MAY 23 — The National Human Rights Society (Hakam) is an important organisation in our country’s history. It was the first human rights society in Malaysia to be registered under the Societies Act 1966, with a purpose to promote and defend human rights in Malaysia. Its formation was declared on 10 December 1988, on the day that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights celebrated its 40th anniversary.

What made Hakam special is the people behind its formation. The establishment of Hakam was the result of the hardwork of a group of civil society organisations, together with none other than the first Prime Minister of our country, Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj. The Tunku was Hakam’s first pro-tem chairman.

The Tunku was joined by other luminaries including Tun Hussein Onn, Raja Aziz Addruse, Dr Tan Chee Khoon and Tan Sri Ahmad Nordin. In fact, Tun Hussein Onn was Hakam’s second pro-tem chairman, after the Tunku. And subsequent Presidents include respected names such as Cecil Rajendra, Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar and now Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan.

So when Hakam says something, we should pay attention. I was particularly attracted to Hakam’s statement on 18 April 2016.

In that statement, Hakam called for urgent institutional reforms. They stated that they are “gravely concerned with the seemingly increasing disregard for the fundamentals of democracy by the Federal Government and key institutions of the nation.”

They argued that the situation is critical due to the increasingly strident and combative tone that the Government and institutions have adopted in dealing with criticisms.

In particular, Hakam said that they are worried about the state of our race and religious relations, the administration of justice, the freeness and fairness of elections, and the spread of corruption.

As solutions they proposed for the separation of the role of the Public Prosecutor from that of the Attorney General, reforming of the electoral processes, repeal of suppressive laws, and the improvement or creation of important institutions such as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Malaysian Judicial Appointments Commission, the office of the Inspector General of Police (IGP), and the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).

I share Hakam’s concerns about the situation in our country. Our current trajectory is wrong and we certainly must urgently fix the situation.

I am really glad that in their statement, Hakam included the call for the constitutional reform to separate the role of the Public Prosecutor from that of the Attorney General. This has been our call too and we need more civil society organisations to voice the same demand to make this happen. It is great to see that Hakam has officially made public their support for this agenda.

The Attorney General cannot continue to be Public Prosecutor at the same time. Instead, I believe the Attorney General should play the only the role of chief legal adviser to the government. Prosecutorial decisions should be left to another office so that decisions can be made without any political considerations. This reform is the only way to return trust to the this important institution.

In fact, it is not enough for this to remain just a civil society agenda. Since we are heading towards the 14th General Election in two years’ time, I urge politicians to consider making this important reform as a manifesto commitment.

However I disagree with Hakam’s call for MACC to be given prosecutorial power. While I share their desire to see our anti-corruption body be elevated to a higher position and protected by the Federal Constitution, I do not think the MACC needs to have its own prosecution power.

Giving the MACC prosecution power will create a new conflict of interest. The MACC will feel greater pressure to prosecute because they themselves conducted the investigation. This will be unfair to the accused. That is why it is better to separate the roles of investigator and prosecutor.

Instead the problem can be resolved by separating the role of Public Prosecutor from that of Attorney General. It is the office of the Attorney General that needs to be reformed. There is no need to give prosecutorial powers to the MACC whose role is to investigate.

I also support Hakam’s call to create the IPCMC. In this instance, Hakam has rightfully reminded us that another institution that must be looked at is the office of the Inspector General of Police (IGP) as well as the police force as a whole. Our national reform will not be complete if the powers of the police, especially the IGP, is not checked.

In 2004, the government formed the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia Police. The commission proposed, among others, the setting up of the IPCMC. This is an important proposal that is still being ignored by the government.

Indeed these are not the only institutional reforms that we need for the country. More work is definitely needed. But Hakam’s list is a good place to start. — Sin Chew Daily

* Wan Saiful Wan Jan is the chief executive of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS)

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.