The argument that Barisan Nasional politicians had also been detained under the Internal Security Act to show that the law was "evenly" applied was no rebuttal against the charge that the ISA was mainly used to curb political dissent, according to a former ISA detainee.

Dr Kua Kia Soong, one of those held for more than a year under ISA following "Operation Lallang" in October 1987, told malaysiakini today that the ISA had been constantly abused by the government to suppress dissent and freedom of political activities.

Kua was commenting on a statement made by Deputy Home Affairs Minister Zainal Abidin Zin in Parliament on Monday that the police does not use the ISA to arbitrarily arrest people.

The deputy minister added that the government does not use the ISA to suppress opposition parties, citing the case of arrests of several BN members in the past to prove its case.

According to Kua, the government of the day had used the ISA as a punitive, not preventive, tool to suppress political dissent during a period when there was instability within the ruling government party.

He said that the BN leaders detained with him in 1987 were given "favoured" treatment at Kamunting. These BN politicians were detained more "for show"; furthermore, they were all released in less that 50 days, he added.

Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) legal adviser R. Sivarasa said that the government had time and again used the ISA to curb political dissent, mainly against Opposition leaders and NGO activists, and even when used against Umno politicians occasionally, the ISA was used to kill off opponents in an internal power struggle.

"Such laws nullify the judicial process intended for in a parliamentary democracy and I don't find any comfort in the government's assurance that these laws would not be abused," he said.

Sivarasa recalled that in the "Operation Lallang", the government had blatantly abused the ISA to detain mainly opposition leaders and NGO members, under the guise of maintaining peace and security in the country.

The few BN members among the over 100 people rounded up during the operation were released within a few weeks while the rest were held at the Kamunting Detention Centre for more than a year.

The partiality or impartiality of enforcing a law like the ISA is no justification for its existence as there are other laws which already provide "oppressive" powers like the Police Act to enforce public order and peace, Sivarasa said.

"Detention under the ISA without recourse to the court process is repulsive and personally speaking, the extent of torture, both physical and mental, that the detainees are subject to is repulsive and inhuman," Sivarasa said.

On the opinion of a visiting professor that the ISA could only be repealed when the government was satisfied there was no risk to public order, both Sivarasa and Kua said there was no room in a parliamentary democracy like Malaysia to have repressive laws like the ISA.

The professor, Reginald Hugh Hikling, was reported by the New Straits Times on Monday as having said in Ipoh that "he felt it would be some time before the government could repeal the security legislation".

Hickling, 79, who helped draw up the ISA during the Emergency when he was the parliamentary draftsman and Commissioner of Law Revision in Malaya, however, did hold the view that there was a need for an immediate repeal of the Printing Presses and Publications Act, which inhibited a free exchange of ideas.

Sivarasa, who is acquainted with Hickling, expressed some surprise at the report, remarking that the context of Hickling's address was important for a full understanding of the professor's views. He said perhaps it was merely a matter of which legislation was to be abolished immediately, and that the ISA ranked lower than the PPPA in Hickling's "hierarchy of priorities".