Pointing out that the Bar Council, NGOs and elected representatives had all raised valid criticism against the amendments, Surendran said Zahid’s claim that human rights defenders were “wolves in sheep’s clothing who protect criminals” was unjustified and unbecoming of a person holding the office of deputy prime minister.
“In criticising the amendments, we were defending the constitution, the rule of law and the right of all Malaysians to be protected from unfair procedures and arbitrary arrest or detention.
“To say that we thus defended criminals is false and absurd, and merely demonstrates the weakness of Zahid’s defence of Poca,” he said in a statement.
Earlier today, Zahid had denounced those whom he said defend human rights as being the biggest opponents to the Poca amendments passed in the Dewan Rakyat last week.
He said the amendments were only carried out after town hall engagements and brainstorming sessions involving intellectuals, lawmakers, civil societies and NGOs, adding that the use of Poca had reduced 47% of crime in the country.
However, Surendran, who is also a lawyer, said the amendments take away the right of the detainee to challenge any finding of guilt made by the inquiry officer against him.
“In fact, the detainee is deprived of the right to be even informed of the inquiry officer’s decision. Based on the inquiry officer’s report, the board is then authorised to make detention orders up to two years, without even hearing the detainee.
“Can Zahid explain how these amendments can be lawful, when the detainee’s constitutionally guaranteed right to be heard has been taken away?”
Surendran added that the amendments are in clear breach of Articles 5 and 8 of the Federal Constitution, and that attributing improper motives to legitimate critics would not make Poca any more lawful or constitutional.