We, the 17 undersigned groups and organizations is appalled at yet another extrajudicial killing by Malaysian police that happened on 13/8/2024(The Sun), whereby immediately after that the public is fed with the police version of what happened in an attempt to absolve the police from guilt, and with allegations that the deceased was a ‘bad person’. Was there even sufficient time for the police to conduct a proper investigation into the killing? Were the police officers in uniform or in a easily identifiable police vehicle?

In cases of extrajudicial killing, it is the police that caused the killing who should be investigated for the crime of murder and culpable homicide, not the deceased.

However, it must be noted that there have been several cases in Malaysia, where the police version of what happened was found to be LIES.

Police Version Of What Happened Found To Be False

The High Court in Ipoh on 1/2/2024  set aside an open verdict delivered in an inquest involving a police shooting in Sitiawan, Perak nearly eight years ago, and ruled it to be a homicide. “This court, under the Chief Justice’s Direction No 2 of 2019, makes a finding of homicide against the police,” he[Judicial commissioner Moses Susayan] said..’ The police and prosecution version were that Mohan got out of the vehicle and fired at the policemen, forcing them to shoot back. However, there were ‘…no bullet casing from the purported revolver used by Mohan was found. Neither were fingerprints, DNA or gunshot residue found on the alleged gun or the deceased. The Inspector-General’s Standing Orders that requires police to fire warning shots and to shoot at the leg was probably not followed. (FMT)

On 31/5/2023 that the coroner’s court, presided by Coroner Rasyihah Ghazali, for ‘police shooting that resulted in death of 3, ‘…. concluded that there was abuse of power and elements of a criminal nature in the death of three men who were shot at close range by police three years ago. “The shots were not fired in self-defense. There was abuse of power and (actions in the nature of) criminal elements by police in the death of the men,”… She said police witnesses gave evidence that shots were fired at the men from an upright position but post-mortem reports stated that the bullets pierced their bodies at a downward angle. … “The weapons described by the ballistic expert (Izzuwan Marzuki) and the investigating officer (P Visvanathan) were also in conflict,” (FMT, 31/5/2023)

We sadly note that there has been no news about the said police personnel found criminally liable for the killing being investigated and/or charged in the courts, despite the findings of the Coroner and/or the Court.

End Perception that Malaysia Protects Law Enforcement Who Broke the Law

The perception that Malaysia protects police and law enforcement officers from criminal prosecution must end. This is not a matter to be dealt with through internal disciplinary actions – but requires the suspected police officers to be charged and tried in Court.

Sadly, in most of these extrajudicial killings, we do not hear about the findings of the Independent Coroner, who is legally the person who will enquire and determine the cause of death, including whether any person, including the police, was criminally liable for the death. Hence, we only have the police version of what happened issued hours after the killing.

The Home Minister must disclose the findings of the Coroner’s Inquiry of all cases of extrajudicial killing by law enforcement. He must explain why the police have not been charged in court for the crime of killing. Whether, the police’s defence of ‘self defence’ will succeed is something for the Court to decide – not the police, the prosecution, the Minister or the government of the day.

Coroner must investigate immediately, and decide fast

In cases of police killing that we hear about the Coroner’s findings, it is simply too long after the said killing occurred. In cases of extrajudicial killings and deaths in custody of law enforcement, Coroners must speedily inquire into the death and render a decision as fast as possible, preferably within a month, not after years. Coroners must not only rely on the police for evidence, but also do their own independent investigations as the police do ‘lie’ at times to maybe protect their own officers.

Police are the suspects – not the deceased

In extrajudicial killings, the suspects of the crime is the POLICE, not the deceased. It is the police suspects that need to be investigated, and not the deceased. It was odd, that a media report stated that the police had commenced an investigation ‘…under the Penal Code for attempted murder’. Are they investigating the deceased, for if they are investigating the police, it should be an investigation for murder, not attempted murder since the victim died. (NST, 13/8/2024)

Extrajudicial Killings Must Be Criminalized – An offence and a deterrent penalty

Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions – is the deliberate killing of individuals outside of any legal framework – are a violation of this most fundamental right. In Malaysia, the Federal Constitution acknowledges the right to life, and in Article 5(1) states that ‘No person shall be deprived of his life …. save in accordance with law’ and this means that the State or its officers can generally only kill someone after he has been tried, convicted and sentenced to death. When it comes to the police, their duty is merely to arrest and investigate suspects – not kill them.

Malaysian law, on arrest is very clear and right to kill is limited to persons who have already been charged in court, being the time, a suspect becomes an accused, for an offence that carries the death penalty or sentence of imprisonment of 30 years or more.

Section 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code, amongst others, state that  ‘…(2) If such person forcibly resist the endeavour to arrest him or attempt to evade the arrest such officer or other person may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.(3) Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for a term of not less than thirty years but not exceeding forty years or with imprisonment for life.’

In all the known cases, those that end up being shot dead are certainly not accused persons facing trial for such serious offences.

Malaysia must enact a law making extra-judicial killing by law enforcement a crime with a deterrent penalty, as the killers in these cases are public officers responsible for law enforcement, who should never ignore the law and kill suspects, witnesses or others during the performance of their duties. The fact that we have murder and other killing offences in the law is insufficient, and the criminalizing of extrajudicial killings also will indicate Malaysia’s strong position against such killings.

First response by Home Minister is to APOLOGIZE and ensure proper investigation

After anyone is killed whilst making arrest or in police custody, the Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail first response should be to apologize for the death of any suspect. No one during arrest, custody and investigations by law enforcement should die.

He should also commit to an immediate independent investigation and for a speedy Coroner’s inquiry to determine the truth of what really happened. Was there any acceptable legal defence for the killing of persons by the police? In any case, the police personnel involved should be investigated and charged, and it is up to the Court to determine whether any defence, including self-defence will succeed in avoiding conviction.

The Minister is responsible for the police, but that does not translate that he should always come out in defence of police actions and/or ‘justifying’ possible criminal wrongdoings, trusting the police version of the facts.

On the face of it, the police broke the law when they failed to arrest a suspect alive.

Hence, as Minister responsible, he must come out expressing his remorse for what happened, and commit to a thorough investigation to determine the truth. He must also make sure that the police do not try to prematurely justify killings on the basis that the deceased was a ‘bad person’. He must  leave the determination of guilt to the Courts.

It is not for the police to decide whether one is a criminal or not, or whether they deceive the death sentence. They are not ‘judge, jury and executioner’ – the police is NOT ‘a person or group who has unchecked power to make decisions, impose punishments, and carry out those punishments without due process or oversight.’

Therefore, we call

Call for the criminalization of extrajudicial killing, making it a crime with a deterrent penalty;

Call on Malaysia to adopt the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, as rrecommended by the United Nation’s Economic and Social Council resolution 1989/65 of 24 May 1989, which, amongst others, state that ‘Governments shall prohibit by law all extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions and shall ensure that any such executions are recognized as offences under their criminal laws, and are punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account the seriousness of such offences…’

Call on the Home Minister to disclose findings of the Coroner in all cases of extra-judicial killings in Malaysia, and explain why the said police officers or law enforcement personnel have NOT been charged and tried in Court for the said killings.

Call on Malaysia to end the ‘defamation’ of the dead, as an attempt to ‘justify’ the killings by law enforcement.

Call for the police officers responsible for the death of suspects and others be charged and tried in Court, for it is Court only that determines guilt, and whether any defence for the said crime including self-defence is accepted.

Charles Hector
Ng Yap Hwa

For and on behalf of the 16 groups listed below

• ALIRAN
• MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
• Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement
• WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)
• Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
• Association Of Home And Maquila Workers (ATRAHDOM), Guatemala
• Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), India
• Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances (CAGED)
• Democratic Commission for Human Development, Lahore, Pakistan
• Global Women’s Strike, United Kingdom
• KLSCAH Youth
• Legal Action for Women, United Kingdom
• Programme Against Custodial Torture & Impunity (PACTI), India
• Redemption, Pakistan
• Sabah Timber Industry Employees Union (STIEU)
• Union of Domestic, Maquila, Nexas and Related Workers (SITRADOM), Guatemala
• Yaung Chi Oo Workers’ Association (YCOWA)

KLSCAH Youth Human Rights Exhibition will be heading to JB for the first time. This time, KLSCAH Youth has collaborated with local community organizations, including Classroom 47, Johor Yellow Flame (JYF) and P320 Community Space to organize a series of activities during the 10-day exhibition, of which the event details will be announced later.

The human rights exhibition opens from August 16th to 25th at Classroom 47, from Sunday to Thursday, from 10am to 5pm, and Friday to Saturday, from 10am to 9pm.

The opening ceremony of the human rights exhibition will be held on August 17th, 2pm at the exhibition venue, with Bakri MP Tan Hong Bin as the guest of honour.

Throughout the history of mankind, people have been on a constant path of pursuing equality, freedom, and human dignity.

Freedom, and the respect of basic human rights are widely regarded as a universal value worth upholding by many. Lest we forget, the freedom that we enjoy today are owed to those who came before us.

We are now proud to present to you an exhibition dedicated to “FREEDOM”.

This exhibition will be divided into various sections, allowing visitors to visualise and understand the concept of freedom, to revisit the path that leads to where we are at today, and to reflect on what is freedom, and what it means to us.

Freedom is not free, however this exhibition is!

For more information, please contact Catherine at 019-755 9042.

Event details are as follows:

Date: 16th-25th August 2024
Time: Sun-Thurs 10am-5pm, Fri- Sat 10am-9pm

Venue: Classroom 47
(Address: 47, Jalan Impian Emas 5/1, Taman Impian Emas, 81300 Skudai, Johor.)

Organizer: KLSCAH Youth, Classroom 47, Johor Yellow Flame (JYF), P320 Community Space

Pertubuhan masyarakat sivil (Civil Society Organisation – CSO) yang disenarai di bawah mengecam sekeras-kerasnya kenyataan Menteri Dalam Negeri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail bahawa kekerasan polis sewaktu perarakan sempena Ulang Tahun ke-15 Teoh Beng Hock adalah untuk menjaga ketenteraman awam. Kami menuntut agar Saifuddin Nasution dipecat sebagai Menteri Dalam Negeri memandangkan beliau tidak layak menyandang jawatan tersebut atas tiga kegagalan utama.

Pertama, Menteri Dalam Negeri Saifuddin Nasution gagal mengarahkan Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) untuk membuka semula siasatan terhadap pegawai-pegawai Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) yang terlibat dalam kes kematian Teoh Beng Hock dibawah Kanun Keseksaan seksyen 302.

Mahkamah Rayuan pada tahun 2014 telah memutuskan bahawa kematian Teoh Beng Hock adalah diakibatkan oleh ‘seorang atau beberapa orang yang tidak dikenali termasuk pegawai SPRM’, dan telah mengesyorkan pihak polis untuk membuka semula siasatan.

Selama 15 tahun sejak kematian Teoh Beng Hock, Pakatan Rakyat atau Pakatan Harapan berkali-kali berjanji kepada ahli keluarga Teoh Beng Hock bahawa mereka tidak akan teragak-agak untuk menyiasat dan menuduh pihak bertanggungjawab di mahkamah sekiranya mereka diberikan mandat oleh rakyat untuk menjadi kerajaan.

Namun, Menteri Dalam Negeri bersikap sambil lewa dalam perkara ini dan tidak pernah membalas kepada tuntutan keluarga Teoh. Persatuan Teoh Beng Hock Demi Kemajuan Demokrasi (TBH-ADA) terpaksa berjalan melebihi 45km dari Plaza Masalam (tempat kejadian kematian Teoh Beng Hock) ke Parlimen Malaysia untuk menyerahkan memorandum supaya suara keluarga Teoh dapat didengari oleh mereka yang kini berkuasa.

Keluarga Teoh tidak memerlukan belas kasihan daripada Menteri tetapi satu tindakan tegas dan cekap dalam siasatan PDRM dalam kes kematian Teoh Beng Hock. Perbualan atau permohonan maaf secara persendirian sememangnya tidak bermakna kepada keluarga Teoh selepas 15 tahun dan terutamanya PH kini telah memegang kuasa eksekutif.

Kedua, Saifuddin Nasution gagal menyemak semula Prosedur Operasi Standard (SOP) PDRM untuk menangani perarakan dan himpunan aman sehingga menyebabkan kekerasan polis berlaku dan mencederakan peserta-peserta. Antara kekerasan polis adalah menolak peserta ke tepi, mengheret baju peserta, menarik rantai leher peserta sehingga dia susah bernafas dan rantai terputus, dan menjatuhkan peserta ke atas lantai secara sengaja.

Kami mengingatkan penyerahan memorandum di luar pagar Parlimen bukan satu perkara baharu padahal keluarga Teoh pernah menyerahkan memorandum kepada Ahli-ahli Parlimen di luar pagar Bangunan Parlimen sewaktu pemerintahan kerajaan Najib Razak.

Kami juga mengingatkan pemimpin-pemimpin Pakatan Harapan pernah menjadi mangsa kepada sekatan polis ke Parlimen dan kekerasan polis. Jangan kita lupa, polis pernah menyekat pemimpin-pemimpin Pakatan Harapan memasuki Dewan Rakyat pada 2 Ogos 2021.[1]  Pada masa itu, pemimpin Pakatan Harapan turut mengkritik tindakan polis yang menyekat suara Rakyat ke Parlimen. Jangan kita lupa, pemimpin-pemimpin Pakatan termasuk Anwar Ibrahim pernah menjadi mangsa kekerasan polis waktu Himpunan Bersih 2.0 dan tindakan polis juga dikecam sekeras-kerasnya dan bukan dipertahankan sebagai langkah menjaga ketenteraman awam.

Tidak kira penyerahan memorandum di luar pagar Parlimen atau Himpunan BERSIH 2.0 adalah suatu amalan demokratik yang patut diraikan malah hak berhimpun secara aman di bawah Perlembagaan Persekutuan patut dihormati dan bukan dizalimi. Kerajaan Madani terutamanya yang diketuai reformis-reformis patut lebih progresif untuk memudahkan perarakan atau himpunan aman dan bukan sebaliknya.

Ketiga, Menteri Dalam Negeri gagal mempertahankan hak asasi manusia di Malaysia. Saifuddin Nasution telah berkali-kali menunjukan ketidakcekapan beliau dalam banyak perkara berkaitan dengan hak asasi manusia, termasuk isu salah laku dan kekerasan polis, isu kematian dalam tahanan, isu penindasan masyarakat Bajau Laut, isu tahanan tanpa bicara, isu kewarganegaraan, isu penggunaan Akta Hasutan dan intimidasi terhadap aktivis-aktivis, dan lain-lain lagi.

Pendirian dan respon Saifuddin Nasution terhadap isu-isu ini hanya mengekalkan status quo dan tidak mengambil peduli saranan-saranan daripada pihak masyarakat sivil mahupun masyarakat yang terkesan. Beliau hanya menunjukkan keangkuhan seseorang pemerintah, dan melaksanakan sesuatu mengikut kehendak hati dan kepentingan politik diri sendiri sahaja. Ia bercanggah kepada nilai Malaysia Madani yang sepatutnya bersikap keterbukaan dan mengutamakan kepentingan rakyat jelata.

Menteri Dalam Negeri mempunyai kuasa yang sangat besar dan mengetuai badan-badan penguatkuasaan. Kami tegaskan bahawa Rakyat Malaysia memerlukan seorang Menteri Dalam Negeri yang dapat menghormati hak asasi manusia dan menegakkan keadilan, dan bukannya seorang penindas yang mengancam keselamatan rakyat jelata. Atas sebab-sebab ini, Saifuddin Nasution harus dipecat segera sebagai Menteri Dalam Negeri.

Kenyataan disokong oleh:

1. KLSCAH Youth
2. University of Malaya Association of New Youth (UMANY)
3. Liga Demokratik Rakyat
4. EMPOWER
5. Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM)
6. Gerakan Belia Se-Punjabi Malaysia – GBSM
7. Student Progressive Front UUM 北大前进阵线
8. Suara Siswa UUM 北大学声阵线
9. Gerakan Mahasiswa Maju UPM
10. KLSCAH Civil Rights Committee
11. Borneo Komrad
12. Hayat
13. Eliminating Deaths and Abuse in Custody Together (EDICT)
14. Aliran 
15. MANDIRI – Pusat Pembangunan Rakyat
16. Congress IIUM
17. Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)
18. Pergerakan Tenaga Akademik Malaysia (GERAK)
19. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
20. Himpunan Advokasi Rakyat Malaysia (HARAM)
21. Suara Mahasiswa UMS
22. Mahasiswa Demokratik Malaysia (MDM)
23. Demokrat UKM
24. Rahman Student League
25. Rahman Solidarity League
26. Stateless.MY

 

[1] Pembangkang yang diketuai oleh Pakatan Harapan menuntut Muhyiddin meletak jawatan sebagai Perdana Menteri yang didakwa melanggar Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan menghina instusi raja Perlembagaan termasuk menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri mengelirukan Dewan.

 

19hb Julai 2024

Kenyataan Bersama: Saifuddin Nasution Harus Dipecat Segera

早前在北方大学校园，陆陆续续有动物被害的事件传出。先有宿舍十多只猫咪疑因被毒死， 再来年头疑似有人撞到小狗却肇事逃逸，到现在也依旧逍遥法外。而如今的当值人员更是在Whatsapp跟某人提到“把小狗杀掉”的疯狂想法，其残忍的态度仿佛是在说撕掉一张传单这么简单。种种表现无一不是对生命的轻蔑，更是对法律的践踏。

根据2015年马来西亚动物福利法就提到，虐待动物者将面对最低20，000令吉的罚款，或最高监禁三年或两者兼施。其中动物法令30条文更是提到了禁止使用枪支射杀动物，除非是在紧急情况或为了控制疾病而获得兽医局批准。此外，动物福利法也提到任何人无合法权限或合理解释使用有毒性，毒害任何动物。

然而这些罪犯却在神圣的校园里面肆无忌惮地横行，甚至是有关当局人员带头教唆。这不止是典当自身道德素养，更是蔑视法律的行为。

早前，北大前进阵线和北大学声阵线就已经为这些含冤去世的动物呈交了一份备忘录，里面包含了透明化处理校园动物以及彻查虐待动物案的诉求。可是事发至此校方依旧没有给出一个完整的交代。我们极力谴责校方管理层轻蔑动物生命的态度。我们强调，动物也是校园内的一份子，是大自然的馈赠。我们应该做的是文明控制动物繁衍数量如带它们进行绝育手术，或适当处理垃圾以免吸引更多外来的动物到这里觅食导致泛滥等等，但绝对不是射杀它们。

此外，有关动物习性的宣传也可以在校园内普及，以免部分学生因不了解而在无意中做出让动物应激的反应，达到动物和人和平共处的目的。面对已经数量泛滥的动物，有关当局更应该有一套透明的处理动物的SOP, 不然只会导致校园内流言四起，人心惶惶。

曾经听到一段话可以让大家共勉：“如果一个学校，连一条狗都放不下，更谈何教书育人？”相比之下，作为培育国家未来栋梁的象牙塔，我们却处处容忍甚至是默认这些不人道的行为，实在是讽刺至极。

最后，我们呼吁校方重新审视执法单位的执法标准，透明且公开地制定一套针对动物的人性化处理方针。他们作为手持武器的一方应该首当其冲保护弱势群体，而非带头助力虐待动物的歪风。此外，校方也应该把重心放在彻查校园内虐待动物的案件，而非把矛头指向无辜的动物，使它们原本就身处劣势的生存环境更加雪上加霜。

发起单位：北大前进阵线以及北大学声阵线

Rangkaian Solidariti Demokratik Pesakit Mental (SIUMAN) is perturbed by the recent news of a Deaf e-hailing driver being allegedly assaulted while working near KL Sentral on 28 May 2024. According to his account, the 46-year-old driver was punched in the face by a ‘VIP bodyguard’, resulting in soft tissue injury, which was diagnosed and treated at Kuala Lumpur Hospital. He was advised to file a police report, where at one point he was eventually given two options, i.e. to have his phone confiscated if he decides to proceed with the case, or to drop the case and be compensated. Under duress, the Deaf driver opted for the second option. Throughout his visit to the police station, he was also left unattended for hours, given no explanation as to why his phone was inspected for an extended period of time, and given no immediate access to a Malaysian Sign Language Interpreter to communicate and defend himself.

SIUMAN would like to draw attention to the jarring gaps in accessing justice for Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) as highlighted throughout this case. A disabled complainant’s right to communicate was withheld through action (confiscation of phone as assistive technology) and omission (unavailability of a competent sign language interpreter or other sufficient reasonable accommodations). Access to justice is a fundamental human right. It enables everyone, including PWDs, to live a dignified life. This case (and many others) points to an urgent need to address the gaps in accessing justice for PWDs.

The gaps in protection mentioned in the Malaysian Deaf Advocacy and Wellbeing Organisation’s (DAWN) statement affect all PWDs. Even though Malaysia has enacted the Persons with Disabilities Act in 2008, universal access, reasonable accommodations and discrimination protections are not mandated in any area of life. Section 30(3) in the PWD Act states: “The Government and the private sector shall accept and facilitate the use of Malaysia Sign Language, Braille, augmentative and alternative communication, and all other accessible means, modes and formats of communication of their choice by persons with disabilities in official transactions.”

However, Section 41 of the same Act precludes the government and state bodies from any remedial or court actions by stating: “No action, suit, prosecution or other proceedings shall lie or be brought, instituted or maintained in any court against the Government… …in respect of any act, neglect or default done or committed by him or it…” This is further supported by Section 42 of the Act which states: “The Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 [Act 198] shall apply to any action, suit, prosecution or proceedings against the Government… …in respect of any act, neglect or default done or committed by it…”

This clearly highlights the jarring contradiction and reluctance of the State to uphold disability rights.

Furthermore, Article 8(2) of the Federal Constitution on discrimination does not mention disability. The Federal Constitution was amended in 2001 to include gender as part of our obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). However, the same was not initiated for disability after Malaysia ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2010.

We have also arguably failed to domesticate the CRPD and its principles in Malaysian legislation. We had no reservations on Article 13 of the CRPD (Access to Justice), but it is apparent that we have not operationalised it. This all needs to change and justice must be accessible to everyone throughout the whole process. The International Principles and Guidelines on Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities offers practical suggestions for the State to design and implement justice systems that provide equal access to justice for PWDs.

Multiple administrations have excluded PWDs from meaningful social participation in all areas of life, ignoring the promotion and protection of Disability Rights. We call upon the State and State Actors to view this incident with urgency and proactivity to ensure the rights of PWDs in Malaysia are protected. 

Pursuant to that call to action, SIUMAN has made several recommendations in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, that we hope will lead to better discrimination protections and mandated reasonable accommodations via policies and laws. All our materials and references can be downloaded from http://linktr.ee/KamiSIUMAN.

Our collective stands in solidarity with DAWN, our deaf peers, and the Deaf Community.

 

Endorsed by:

Organisations

1. All Women’s Action Society (AWAM)
2. Architects of Diversity
3. Association of Women Lawyers
4. Autism Inclusiveness Direct Action Group (AIDA)
5. Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
6. Agora Society
7. Aliran
8. Association of Women with Disabilities Malaysia
9. Boleh Space, Disabled-led Disability Rights Advocacy Movement
10. Centre for Independent Journalism
11. CRIB Foundation (Child Rights Innovation & Betterment)
12. CYBHER Collective
13. Demokrat UKM
14. EMPOWER
15. ENGAGE
16. Family Frontiers
17. Freedom Film Network
18. Gegar
19. Gabungan Pilihan Raya Bersih dan Adil (BERSIH)
20. HAYAT
21. Ikatan Mahasiswa Demokratik Malaysia (MDM)
22. Jaringan Kampung Orang Asli Semenanjung Malaysia (JKOASM)
23. Jentayu
24. Justice for Sisters
25. Kemban Kolektif (Intersectional Human Rights Activists)
26. KauOKTak (Community Building and Mental Health Outreach for Teenagers)
27. KRYSS Network
28. Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall, Youth Section (KLSCAH Youth)
29. Klima Action Malaysia – KAMY
30. Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Deaf Media and Technology Association
31. Kedah Sports Deaf Association
32. Legal Dignity
33. Mahasiswa Keadilan Malaysia
34. MAJU Foundation
35. Martabat PJ
36. Malaysian Sign Language and Deaf Studies Association
37. MUDA
38. Mental Health Association of Sarawak
39. Monsters Among Us (MAU)
40. National Organisation of Malaysian Sign Language Instructors
41. Negeri Sembilan Association of the Deaf
42. North South Initiative
43. Our Journey (Probono legal representation for migrants in labour immigration & criminal cases)
44. Pusat Pembangunan Rakyat (MANDIRI)
45. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor
46. Project Stability and Accountability for Malaysia (Projek SAMA)
47. Pemuda Sosialis PSM
48. Pertubuhan Rangkaian Pembangunan Kesinambungan Malaysia (SUSDEN Malaysia)
49. Parti Sosialis Malaysia
50. Pusat KOMAS
51. Persatuan Advokasi Diri Orang Bermasalah Pembelajaran Selangor & Kuala Lumpur (United Voice)
52. Projek Wawasan Rakyat
53. Persatuan Promosi Hak Asasi Manusia (PROHAM)
54. PurpleLily Social Association Kuching
55. Pergerakan Pemuda UMNO Bahagian Damansara
56. Persatuan Ikatan Serikat Serantau (IKRAR)
57. Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia
58. Sisters in Islam
59. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
60. Sabah Deaf Muslim Association
61. The OKU Rights Matter Project
62. The Talisman Project
63. Teater Untuk Semua
64. Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement
65. Women’s Centre for Change (WCC)
66. Women’s Aid Organisation
67. 3 June Onwards – Development of Human Resources for Rural Areas (DHRRA)

Individuals

1. Ali Amir Razali
   Political Activist
2. Amin Zuhaili Bin Mansor
   Deaf Advocate
3. Adrian Pereira
   Executive Director, North South Initiative, PWD Rights Advocate
4. Albert Wong Tuong Chui
   Deaf Advocate
5. Beatrice Leong
   Autistic Rights Advocate, Founder Autism Inclusiveness Direct Action Group (AIDA)
6. Bathmavathi Krishnan
   Wheelchair user, Senator representing Persons with Disabilities in the Upper House, Parliament of Malaysia (2013-2016; 2016-2019)
7. Calysta Tay
   BIM Interpreter, PWD Ally
8. Christopher Yap
   Deaf Person
9. Dr. Ikmal Hisham Md Tah
   Legal Academic, Disability Law Researcher
10. Dr. Vilashini Somiah
    Feminist anthropologist, PWD ally
11. Dr. Benjamin YH Loh
    Digital media researcher, PWD ally
12. Dunstan SG Lim
    Sarawak OKU Skills Development Association (SOSDA), Disabled Disability Advocate & Person with Lived Experience
13. Dayangku Syarizat
    Person With Lived Experience
14. Dr. Lim Chee Han
    Public health researcher, Manifesto Rakyat coordinator
15. Datin PH Wong
    Childline Foundation
16. Durrah Sharifah Ahmad Azlan
    Mental Health Advocate
17. Freida Pilus
    Chairman, Cempaka Education Group
    President, Persatuan Siswazah Wanita Malaysia
18. Gigi Teoh
    Hearing ally, a member of JupeBIM, an employer to 4 deaf persons
19. Hasbeemasputra Abu Bakar
    Disabled Disability Advocate & Person With Lived Experience
20. Ho Lee Ching
    Theater Maker
21. Iskandar Khoo Kuan Yiaw
    Ketua badan Perhubungan Perikatan Nasional Kawasan Kepong
22. ‘Izz Daenie
    Disability Justice Advocate
    Person With Lived Experience
23. Jonah Ong
    Deaf Advocate/BIM Interpreter, Human Rights Activist
24. Jessica Mak Wei-E
    Deaf Advocate
25. Joan Sim Jo Jo
    Social Worker, Advocate for the Deaf, BIM Interpreter
26. Khor Ai-Na
    CEO, Asia Community Service
27. Kelvin Lee
    KLSCAH Youth
28. Koh Lianne
    E-Hailing Driver
29. Kaveinthran
    Native Blind person, Independent disabled human rights activist
30. Kya Cahya
    Human Rights Advocate, Activist
31. Lavinia Abirami
    ⁠Deaf Person With Lived Experience Global Institute For Tomorrow
32. Leong Wai Min
    Deaf Person, e-hailing driver
33. Lee Siow Hua, Declan,
    RRC Grab team (Rakan Representative Community for Klang Valley Deaf drivers)
34. Leben Siddarth
    Ketua Penerangan MUDA
35. Lee Nyook Loong
    Deaf Person, E-hailing Driver
36. Laura Kho
    Mental health policy consultant, Mind Brew, PWD ally
37. Muhammad Mustaqim bin Badrul Hisham
    Person With Lived Experience
38. Muhamad Nadhir Abdul Nasir
    Independent disability issues consultant & researcher
39. Murugeswaran Veerasamy
    President, Damai Disabled Person Association Malaysia
40. Meera Samanther
    Co-Chair of Ad Hoc Committee on Persons with Disability, Bar Council
41. Maizan Binti Mohd Salleh
    President, Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Albinism Association
42. Mohd Asraf Sharafi Mohd Azhar
    PWD Ally
43. Maria Chin Abdullah
    Social activist
44. Mutharasapan a/l Lakshmanan
    Deaf Advocate
45. Marzuki Ong bin Maliki Ong
    Deaf Advocate
46. Mohamad Faezal Bin Muktar,
    Chairman, Persatuan Ikatan Serikat Serantau (IKRAR)
47. Mimie Rahman
    Managing Director & Registered Counsellor,
    MINDAKAMI
48. Ng Lai-Thin
    Dementia care partner, Project Lead of National Early Childhood Intervention Council, Member of The OKU Rights Matter Project.
49. Nurafirah Jaharuddin
    Master Student, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
50. Ong Hwei Ling
    Deaf Advocate
51. Nasrul Noor
    Disability Advocate
52. Norman Goh
    Person With Lived Experience
53. Ong Hwei Ling, Annie
    President of National of Organisations Malaysia Sign Language Instructors (NowBIM)
    Deaf Advocate
    Co-founder DAWN
    RRC Grab (Rakan Representative Community for Klang Valley Deaf drivers)
54. Prof. Wong Chin Huat
    Political scientist; Member, Projek SAMA
55. Quah Jia Tian
    President of Universiti Malaya Student Union, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    Vice President of YouthCare Malaysia
56. Sofea Rozhan
    Founder, untuksemua.my
57. Sharifah Tahir
    Dementia and care partner advocate, founder of UMI, Dementia Care and Resource Center
58. Shawn Sharif
    Patient Advocate & person with lived experience
59. Srividhya Ganapathy
    Co-chairperson CRIB Foundation
60. SK Lee
    Deaf Person
61. Shane Capri
    Human and Animal Rights Advocate
    Disabled Disability Advocate
62. Sya A.
    Autistic Self-Advocate & Person With Lived Experience
63. Shah Fariq Aizal Sha Ghazni
    Entrepreneur
    Director of Private Security Firm
    Member of Generation Democracy (Malaysia Chapter)
    Committee Member of Asia Pacific Security Association (Malaysia Chapter)
64. Sariah Ibrahim
    Deaf Advocate
65. Tay Chia Yi
    Speech-language therapist, Malaysian Association of Speech-language & Hearing (MASH)
66. Thilaga Sulathireh
    Researcher
67. Tashny Sukumaran
    Human Rights advocate
68. Wong Yan Ke
    Human Rights Defender
69. Yana Karim
    Boleh Space Co-Founder, Disabled Disability Rights Advocate
70. Yuenwah San
    Disability Rights Advocate, Dementia care partner, Co-Founder Member, The OKU Rights Matter Project
71. Yeong Moh Foong
    Senior Job Coach Trainer
72. 3 June Onwards
    Munira Mustaffa & Mustaffa Family Lived Experience
73. Pong Chang Khim
    Deaf Advocate
74. Mohamad Burhanudin bin Mohamad Zamri
    PWD Ally
75. Rafeeqa binti Ruslan
    PWD Ally
76. Lim Heng Tuck
    Deaf Advocate
77. Christine Lee,
    Wheelchair User and Polio Survivor
78. Dr Sean Thum
    Independent Public Health Advocate
79. Azad Akbar Khan
    Ketua Biro Polisi MUDA Selangor

EN – Access to Justice is a Fundamental Human Right – June 2024