JUSTICE needs not only be served but must be seen to be served.
This was the point highlighted by human rights activist and lawyer Chares Hector who noted alarming discrepancies in the investigation process into the allegations levelled against Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH).
At one hand, the powers-that-be are under pressure to be seen to be proactive in taking decisive measures with many serious accusations of child abuse surrounding GISBH dominating both social and traditional media as well as coffeeshop chatter.
However, the co-founder of NGO Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET) cautioned against playing to the gallery by highlighting several discrepancies which are not in the interest of justice being meted out.
First and foremost, Hector pointed out that there should be a presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law.
With this case being a high profile one with it being the subject of endless chatter, speculation and conjecture, there is a very real danger that this case is being tried by the court of public opinion.
Secondly, Hector noted that there should be no pre-conviction punishments. By this, the government must ensure that ‘no punishment’ – some with irreparable damages – is imposed, more so on the innocent persons and/or entities. If pre-conviction punishments have already imposed, it must be speedily revoked or varied.
To date, it has been reported that various actions have been taken against numerous business premises the group which is said to be remnant of the banned Islamic deviant sect, Al-Arqam, by means of freezing of bank accounts, seizure of properties/land, vehicles and livestock, to name a few.
Herein, Hector pointed out that while there have been allegations of wrongdoings in relation to child abuse and sexual crimes at children’s homes allegedly run by GISBH and/or its subsidiaries, these are crimes committed by individual persons, not business entities.
Henceforth, the individual perpetrators must be identified, investigated and charged; it is unjust to also act against sources of income and/or companies they own or work in as such actions may have a significant – if not irreversible – impact to one’s livelihood and life.
Thirdly, Hector highlighted the alarming precedent of the enforcement agencies – instead of the courts – issuing orders to seize/freeze assets related to GISBH.
To date, a total of 153 accounts linked to GISBH worth RM882,795.94 have been frozen under Section 44(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLA) while the seizures of vehicles and properties/land were made under Section 45(2) of the same act.
Additionally, a total of 26 animals, consisting of nine horses, 14 rabbits and three peacocks as well as cash amounting to RM18,650 and two watches valued at RM600 were also confiscated, according to Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Razarudin Husain.
These orders require the enforcement agency to have reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence has been committed OR that the enforcement agency has reasonable grounds to suspect that the said property is derived from proceeds of an unlawful activity or the instrumentalities of an offence.
It is absurd therefore for an enforcement agency itself to issue orders based on whether it has the needed reasonable grounds.
MADPET is of the opinion that it must be the courts that issue such Section 44 AMLA orders after determining the validity of the enforcement agency’s reasonable grounds. If not, such powers can/may be easily abused by the enforcement agency.
Hector further drew comparison with the case of now incarcerated former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak which also involved Section 44 of AMLA. He wondered if Najib and his family also had their properties seized and bank accounts frozen or their livestock seized as is the case with GISBH.
Fourthly, Hector questioned why has the order yet to be disclosed to the public? Who is it against?
Note that section Section 44A accords the right to the “person named or described in the order” to apply to revoke or vary the Order.
This Order naturally affects a lot of other people including workers other persons and businesses with business links to these business entities.
What is worrisome, according to Hector, is that employees, owners and GISBH-linked subsidiaries may suffer similar irreparable injustices if the allegations are found to be false or baseless at the end of the day.
In this respect, the legal eagle questioned the speedy action of the police. Why the sudden swoop when apparently police reports have been lodged on the matter as far back as 2011.
The fact that the police operation was called “Op Global” also does not augur well as the name relates to an action against GISBH for suspected criminal activities other than child abuse.
Last but not least, Hector also highlighted the highly sensitive nature of when it comes to allegations of “religious deviants”.
To allow for a professional and unbiased investigations against the alleged suspects, MADPET suggested for a separation of investigations to those related to child abuse and those of religious deviancy with the latter to be handled by the relevant religious agencies.
Given the very high-profile nature of the case, it is indeed pertinent that due process be followed to ensure the proper dispensation of justice.
At the moment, as highlighted by MADPET’s statement, much seem to be knee jerk reaction to public outrage.
The seeming lack of due process also sets dangerous precedents for which there may be far reaching consequences, not just for the parties involved but for the Malaysian society at large. – Sept 28, 2024
Main image credit: GISB Holdings Sdn Bhd/Facebook
