuk dibuat liputan temuramah untuk pihak TV3 walaupun pada masa tersebut beliau masih ditahan. Tindakan ini amat serius kerana sebelum pun siasatan dijalankan, pihak polis telah mengambil langkah memberi laluan kepada media tertentu untuk mendapat access kepada orang tahanan. Seorang tahanan yang dibawa pada masa tahanan untuk memberi temuramah TV merupakan satu tindakan yang melanggar prosedur dan adalah salahguna kuasa polis.

Kami berharap satu siasatan dibuat kerana kami berpendapat wujud salahguna kuasa polis dan pencabulan hak asasi manusia. Kami kecewa kerana kita melangkah ke tahun baru 2006 dengan imej polis terus tercemar jika isu-isu ini tidak ditangani.

Sekian Terima Kasih dengan harapan tindakan dan siasatan dikendalikan oleh pihak yang berkecuali.

Yang Benar,

S.Arutchelvan
Penyelaras

Sk – Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia (SUHAKAM)