The acts of terror are taking a new dimension. The recent spate of terrorist attacks in Paris, Istanbul, Dhaka, Orlando and Nice has exposed one worrying trend: the enemy is from within the borders.
The motivation aside, most of these atrocities had been perpetrated or committed by citizens in their own countries — be it French, Bangladeshis or Americans.
In short, the enemy is from within. These radicals are indeed home-grown, though they might have links with some regional or international terror groups.
You may call them self-radicalised but these young people willing to die for their causes are looking inwards to recruit new members and inflict huge damage at home.
The world is no safer place (in fact it is becoming even riskier) despite the US declaring the war on terror following the 9/11 attacks on US soil in 2001.
One reason is the emergence of new organisations such as the Islamic State (IS), the group allegedly behind some of the recent terror attacks, directly or otherwise.
Fifteen years since 9/11, the world is on even greater security alert, with regional instability, economic disenchantment, the growing emergence of the deprived and the marginalised proving to be a fertile breeding ground for radical groups.
Sadly, Islam has been used as a political tool by these groups to justify their ends.
The senseless killing of innocent bystanders in the name of Islam has been condemned and must be condemned by peace-loving Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
How do countries like Malaysia, a modern and progressive Muslim nation, respond to this disturbing development?
The government has turned to Parliament to provide some answers. The new National Security Council (NSC) Act 2015, which comes into force tomorrow, could provide more bite to the authorities in their war on terror.
Detractors were quick to slam the NSC Bill, which has since been passed by Parliament, as too draconian.
The NSC Bill 2015 was presented in Parliament on Dec 1, 2015. It was passed by the Lower House two days later and the Upper House on Dec 22, 2015.
On June 7, Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali announced that the Royal Assent was obtained on February under Article 66 (4A) of the Federal Constitution, which says that even if the king does not give assent at the end of 30 days, he is deemed to have done so.
The UN Human Rights Office for South East Asia (OHCHR), joining in the fray, said it was concerned by the coming into force in Malaysia of the law, which it says “gives the prime minister sweeping security powers” and could restrict civil liberties.
Through the Act, it said, the prime minister would have the power to declare, upon the advice of the NSC, a “security area”, defined as being a location “seriously disturbed or threatened by any person, matter or thing which causes or is likely to cause serious harm to the people of Malaysia, or serious harm to the territories, economy, national key infrastructure of Malaysia or any other interest of Malaysia”.
“These provisions run counter to the requirement to investigate wrongdoing and hold institutions and their personnel accountable in the case of human rights violations,” said Laurent Meillan, OHCHR’s acting regional representative in Bangkok. “We are gravely concerned that the immunity provisions in the Act may encourage human rights violations.”
Meillan also expressed concern that the Act could be used to impose unjust restrictions on freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of assembly.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has brushed aside these and other criticisms as the work of “fear-mongers” who deliberately distort the law for political reasons.
He said Malaysia and Malaysians were not immune to the threats of terror, which, he said, were “real and growing”.
“The government will never apologise for placing the safety and security of Malaysians first. These (security) laws are necessary and other countries have since followed our lead.”
Under the NSC Act, the prime minister can declare a region as a security area for six months at a time and allow an extension for up to another six months or indefinitely.
But the Act does not define what is “national security”. There is also no mention of how wide this “security area” can be.
Moreover, the Act grants immunity to members of security forces and personnel of other government entities for their acts in any “security area”.
Under the Act, the NSC can deploy security forces or any government entities into the area and the director of operations may order the exclusion/evacuation/resettlement/curfew to a citizen, and failure to obey may result in a fine not exceeding RM5,000 or a jail term not exceeding three years, or both.
Without a warrant, security forces can stop and search any individual, vehicle, vessel or aircraft in the security area if they are suspected of an offence; and enter and search any premises or place if they suspect that any evidence of the commission of an offence is likely to be found on the premises, and may seize any article so found.
The security forces also have powers to take possession of any land, building or movable property such as vehicles in the security area.
NSC comprises eight members — the prime minister as chairman, deputy prime minister as deputy chairman, the defence, home and communications and multimedia ministers, chief secretary to the government, chief of defence forces and inspector-general of police.
The council has been in existence since 1971. The new Act places the NSC on a statutory basis for the first time.
A veteran newsman,A. Jalil Hamid believes that a good journalist should be curious and sceptical at the same time