Malaysian High Court Stands Up Against Torture

npearson — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 14:44:15 -0500

In a recent e-newsletter I received from FORUM-Asia I was very excited to see highlighted a "landmark case in Malaysia granting a [human rights activist who was a] former detainee RM 2.5 million (about US $ 0.74 million) for his detention and torture in 1998 under Malaysia’s highly controversial Internal Security Act (ISA).

Abdul Malek Hussein, who now heads polls watchdog Malaysians for Free Elections (Mafrel), was detained for 57 days under the draconian act for addressing a demonstration at the height of Malaysia’s Reformasi movement, which was sparked by the controversial sacking of then deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus ruled that Abdul Malek’s arrest and detention were made in bad faith under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution. He added that the nature of the interrogation was clearly for a political purpose, and was not based on genuine concern for national security."

For the full artlcle see: http://www.forum-asia.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1160&Itemid=131

As one can see, the wheels of justice turn slowly. Abdul Malek Hussein was detainined in 1998. He was drawing close to a decade long struggle. For too many, this justice has never arrived. But this case provides hope because this is a landmark not only for Malaysia but for all those seeking justice. The point is not the monetary reparations provided, the real point is the acknowledgment that the detention, ill-treatment and torture were wrong. It sends a tremendous signal to the government that the high court of justice in Malaysia stands against this behavior and is requiring the government to pay for this wrongful behavior. We work for the day when courts in every country around the world take this stand against torture.

The Center for Justice and Accountability in the United States has also worked tirelessly to bring torturers to justice. I hope these rulings inspire others to act against impunity.

Reparations

bharris — Fri, 25 May 2007 20:08:13 -0500

Reparations

by Sandra Coliver and Moira Feeney, (CJA)

Download full notebook below.

In this notebook we learn how civil laws can be used to hold torturers and other human rights abusers accountable, and to gain reparations for survivors. The Center for Justice and Accountability (CJA) represents survivors using the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA, dating back to 1789) and the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991, which gives both U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike the right to sue human rights abusers who live in or visit the U.S. CJA has effectively used these acts to help end the possibility of abusers using the U.S. as a safe haven, to assist survivors in gaining reparations, and to break the silence that has enabled abusers to live in impunity. This notebook demonstrates how countries with laws similar to the ATCA can put them to work to end such impunity. Activists around the world can consider ways to use their own civil laws, and to target abusers who travel to the U.S. by building collaborations among diverse groups that include activists in the U.S and abroad, refugees, lawyers, and people skilled in using the media

When speaking about his involvement as one of the plaintiffs in Romagoza, Gonzalez, & Mauricio v. Garcia & Vides Casanova, a case against two high ranking Salvadoran generals for torture committed in 1979-1983, Carlos Mauricio said, "I am participating in this case in order to help send a message to military leaders around the world that, if they commit atrocities, they will not be able to visit or live in the U.S. with impunity. They will always have to fear that someone someday may recognize them and bring them to justice. I am involved in this case to try to deter people, especially military people in El Salvador and elsewhere, from committing atrocities in the future. Let me tell you, many military officers in Salvador dream of living in the United States after they retire. My case and other cases are sending a powerful message to them. Resolutions passed by the U.N. General Assembly and reports by human rights organizations are effective in publicizing what happened, but they do not send a strong message to military leaders, who think they are above the law. They may be above the law in their home countries, but these lawsuits tell them that they are NOT above the law in this country."

Since 1980, 18 non-U.S.-born human rights abusers who moved to or were visiting the United States have been successfully sued by their victims in civil proceedings. The victims have been able to use two U.S. laws--one enacted in 1789 as part of the very first Judiciary Act, the other enacted in 1991--that enable victims of certain egregious human rights violations, wherever committed, to bring civil lawsuits in U.S. federal court against those responsible for the violations, so long as they are physically present in the United States.

*Note: You need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open the files marked with an asterisk (*). You can download a free version of this program from www.adobe.com.