Thursday, May 26, 2022

Media Statement (8 Gps) - SUHAKAM ‘dead’ with no HR Commissioners for 1 Month is unacceptable

 

Media Statement – 27/5/2022

SUHAKAM ‘dead’ with no HR Commissioners for 1 Month is unacceptable

We, the 8 undersigned organizations and groups are perturbed that the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) has ceased to function when the term of office of the previous Chairman and SUHAKAM Commissioners came to an end on 27/4/2022, and to date no new Chairpersons and HR Commissioners have been appointed.

Without any HR Commissioners, SUHAKAM cannot play the vital role it has been playing in Malaysia. They can make no SUHAKAM statements, recommendations to the government or even hold public inquiries. Human Rights suffers.

A media report on 11/5/2022, stated that the ‘…Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) is conducting an investigation into alleged human rights violations against junior doctors at public hospitals in Malaysia…’ raises a fundamental question, as to how SUHAKAM, with NO Commissioners at present, can even make such a statement. SUHAKAM employees reasonably cannot act on their own if and when there are no Commissioners. (FMT, 11/5/2022).

SUHAKAM is a statutory body created by reason of the Human Rights Commission Of Malaysia Act 1999, and the Commission is made up of the appointed HR Commissioners, appointed for a 3-year term. When there are NO Commissioners, as had been the case for the past month, SUHAKAM ceases to function, and will not be able to do anything including issuing  statements, appointing and also providing directions to SUHAKAM’s staff/employees.

Noting the important role that SUHAKAM has been playing in Malaysia, in terms of the promotion and defense of human rights, it is an embarrassment for SUHAKAM to find itself in a comatose stage by reason of a failure of government to ensure that SUHAKAM always have Commissioners.

It must be pointed out that the process of identifying and selecting new SUHAKAM Commissioners began in October 2021, and so the failure of the appointment of Chairperson and new Commissioners on or before the end of the term of previous Commissioners on 27/4/2022.

The choice of the future Chairperson and SUHAKAM Commissioners is crucial, for that determines the future functioning and effectiveness of the National Human Rights Institution.

In the past, from the birth of SUHAKAM, its effectiveness was not so evident but it changed after Tan Sri Hasmy Agam (2010-2016), and later Tan Sri Dato' Razali bin Ismail(2016-2019)  were appointed as Chairpersons of SUHAKAM. The strong effective SUHAKAM continued on until April 2022.

The number of Commissioners who will act without fear or favour for human rights in SUHAKAM is crucial, for all decisions of SUHAKAM requires consensus failing which the decision by a two-thirds majority of the members present at meetings shall be required. If the wrong kinds of Commissioners are appointed, we may end up with a less vocal, possibly ‘pro-government’ SUHAKAM who may be disinclined to speak up when required, or even hold public inquiries, more so when the alleged perpetrators may be State or State officers.

If the wrong Chairperson and Commissioners are chosen, there may be no more public inquiries on matters of human rights, like the Public Inquiry Into The Disapperances Of Joshua Hilmy And Ruth Sitepu, Public Inquiry Into The Disappearance of Pastor Raymond Koh And Amri Che Mat, Public inquiry into the incidents during and after the public assembly of 28 april 2012, Public Inquiry into the Infringement of Human Rights Including the Use of Excessive Force Prior to and During the Assembly on 9 July 2011, Public Inquiry Into The Arrest And Detention Of Five Lawyers Of The Kuala Lumpur Legal Aid Centre on 7 May 2009, Public Inquiry Into The Allegation Of Excessive Use Of Force By Law Enforment Personnel During The Incident Of 27th May 2008 At Persiaran Bandar Mahkota Cheras 1, Bandar Mahkota Cherasil and inquiries into death in custody.  

The days when the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) was effectively an independent organisation which investigates complaints for the violation of human rights may come to an end.

We hope that the members of the Commission appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the recommendation of the Prime Minister are done without any more delay.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of the 8 groups/organizations listed below

 

ALIRAN

MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Greenpeace Malaysia

International Women's Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific (IWRAW AP)

NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)

Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM)

Teoh Beng Hock Trust for Democracy

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

 

Suhakam left with no commissioners for third time

Mah Weng Kwai says having no commissioners will affect advocacy work and maintaining the good standing of Suhakam.

PETALING JAYA: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) does not have any commissioners after their term expired yesterday, similar to what happened twice previously.

Former commissioner Mah Weng Kwai said a selection committee met on Monday and the process would take some time.

“As of today, there are no commissioners and this will affect advocacy work and maintaining the good standing of Suhakam,” he told FMT.

Mah said only the Suhakam management functioned and no policy decisions could be made.

There are nine commissioners who have a three-year term from 2019.

Five, including Mah, a former Court of Appeal judge, served two terms, the maximum allowed under the Suhakam Act.

The other four – Osman Hashim, Noor Aziah Mohd Awal, Madeline Berma and Hishamudin Md Yunus – could be reappointed for another term.

FMT understands that Hishamudin, also a retired Court of Appeal judge, had expressed his wish not to be reappointed.

Mah said that three years ago, it took the government two months to appoint the commissioners.

“It is in the best interest of the public that the commission is up and running at all times as there are always serious challenges on human rights issues like the threat to the independence of the judiciary,” he said.

In 2016, under Najib Razak’s administration, Suhakam was also left without commissioners for almost two months. - FMT, 27/4/2022

 

Five Suhakam commissioners complete two service terms
Published:  Apr 27, 2022 10:22 AM
Updated: 10:25 AM

Five Suhakam members completed their second term at the human rights commission yesterday.

They are Mah Weng Kwai, Jerald Joseph, Nik Salida Suhaila Nik Saleh, Lok Yim Pheng and Godfrey Gregory Joitol.

All five started their tenure as Suhakam commissioners in 2016 during then prime minister Najib Abdul Razak's administration.

Each term lasts three years. Section 5(4) of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 (Suhakam Act) does not allow a third term.

Four other commissioners completed their first term including Othman Hashim (outgoing chairperson), Madeline Berma, Mohd Hishamuddin Md Yunus and Noor Aziah Mohd Awal.

Putrajaya has yet to announce the list of replacement commissioners.

Suhakam members are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the recommendation of the prime minister in consultation with an appointment committee chaired by the chief secretary of the government.

According to Section 11 of the Suhakam Act, the committee must also consist of the chairperson of Suhakam and three members of civil society who have practical experience in human rights matters, appointed by the prime minister.

In previous cycles, there have been incidents where there will be a gap of several months before a new batch of commissioners is appointed. - Malaysiakini, 27/4/2022

Monday, May 2, 2022

Law says for OSH violation, both company and Directors(Managers, etc) but why are the humans not charged - Joint Statement of 15

 Media Statement – 3/5/2022

Is it the Minister or is it the Public Prosecutor that ‘protects’ Directors and/or humans in companies from being charged when OSH laws are breached and worker/s die?

174 workers killed and 249 disabled in 6,686 workplace accidents in 2021

We, the 15 undersigned groups, trade unions and organization are concerned as to why human persons responsible for worker safety and health are still not being charged in court even when workers are killed or injured despite the fact that the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 provides for this. Prosecution for offences under this Act requires the consent of the Public Prosecutor, and as such one wonders whether it is the Public Prosecutor or is it the Minister that is deciding to charge only the company, but not the director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate even when workers are killed.

It was recently reported that a state-linked company (SLDB Management Sdn Bhd) and a manufacturing firm was found guilty for the offence under Section 15(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994, for neglecting safety aspects, which resulted in the deaths of their workers which provides for a fine of up to RM50,000 or a jail term of up to two years, or both, upon conviction. It appears from the media report that no ‘director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate…’ was charged(Star, 8/4/2022)

After state-linked SLDB Management Sdn Bhd pleaded guilty on Friday (April 8), the company was ordered by the Sessions Court to pay a fine of RM15,000 for the death of Indonesian worker Cahya Abdullah at Ladang Bombong 1, Kampung Bombong in Kota Marudu on May 25 2021. SLDB Management was also ordered to pay RM5,000 by April 14 to Cahya's next of kin.

In the other case, Englen Manufacturing Sdn Bhd after its representative admitted to the charge, was sentenced with a fine of RM20,000 or three months' jail. The company was accused of failing to ensure the safety of its worker Bonnie Roger, who was involved in a fatal accident at its premises on May 15 last year at the Kota KInabalu Industrial Park here.

What is of concern is that no human decision maker or owner of these companies were charged for these offences despite the fact that Section 52 of the Occupational Safety And Health Act 1994 states ‘(1) Where a body corporate contravenes any provision of this Act or any regulation made thereunder, every person who at the time of the commission of the offence is a director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate shall be deemed to have contravened the provision and may be charged jointly in the same proceedings with the body corporate or severally, and every such director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence.’ Subsection (2) states, (2) A person may be proceeded against and convicted under the provision of subsection (1) whether or not the corporation has been proceeded against or has been convicted under that provision.

It must be pointed out that in a company, all decisions are made by human persons, including ensuring the safety of workers. It is absurd that only the company is charged in court, and not the human decision makers or those responsible. With regards to a company, they can only be fined – it obviously cannot be imprisoned.

Concern arises about this practice of not charging Directors and officers of the company, more so when it is a government linked company (GLC), where Directors may be politically appointed persons is a worry. Directors of companies have a great responsibility not just to the shareholders but also to all workers, and actions or omissions be it intentionally or negligently done, to avoid making workplaces safe to protect workers and their health should no longer be tolerated.

Even in the recent 2 cases in Sabah, we find that the companies immediately admitted guilt, and as such there will also not be any grounds of judgment that can be educational to other employers to ensure that they do not ignore safety and health of workers.

The cases was dealt at the Sessions Court, even when death was a result of the fault of the employer, and this may also lead to non-dissemination and/or reporting of the grounds of judgment in law journals.

We take the view that when a worker dies, or is injured by reason of an employer’s failure to ensure the safety and health of a worker, this matter should be dealt by the High Court, and a higher penalty ought to be imposed on the guilty employer company, and its a director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate. Black listing of such convicted companies and its directors may also be needed to ensure employer’s place the highest regard to complying with the law concerning occupational health and safety.

Statistics from the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) showed that there were 6,686 workplace accidents reported as of December 2021, of which 174 were fatal. Another 249 victims became disabled. This shows that this issue is a very serious issue for the protection of workers.

Prior Written Consent Of The Public Prosecutor – Who decided not to charge Directors,etc?

Section 61 of the Occupational Safety And Health Act 1994 states that ‘Prosecutions in respect of offences committed under this Act or any regulation made thereunder may, with the prior written consent of the Public Prosecutor, be instituted and conducted by an occupational safety and health officer or by an officer specially authorized in writing by the Director General subject to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.

By reason of the written consent requirement, the Public Prosecutor may be the person refusing to give the required consent if and when the Ministry wants to charge certain directors, managers, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate, and so they cannot be charged.

Alternatively, it may the officers of the Ministry, being the ‘…occupational safety and health officer or by an officer specially authorized in writing by the Director General…’ who chooses not to charge any directors, managers, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate.

This matter needs to be clarified, and the reasons for not charging the human persons in these companies need to be investigated. We hope that there is no corruption or abuse of power involved.

The maximum fine from RM50,000 will be increased to RM500,000 by virtue of the Occupational Safety And Health (Amendment) Act 2022, which was gazetted on 16/3/2022, but is not yet put into force by the Minister, being the Human Resource Minister. Why the delay?

As such, the Session Courts imposition of fines of only RM15,000 and RM20,000 in the cases mentioned above where workers died by reason of the companies’ breach of the law, when Parliament had already decided to raise fines is also questionable. True, that the current maximum applicable in this cases was only RM50,000, and justly where the companies admitted guilt, maximum fines should have been imposed since workers died by reason of the companies breach of the law.

The Public Prosecutor and the Minister must explain why  directors, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate are not being charged and jailed more so in cases when the breach of law resulted in injury or death of workers.

Every time that a company is charged for such offences, the persons who are responsible for the acts/omissions that resulted in the violation of the law reasonably must also be charged. It is odd if just the company is charged, and not the human persons responsible.

Charles Hector

Apolinar Z Tolentino Jr.

 

For and on behalf of the following 15 groups/organisations

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

Building and Wood Worker's International (BWI) Asia Pacific

Labour Law Reform Coalition(LLRC)

ALIRAN

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor

AsociaciĆ³n de Trabajadoras del Hogar a Domicilio y de Maquila–Atrahdom, Guatemala

Black Women for Wages for Housework

Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) SEA Coalition

Haiti Action Committee

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility (Dr R S McCoy)

NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)

North South Initiative

The William Gomes Podcast, United Kingdom

Women of Color/Global Women’s Strike





Two Sabah firms fined for negligence over workers' death

By MUGUNTAN VANARSabah & Sarawak


Friday, 08 Apr 2022 7:56 PM MYT



KOTA KINABALU: A state-linked company and a manufacturing firm have been fined by the Sessions Court here for neglecting safety aspects, which resulted in the deaths of their workers.

A representative of state-linked SLDB Management Sdn Bhd pleaded guilty on Friday (April 8) and was ordered to pay RM15,000 for the death of Indonesian worker Cahya Abdullah at Ladang Bombong 1, Kampung Bombong in Kota Marudu on May 25 last year.

The offence under Section 15(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 provides for a fine of up to RM50,000 or a jail term of up to two years, or both, upon conviction.

Judge Elsie Primus also ordered SLDB Management to pay RM5,000 by April 14 to Cahya's next of kin.

Cahya died after falling off a trailer mounted on a tractor which was deemed unsuitable for carrying workers.

In another case, judge Noor Hafizah Mohd Salim imposed a fine of RM20,000 or three months' jail against Englen Manufacturing Sdn Bhd after its representative admitted to the charge.

The company was accused of failing to ensure the safety of its worker Bonnie Roger, who was involved in a fatal accident at its premises on May 15 last year at the Kota KInabalu Industrial Park here.
 
According to the charge sheet, Bonnie's death resulted from unsafe work procedure involving a welding machine. - Star, 8/4/2022


Work towards zero workplace accidents, urges NIOSH chairman

By RAGANANTHINI VETHASALAM Nation


Thursday, 28 Apr 2022 3:46 PM MYT



PETALING JAYA: There should be zero accidents at workplaces, if possible, says National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) chairman Datuk Wilson Ugak Kumbong.

Wilson urged employers and employees to practise a safe and healthy working environment to prevent any mishaps.

Therefore, he urged stakeholders to work as a team and conduct activities related to safety and health to ensure a safe work environment.

“At least, we want zero accidents or casualties.

“Our goal is to reduce accidents at workplaces,” he said at the sidelines of the Occupational Safety and Health Day celebration.

Statistics from the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) showed that there were 6,686 workplace accidents reported as of December 2021, of which 174 were fatal. Another 249 victims became disabled.

The sector which contributed to the highest number of deaths during the period was construction, where 65 casualties were reported.

As at the first quarter of this year, there were 1,703 such accidents reported which claimed the lives of 48 while 54 became disabled.

The manufacturing sector contributed to the highest number of fatalities coming from manufacturing and construction which reported 16 deaths each.

Meanwhile, Wilson also advised the public to continue to observe standard operating procedure (SOP) to curb Covid-19, despite the announcement on relaxations.

“Children as young as two to three years old have yet to be vaccinated and only those aged five and above have been vaccinated. So if possible please observe the SOP while you are with your family,” he said.

“If there is a big crowd, why not use the SOP to be safe,” he said.

Health Minister Khairy Jamaluddin announced a slew of relaxed measures on Wednesday (April 27). Among the measures were making MySejahtera check-ins and wearing face masks outdoors no longer compulsory. - Star, 28/4/2022
 
 
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT 1994
 
52  Offences committed by body corporate

(1) Where a body corporate contravenes any provision of this Act or any regulation made thereunder, every person who at the time of the commission of the offence is a director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate shall be deemed to have contravened the provision and may be charged jointly in the same proceedings with the body corporate or severally, and every such director, manager, secretary or other like officer of the body corporate shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence.

(2) A person may be proceeded against and convicted under the provision of subsection (1) whether or not the corporation has been proceeded against or has been convicted under that provision.

 61  Prosecutions

Prosecutions in respect of offences committed under this Act or any regulation made thereunder may, with the prior written consent of the Public Prosecutor, be instituted and conducted by an occupational safety and health officer or by an officer specially authorized in writing by the Director General subject to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.