SOSMA- LTTE : The 2 Faces of the AGC?
It was reported that Tommy Thomas, the Attorney General, personally attended the hearing of Sosma-LTTE detainee Suresh last week on 23 January 2020 before High Court judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah.
The AG was there to explain his conviction and position on Section 13 of the Sosma Act which denies the rights of courts in granting bail to accused charged under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma). It is laudable to have the AG himself coming to court to explain in person since the Judges and the DPP present before this were seen to be not very sure if the AG was really against Section 13 or only partially against it.
The AG said that government is expected to amend the said provision in the SOSMA Act during the next parliamentary sitting in March. On Nov 29 last year, Justice Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali declared that Section 13 of Sosma was ultra vires Articles 8 and 121 of the Federal Constitution. On December 13, 2019, Tommy Thomas stated that the AG will not contest the High Court decision by Justice Mohd Nazlan that Section 13 of Sosma was unconstitutional.
To give Bail or Not?
The AG’s decision in spirit is to allow bail for the SOSMA-LTTE detainee on the grounds that denying them bail goes against the principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty; yet at the courts it is baffling to hear the DPP fighting against granting bail to the detainee.
I have seen on two occasions, when merits of the case were argued, the DPP took a strong position against bail for the SOSMA-LTTE detainee.
On 16 January 2020, when Ram Karpal submitted that bail should be granted for Gunasegaran, the Seremban Jaya assemblyman, the AGC represented by Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Saifuddin Hashim Musaimi argued very strongly against granting bail.
On the same day Tommy Thomas spoke on the unconstitutionality of Section 13 on 23 January, at another court hearing the bail application of G. Saminathan, the Gadek state assemblyman, the DPP argued against bail. His basis for doing so was the issue of National security, and he cited the DSAI case on denying bail.
Now if the AG as the Public Prosecutor is really interested to release the detainees under bail, the easiest thing to do is for the DPP to insist that they have no objection in granting bail and maybe they could have imposed other conditions such as withholding the passport or other conditions deemed fair. Now how come we see the two faces here?
The earliest bail application decision will be on 29 January and if the Courts deny bail, then the AG and his team will have to explain since they were not in favour of granting bail.
The best way out is for the Government to repeal the SOSMA act or at the least do away with all conditions which go against detention without trial. Now at the courts, the AG and his team should be seen to show some level of consistency if they truly believe in the notion and principle of rights of a detainee. Their double stand and two faces can only be interpreted as the confused state of Governance we are in.
S Arutchelvan is the deputy chairperson Parti Sosialis Malaysia
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of The Leaders Online.
