Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz's statement that the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) was never intended to have any teeth was "shameful" and presumptuous, said its commissioners.

Suhakam was established not by the government of the day to which Nazri belongs but by Parliament, said commissioner Prof Mohd Hamdan Adnan.

As such, Nazri's implied judgement that Suhakam was set up merely for window-dressing only reflects badly on his own government, he added.

"His statement is uncalled for because (he is) really telling people that Suhakam is just window dressing. That's pretty bad for a government to admit. I hope he's not talking on behalf of the government. It's shameful for him to make the government look bad," he said.

Hamdan was responding to Nazri's statement in Parliament earlier this week that the government had "never planned to give any teeth to Suhakam," and that those who seek otherwise are 'dreaming.'

Nazri was also presumptuous in decreeing that Suhakam would never be granted such powers because, whether or not it happened, it is not up to him or the current government to decide such matters, said Hamdan.

"That's dependent on the prevailing environment, so finally, it's up to Parliament to decide, it's not up to the government. Parliament consists of both the government and the opposition. The law here is established by an Act of Parliament, not an act of government," he said.

Suhakam has earlier said it will propose that amendments be made to the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 to accord the watchdog with quasi-judicial powers.

Not demanding more powers

However, said Hamdan, Suhakam is currently under no rush to demand more powers and responsibilities in addition to the functions that it currently possesses.

"The powers that have been given to Suhakam are comparable with the powers given to other authorities of investigation. We are given powers ... to subpoena, and so on. The police cannot, for example, refuse to answer our questions. It's in the law," he said.

Other functions such as enforcement and prosecution could well be carried out by other agencies, said Hamdan, adding that the country's relatively 'calm' history has not necessitated the granting of such functions to Suhakam.

"We haven't come to that because our history has been quite calm compared to those countries that give their human rights commissions powers to even (exercise) 'courts of human rights," he said.

Hamdan suggested, however, that the prosecuting agencies may not have complemented Suhakam's investigative role 'as much as we would like.'

'Discouraging'

Commissioner N Siva Subramaniam also took Nazri to task for making demoralising statement about Suhakam.

"We expect more encouraging and positive statements from ministers like Nazri rather than statements that are discouraging. We hope in the future he will be more positive," said Siva.

He also said, however, that Suhakam was already kept busy with the investigative, educational, advocative tasks that it had been assigned.

The current improvements in human rights awareness among the public and civil servants such as police officers as well as the better conditions in prisons and lock-ups compared to past years were testimony to Suhakam's contributions, Siva added.

The fact that people and groups are coming to Suhakam despite its lack of enforcement or prosecution powers indicates that they have faith in the commission as a moral authority, said Siva.

"Ideally, in the future, we should have enforcement powers, but right now, we are at a bottleneck with cases and so on. The response in the last two years have been considerable. It's a positive sign.

"Today, people all over the country have respect for Suhakam. In the end, it is the judgment of the people that matters, not the politicians."