OCTOBER 14 — The police, yet again, have come under much criticism.
This time for the use of Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma) to detain, the 12 individuals thus far for their alleged links to the terrorist group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
But how does one tell the police not to detain or arrest those individuals under Sosma when it is the law that applies to the arrests?
Let it be reminded that Sosma is the law that provides for the procedures, evidential rules and powers (including that of arrest) to the authorities in relation to what is known as ‘security offences’.
The term ‘security offences’ is defined to include offences which fall under Chapters VI (offences against the State), VIA (offences relating to terrorism) and VIB (organised crimes) of the Penal Code.
For these offences, it is explicitly stated that Sosma shall apply [section 2]. There are no two ways about it.
So, whether one agrees with the Prime Minister or not, he is right to say that there is no other law to govern the arrests made except Sosma.
It not the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) – the general law on arrest and investigation for offences under the Penal Code — that applies to security offences.
Even the CPC explicitly states that its provisions do not apply where there is a written law for the time being in force regulating the arrest and investigation, among others, of such offences [section 3].
Unlike the CPC, Sosma empowers a police officer, without warrant, to arrest and detain any person whom he has reason to believe to be involved in security offences [section 4(1)]. The detention of the person so arrested and detained may be extended for 28 days by a Superintendent of Police for the purpose of investigation [section 4(5)].
So unless an arrest has been made purely for a person’s political belief or political activity, which is prohibited under Sosma [section 4(3)], an arrest is lawful if there is reason to believe the person is involved in security offences.
The law here is undoubtedly broad and wide, and open to abuse. But it is for Parliament to repeal or amend Sosma.
Until and unless Parliament does that, Sosma is the law to be applied.
Coming back to the LTTE arrests, it looks like the arrests are unlike the arrests of the past, notably for example the arrest of Maria Chin Abdullah under Sosma on November 18, 2016, for which the government agreed to pay her RM25,000 in damages.
On this note, much of the criticism against the LTTE arrests reeks of ignorance of the law. It is therefore pleasing that the Malaysian Bar, through its president, does not raise question on the use of Sosma for the arrests.
We can all stand with the Malaysian Bar in calling for the police to speed up investigations and not to unnecessarily detain the 12 individuals for a full length of 28 days as provided under Sosma.
After all, the police themselves have alluded to the strong evidence of terrorism or the possibility of terrorism from the LTTE group in the country.
So, why the need for 28 days to complete investigation?
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
