The Human Rights Day celebration tomorrow is expected to determine the ‘colour’ of freedom of Malaysians. Human Rights Commission of Malaysia chairman Tan Sri Razali Ismail tells Audrey Vijaindran about pertinent issues.
Question: What is the implicit message behind this Dec 8 celebration?
Answer: It is a historic moment in conjunction with the celebration of Human Rights Day, and made prouder with the fact that the prime minister (Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad) will inaugurate it for the first time. Among highlights of the programme is a series of discussions that addresses human rights issues.
This event is not a government initiative, but is based on the aspirations of Malaysians, who wish to increase the status of human rights each day. It should be noted that organising such events is not intended to trigger “drama”, but to create an opportunity to journey together to achieve success, covering all aspects.
It is a day to reflect on how we interpret human rights in this country.
Q: Is there any expectation that the prime minister will make a special announcement on human rights?
A: No, we have not asked him to make such an announcement.
The prime minister showed the best example when he opened up his residence in Seri Perdana for public visits. How many previous prime ministers have done that?
In addition, through institutional reforms, we can see that things that deeply concern the people and legal practitioners no longer happen in Malaysia.
For example, whenever the authorities investigate and file cases for the attorney-general’s attention, they no longer “bury” facts, and there is now no charge done without merit.
Moving forward, our country can look at the world with a prouder image, although we have to acknowledge that over the years, we have had a lot of success. Only a handful of aspects require a breath of fresh air, which we are witnessing now.
Q: How will this celebration change the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia’s (Suhakam) image?
A: During the previous government’s administration, our “voice” was often excluded and we were used as showpieces during official visits, as if to portray that Malaysia also has a body to champion human rights issues.
In reality, behind the scenes, we were kicked around like a ball during disputes or when trying to pioneer efforts to fight for human rights issues. Now, Suhakam is at the forefront and often used as a reference, even during meetings with ministers.
In the past, it took three years to see the deputy prime minister and even then, it was a dead end. Now, almost all cabinet members are friendly and open to meeting us to discuss issues related to human rights.
The highest reward and accolade should be given to Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Dr Mujahid Yusuf Rawa, as he is actively looking at human rights struggles despite taking on a religious portfolio.
Q: What’s your stance after realising that the government might not sign the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)?
A: At a meeting with community groups, many Malaysians, especially young people, are demanding human rights struggles be addressed through the signing of ICERD and five other international conventions, which we have not signed yet.
We should not continue to set aside groups that demand the rights of equality in Malaysia, including groups that may appear to be different, but live in harmony with us.
It is time we embrace our differences and uniqueness. Similarly, with these five other conventions that demand for freedom of expression towards the direction of the modernisation of our society.
We cannot live in days of old, as times have changed. If we do not change, then Malaysia will be left behind. Today, the average person is bold to speak up on various issues. We should allow them to do so.
Q: What are the expectations of the six unsigned conventions in Malaysia?
A: If possible, I want to have them signed before 2020, instead of assuming it will lead to implementation or application to domestic law.
Our minds need to change by not assuming a liberal person is evil or bad. Having a liberal view and fighting against conservative ideas does not mean that one is against a particular religion.
It must be acknowledged that change is human nature. No person or leader is crazy enough to intend to change the contents of the Federal Constitution or dispute the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Rumours that there is a movement to change the status of Islam is nonsensical because however liberal a person is, that is never the intent.
Q: But there are still countries, including Singapore and Brunei, that have not signed the International Civil and Political Rights Convention (ICCPR)?
A: Singapore? I do not want to live in a one-ruling-party country. Take for example the United States. Since Donald Trump became president, the Republicans are no longer the best example to follow.
We are aware of some constraints faced by the government, including the strata of society comprising races, custom and religion, thus making any dispute in the country seem sensitive to a handful of people.
Q: Do evidence or facts support that young people are demanding a human rights convention be signed in Malaysia?
A: I am not saying all (demand a human rights convention to be signed), but those we met the other day expressly support Ma-laysia signing the six conventions on human rights. I acknowledge that we have yet to get the views or hear the voices of those in rural areas about these six conventions.
The issue of human rights should not be capitalised for political gain as often done by opposition parties. Do not politicise everything, but look at issues from the point of its importance to society and benefits to the nation.
Q: What is your view on the abolition of mandatory death sentence, comprising 32 criminal offences?
A: Every human being has the right to survive, whatever the person has done. The concept of “a life for a life” is no longer relevant in the context of today’s society. Everyone should have a second chance, even if the offence committed was murder.
We need to educate and explain to the person that the offence is not a norm in society or any religious practice. Our own God never gives up or closes the door of repentance to a killer, therefore why should we determine their fate?
Through the abolition of this mandatory death sentence, one is able to draw lessons and reevaluate his actions. Sentencing a person to death could also be a result of wrongful judgment.
Q: What do you hope to achieve in relation to human rights and the role of Suhakam?
A: We do not want to be a commission without strength or just a decoration piece for the image of the country. It is my hope that Suhakam be certified as an impetus of power that champions human rights.
The benchmark for this achievement is via the recognition of Malaysians that Suhakam exists and is always in the forefront of defending them whenever human rights defences are bombarded with challenges or oppression.
Suhakam is not like a policeman, we have no such power, but rather a fighter who demands justice in human rights in the interests of the world.