COMMENT Today is Feb 7, 2014. Yazid Sufaat and Hilmi Hasim have been jailed for exactly one year under the Security Offences and Special Measures Act (Sosma).

Yazid ( right ), Hilmi and Halimah Hussein were the first victims of Sosma, arrested on Feb 7, 2013. They were charged under Section 130 G(a) of the Penal Code, that is, attempting to spread ideologies or actions which threaten civilians in Syria.

However, the Kuala Lumpur High Court freed them on May 20, 2013. Justice Kamardin Hashim came to his verdict on technical grounds, that Sosma can only be used for security offences committed against Malaysia.

However, exactly one week after they were released, Yazid and Hilmi were rearrested on May 27, 2013. This time, they were arrested under Section 130K(a) of the Penal Code for allegedly being Al-Qaeda members. Police are still hunting for Halimah.

It is important to note that offences under Section 130 of the Penal Code are non-bailable offences. As such, the duo will remain in jail until the court process is exhausted.

Besides Yazid, Hilmi and Halimah, 30 others in Sabah are facing the same fate. The 30 are held under Ops Daulat Lahad Datu. Three of them are Malaysians, including the sole woman captured under Ops Daulat.

Suaram's basic stand is that every offence should be punished. However, the punishment must be meted out in accordance with the principles of justice.

The rights of the accused must be upheld, including the right to a defence and the right to a fair trial. These rights are enshrined under Articles 10 and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

These are the rights that are contravened in the Sosma. Sosma gives police the right to hold a suspect in custody for 28 days without a remand order from the courts.

Contravenes UN declaration

A trial under the Sosma is also not just, and sides with the prosecution. The prosecution can call any witness it wants without revealing the identity of the witness to the defence.

The witness statements can even be recorded without the witness having to be present in court.

All evidence or statements presented by the prosecution must be accepted by the court, including the statements of underaged witnesses.

These are included in Sections IV, V, VI and VII of Sosma, in the areas pertaining to confidential information, trial, witness protection and testimonies. In other words, Sosma favours the prosecution and any trial under this Act will be lopsided.

In the Sabah Sosma case, for example, the trial was not conducted in the court but at the Kepayan Prison. It was not a trial open to scrutiny by the public.

This contravenes Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Civil and Politics Rights, which states that everyone has the right to a free, fair and open trial.

There is a trend by the police to threaten the rakyat using the Sosma. Based on this and the experience of lopsided trials, Suaram reiterates our call on the government of Malaysia to repeal Sosma and other laws that contravene human rights. These include the Prevention of Crime Act an the Dangerous Drugs Act.

SYUKRI RAZAB is a Suaram coordinator. The article was translated from its original Bahasa Malaysia.