Police: First 60-day under ISA not 'brainwashing session'

The 60-day initial detention under the Internal Security Act - where detainees are often held in 'incommunicado' - was to gather additional intelligence of their alleged involvement in activities prejudicial to national security, stated the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) ISA inquiry report today.

Special Branch Social Intelligence Assistant Director Anuar Bashah Mohd Sohore, who has over 30 years experience in handling ISA cases, said it was not a brainwashing session.

He said interrogation, which was the primary method of eliciting information, was carried out without the use of physical force.

His was among the 16 testimonies recorded by a Suhakam panel during a public inquiry into the detention conditions under the ISA held in mid-2002.

The inquiry was prompted by a hunger strike by six reformasi detainees in the Kamunting Detention Centre in Taiping, Perak.

In the 61-page report, released at a press conference at its headquarters in Kuala Lumpur, Suhakam reiterated that the public inquiry was a specific exposition into detention conditions and that its Law Reform Working Group was studying in detail the other aspects of ISA detention.

Anuar Bashah told the panel that detainees were questioned o­n their alleged involvement in activities prejudicial to national security, and "reason" was used to obtain information from them.

He contended that such an approach did not amount to brainwashing or "turning-over" as alleged by several former detainees.

He said today's cases of "ideological fundamentalist organisations" such as the Kumpulan Militan Malaysia (KMM) and Jemaah Islamiah (JI) were similar to cases during the communist insurgency, and were particularly difficult.

[The government had directed editors of all media organisations to use the word militant in KMM, and not Mujahidin as they call themselves]

The police officer told the panel that alleged operatives of such organisations were said to undertake an oath of silence called the "bayat" which preconditioned them to protect the sanctity of their organisation at all cost.

He said when faced with such detainees, the police attempt to reason with them that it is "unIslamic to take such oaths, and that such oaths are not binding o­n them".

He also stressed that not every person detained under Section 73 of the ISA would continue to be held for the entire 60 days, but was dependent o­n how much information was obtained and the extent of the individual's involvement.

"Furthermore, not all persons detained under Section 73 would be subjected to further detention under Section 8 (the two-year ministerial order)," he added.

The report also included different menus for various categories of detainees, statistics o­n persons released before the expiry of the 60-day detention (chart) and a standard diagram of the human body for identification of marks and bruises o­n the detainee's body.

Anuar Bashah said the interrogation of transitional detainees during the temporary period in police lock-ups are conducted by the Special Branch and not officers from that particular station.

He added that they are treated the same way as other criminal suspects.

The inquiry panel was told that after the initial 48 hours, detainees were transferred to specially-gazetted police remand centers (PRCs) in undisclosed locations.

"Detainees are transported to the PRCs blindfolded in order to preserve its secrecy,"said the Special Branch officer.

The report stated that detainees are held individually in cells equipped with squatting toilets and no beds.

"They are expected to sleep o­n a raised cement platform."

It added that detainees are supposed to be given sheets, a mattress, pillows, soap, toothbrush, toothpaste, slippers and a prayer mat, if they require o­ne.

They are given three meals a day similar to that provided in police lock-ups, and cannot request different foods, except for medical or other significant reasons.

"However, they can eat food brought by their families during the arranged meetings outside the PRC, usually at the police station," said the report.

Anuar Bashah said access to the outside world, which included seeing lawyers, is restricted to prevent detainees from leading the police o­n a "wild goose chase".

"This is because in the past, detainees have been known to rely o­n news from external sources, including newspapers, to confuse the police," he explained.

On allegations of abuse of police powers leading to prolonged detention and interrogations not related to the charges, Suhakam recommended the police exercise "utmost care" to ensure that the right to liberty was "not violated without reasonable justifications".

The panel stressed that the right is a fundamental human right guaranteed by Article 5 of the Federal Constitution and Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and such a denial may o­nly be permissible in the "most exigent" of situations, where "a denial of rights of the individual becomes necessary to preserve the rights of others".

"Individuals should not be detained under the ISA unless genuine reasons exist for believing that the individual is involved in activities prejudicial to national security.

"Where such reasons exist to justify the detention, individuals should not be detained for longer than absolutely necessary," recommended the panel.

The panel also found insufficient evidence to justify a finding of torture because the instances cited in the complaints had failed to satisfy the required threshold of severity based o­n international stipulated guidelines, but recommended that police investigate the cited allegations and take action against any officers involved.

The commission also recommended that detainees be given sufficient and clean bedding, adequate ventilation and access to family visits.

On the stationing of a police officer within "sight and hearing" of the detainees and their families, the panel disagreed with the reason that it was to prevent detainees from passing or receiving any information from members of their organisations through their families.

It found that the likelihood of detainees passing or receiving information is minimal as visitors are searched before and after visits, and that the two-week waiting period before the first visit failed to satisfy the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.

On legal consultation during the 60-day period, the panel found "no legitimate justification for denying detainees their constitutional rights to legal representation and to appear before a magistrate".

The June 18 inquiry was led by Suhakam vice-chairperson Harun Hashim (right) assisted by complaints and inquiry working group chairperson Prof Mohd Hamdan Adnan (left) and commissioner Asiah Abu Samah.