DEC 13 — Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail indicated that he has no intention of reviewing the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma).

He defended the law by saying it allowed judicial oversight unlike other preventive detention laws such as the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Emergency Ordinance.

"People always compare Sosma with other preventive laws when Sosma itself is not a preventive law.

"Compared to ISA or the Emergency Ordinance, (the detention period) is up to 60 days. Sosma is 28 days. At the end of 28 days, there are only two recommendations which are freedom or be brought to court. If he is brought to court, he can still hire a lawyer,” he said.

Let it be reminded that the 28-day detention is for the purpose of investigation. Such a detention is generally referred to as detention pending investigation.

In other jurisdictions like the United Kingdom (UK), it is called pre-charge detention. It is the period that a person can be detained by the police between being arrested and being either charged with a criminal offence or released.

Pre-charge detentions serve the primary purpose of securing sufficient admissible evidence during investigation for use in criminal proceedings.

What is objectionable is that Sosma, unlike the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), does not provide for a judicial authority, like a magistrate, to be satisfied that following the arrest and detention of a person for a period of 24 hours for the purpose of investigation, the extension of the period of detention for up to 28 days is necessary for the purpose of investigation.

Section 4(5) Sosma only requires "a police officer of or above the rank of Superintendent of Police [to] extend the period of detention for a period of not more than twenty-eight days, for the purpose of investigation.”

This is one area where reform to Sosma is necessary. Under a like legislation in the UK, a judicial authority must be satisfied that an extended detention is necessary to: