Man Faces Gallows Open Letter To UN

A complaint on the [unclear: violaiou 'hun] justice' by the Malaysian regime had been submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

A complaint on the violation of 'human Justice' by the Malaysian regime had been submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Committee. This letter was signed by a group in Malaysia' who described themselves as 'people who are deeply concerned with the Human Rights problem in Malaysia'.

The letter highlighted the plight of one Mr Lee Wen Sang who was sentenced to death on 30 March 77 by a High Court Judge Justice [unclear: Hashim Sani].

Lee, a mason, was alleged to have in his possession a pistol, hand grenade and 64 rounds of ammunition. What raised the eyebrows of many was that Lee had previously being charged and sentenced to seven years Jail with six strokes for the same offence, but the sentence and the trial was declared null and void by the courth when Lee appealed.

The appeal court then ordered a fresh trial and the prosecution repeatedly postponed the case. It was not until the Malaysian authorities promulgated new regulations which give a helping hand to the prosecution of such firearm cases that Lee was hauled back to court, charged under new law and sentenced to death.

The letter to the UN described the prosecution tactics as 'a plot to wait for the amendment to the ISA to be passed so that they can use it against the accused'.

With the amendments of the laws and constitution in Malaysia, it is now the responsibility of the accused person to prove his innocence, in some 'security cases'. Cases involving 'illegal possession of firearms and ammunition' fall under such category to be charged under Section 57 of the internal Security Act. This shifting of responsibility from the prosecution of the accused is a total violation of the legal system upon which the Malaysian legislation is based. The cardinal principle that an accused 'is innocent till proven guilty' — a safeguard for the accused in the legal system, is totally ignored and trampled upon in the new Malaysian laws.

Under such system, an accused person has to outwit the enormous machinery of the prosecution before he can hope to escape the hangman's noose for the Judge is compelled by law to impose the maximum sentence — death in the case of illegal possession of firearms. The Malaysian Bar Council said that it is almost impossible for an accused person to prove his innocence.

For the prosecution, the Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975 makes the task of prosecuting simple. Prosecution witnesses will be protected from queries as to his name, address, age, occupation or race and iss allowed to wear a mask. In certain cases, defence cross-examination of such witnesses had to be submitted to the court and at the discretion of the prosecution to answer it or not. Further the position of the prosecution witness at the time of the incident cannot be revealed. Further, hearsay evidence of the prosectuion is also admissible in the courts and be used against the accused.

Given such odds, it is no wonder that Lee becomes one of the almost twenty victims of such repressive law.

In Lee's case, the point to note beign that the alleged offence and the original court trial and sentence took place before the promulgation of the new regulations. It is certainly a 'mockery in the history of the legal circle' as the letter pointed out, to nulify previous trial and trial verdict, and proceed to Judge and sentence a person under new regulations.

This blatant flouting of the legal principles unfortunately do not cease here. An equally preposterous situation emerged in a recent case involving a schoolboy charged for 'unlawful possession of a pistol and ammunition'.

The schoolboy, a Form One pupil of the Heng Ee School was arrested on 14th February this year in a coffee shop in Pragin Road, Penang. At the time of his arrest, he was 13 years 11 months Under Section 16 of the Juvenille Courts Acts 1947, death sentence cannot be pronounced on or recorded against a child defined under the law as a person under the age of 14. Notwithstanding this law the boy is charged under the ISA which carries mandatory death sentence if convicted.

In arguing against the case, the defence lawyer said that death sentence in fact, was never pronounced on a child in any civilised country in the world. He added that it was unfortunate that his client, against all reasons and humanity, was charged under the ISA. The Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975 stales that death sentence shall be passed even if the accused is a juvenile.

In pleading for more compassionate treatment for the boy, the counsel argued that the court could show compassion "if not anything else, on humanitarian grounds — to allow my client to be released on bail pending his trial.. "He further stressed that his client has become the first child to be put in prison.

To support his plea, the boy's father in an affidavit said that his son's detention would "invetitably be a traumatic experience for him and my wife and I are very concerned about his welfare and safety". The Judge turned down the application.

From the above cases, it thus implies that more heads will roll since there are 234 more firearm cases to be sentenced. Inspite of repeated appeal and warning against the oppressive laws by the Malaysian Bar Council, the law makers are taking no heed of the complaints. It is important to note that the notorious Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975 was imposed upon the people without it being debated upon or passed in parliament.