Just as the Emergency (1948-1960) was replaced by the ISA in 1960, today the ISA neared its end with the passing of the Security Offences Bill 2012 in Parliament.

Nazri says nothing can guarantee that a law won’t be abused, as even the effectiveness of built-in safeguards depends on whether the sitting government and its chief executive will play by the rules.

What is he telling us between the lines?

That our judiciary is powerless to prevent laws from being abused?

That laws that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (no detention without trial) can exist in our statute books?

That the Executive is all-powerful with no institutional checks and balances at all?

That the separation of powers is a myth?

Thanks for clarifying that, Mr Law Minister.

We now have the ISA assuming a new name, the Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill 2012, as the bill winds its way to law.

The position of the Abolish ISA Movement (GMI) is clear: the ISA must go and it should not be replaced with other laws, especially the new Security Offences (Special Measures) Act.

Comments

comments