Both ruling and opposition parliamentarians today expressed concern over the proposed anti-terror legislation during the debate for the second reading of the amendment into the Penal Code in the Dewan Rakyat today.

Chang See Ten (BN-Gelang Patah) said he felt "uneasy" with one of the provisions which defined a terrorist act as one that was "prejudicial to national security or public safety".

He said this provision was "too vague" and asked if everyone could truly understand the meaning of national security.

"From our experience with the Internal Security Act (ISA), the authorities could have a different understanding of the phrase 'national security'.

"Currently we might know who should be categorised as terrorists, but since this definition is vague, authorities after 50 years could define any form of opposition political activities as terrorist acts," he said.

The MP stressed that since harsh punishments were included in the proposed law, lawmakers should exercise caution to avoid future abuses.

Be prudent

Ruhanie Ahmad (BN-Parit Sulong) reminded the government to be prudent when enacting anti-terror laws.

He said the government must be wary of working together with superpowers such as United States to tackle terrorism.

"I am of this opinion because we have witnessed how US exploits the international terrorism issue as a reason to launch pre-emptive attacks against independent and sovereign countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq," he said.

Expressing reservation over the implementation of the new law, he also pointed out that international societies have failed to clearly define terrorism.

Echoing this, Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar (BN-Batang Lupar) asked why lawyers and accountants were targeted in this proposed amendment.

Under the new law, lawyers and accountants who offer their services to terrorist could also be liable and face stiff punishment.

On the opposition front, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (Keadilan-Permatang Pauh) said there was concern that the amendments will allow the police and the Home Ministry to act without scrutiny.

The Parti Keadilan Rakyat president added that the proposed legislation should not be used as a political tool by the ruling government.

Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) asked if the government was prepared to abolish the ISA since it was introducing new terrorism-related laws.

'Appropriate' move

Responding to the MPs, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Dr Rais Yatim conceded that the current laws were adequate but stressed that it was still "appropriate" to go ahead with the new legislation.

Rais, who is also de facto law minister, dismissed the claims that the law would be used to suppress political dissent.

"This legislation is not an executive one such as the ISA, it needs judicial decision, and the court is the one to decide and determine who should be punished," he said.

On the vagueness concerning the definition of terrorism, the minister said there were other laws which did not provide conceptual definition to an offence either.

"Like murder, it is only defined by illustration," he said.

On the absence of consultation with the Bar Council and Malaysian Association of Accountants, he said these professionals should not worry if they are not involved in any such activities.

The reading of the bill will continue next Monday.

Meanwhile, an emergency motion tabled by Teresa Kok (DAP-Seputeh) to ask for the bill to be referred to the House's select committee for six months for further revision was delayed to next Monday after the sitting was adjourned.