KUALA LUMPUR: The Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 or SOSMA introduced by the previous government six years ago is a draconian legislation that robbed away the judicial powers of the Court.
In voicing his support for the Act to be repealed, prominent lawyer Tan Sri Shafee Abdullah also described SOSMA as “rarest legislation” with no safeguards against police abuses and brutality.
“The Act has given the police a Carte Blanche (unrestricted authority) to indulge in corrupt practices on a large scale.
“It is also one of the rarest legislation that attempts to rob away judicial power from the courts by not allowing bails to accused persons unless consented to by the prosecution.
“Since when the prosecution controls the judiciary (judicial system)?,” he said in a statement today.
He was responding to the announcement by Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad that SOSMA would be repealed as the Act allowed the government to arrest anyone without going to court.
Shafee claimed that he and his team were the only lawyers, who had challenged the constitutionality of SOSMA in many respects including the very premise of the existence of Act.
“Unfortunately, the Court of Appeal is taking too long to hear the matter to move the Apex Court to decide on the matter.
“Ironically, when we challenged SOSMA that way, none of the practising lawyers in the current Government shared our view.
“I am glad the Prime Minister, a non lawyer sees the injustice brought about by this Act,” he said adding that even the Attorney General’s Chambers did not see blunder of the uncivilised legislation.
The announcement by Dr Mahathir drew mixed responses from politicians and experts, who were in favour and against the proposed abolishment of the Act.
Umno president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi feared the move would lead to increase in racial and religious provocations since the proposed repeal of the Act would provide avenue for irresponsible quarters to incite and create tension.
The former deputy prime minister shuddered the possible outcome from the abolishment of the act and reckoned that people would no longer feel safe in such a situation.