Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) is greatly concerned about police and state actions against Global Ikhwan Services and Business (GISB) Holdings, related or subsidiary companies, and individuals ‘linked’ to GISB, including employees.
The initial complaint was regarding allegations of child abuse.
The rule of law and principles of administration of justice must be complied with at all times. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s assurance – that the investigations are “being handled without bias and in line with the rule of law” and that the “law must apply equally to all, regardless of affiliations” – o welcomed.
No to pre-conviction ‘punishments’
PM Anwar was also right when he said, “Before a sentence is passed, suspects should not be punished beforehand,” in his speech during the 25th Suhakam anniversary.
Hence, the government must ensure that “no punishment”, especially those with irreparable damages, is not imposed, more so on innocent persons and entities. If pre-conviction punishments have already been imposed, they must be speedily revoked or varied.
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a pledge or schedule an auto donation to Aliran every month or every quarter
- Become an Aliran member
To date, it has been reported that various actions have been taken against other premises in the group, the freezing of accounts, the seizure of vehicles, property and others.
Remember that on 11 September the issue was about the crime of child abuse and sexual crimes at children homes allegedly run by GISB or its subsidiaries – which are usually crimes committed by individual persons, not business entities.
The individual perpetrators must be identified, investigated and charged – but it is unjust to also now act against sources of income and companies they own or work in. Such actions have a significant, if not irreversible, impact on one’s livelihood and life.
Don’t act like Israel or US
After the 7 October 2023 bombing and kidnapping of people in Israel by a yet-to-be-conclusively identified terrorist group, both Israel, the US and even the UK were too fast to lay the blame on Hamas. (Hamas was the last democratically elected government of Gaza, if not Palestine.)
There was pressure by Israel, the US and others to lay blame on Hamas, but UN member states, even those in the Security Council, did not want to prematurely accuse Hamas without due process, as the possibility existed that the crimes could have been committed by other ‘terrorist’ groups not linked to or controlled by Hamas.
Until early 2024, the UN official position was that it was done by some “Palestinian armed groups in Gaza”. A perusal of UN Security Council resolutions passed to date shows that there is an absence of any provision that categorically blames Hamas for the attack and atrocities of October 2023.
The abuse of the veto by those who wanted the UN to lay blame on Hamas has to date prevented the UN from taking more concrete action.
Likewise, for alleged incidents of child abuse committed by individual perpetrators, the worry is that the actions against GISB, its subsidiaries, its leaders and persons associated or working in GISB-linked businesses may be premature and in violation of the proper administration of justice.
Presumption of innocence
One important consideration must be the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law, which is accepted in Malaysia.
Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
To date, 153 accounts linked to GISB worth RM882,795.94 have been frozen, Inspector General of Police Razarudin Husain reportedly said. He said 38 vehicles, worth RM3.9m, and 14 plots of land, the value of which is still under investigation, were also seized. The freezing of the accounts was carried out under Section 44(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (Amla), while the seizures were made under Section 45(2) of the same act. “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.”
Court orders
It is shocking that Amla now says that these Section 44 freezing orders are order of the enforcement agency and not court orders. This is dangerous and not just.
These orders require the enforcement agency to have reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence has or will be committed or that the enforcement ncy has reasonable grounds to suspect that the property is the proceeds of an unlawful activity or the instrumentalities of an offence.
It is absurd for an enforcement agency itself to issue orders based on whether it, the agency, has the needed reasonable grounds. It must be some other party – preferably the courts.
Madpet believes 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 be easily abused by the enforcement agency.
If the courts made the orders, they would have been just to allow for some money in these ‘frozen accounts’ to be used to pay wages, electricity and utility bills, rental of business premises and to provide for sufficient money for the business owners to sustain their and their family’s livelihoods.
Completely cutting off the suspects from all of their own money is evil. Consideration should have been given to how the affected families, including the children, live. Money is needed for regular debt financing, including house loans and car loans. Non-payment can result in the loss of homes.
Who issued the current orders? The inspector general – or some inspector? Amla is not clear who has the powers; it just says “enforcement agency”.
Was the Amla order made with the knowledge or consent of the home minister or Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim (as these are two ministers mentioned as responsible for Amla Act)?
Make the orders public
Why is the order not yet disclosed to the public? Who is it against?
Note that Section 44A gives the right to the “person named or described in the order” to apply to revoke or vary the order.
However, this order naturally affects a lot of other people, including workers, other people and businesses that have business transactions with some of these business entities. Should not the right to apply to vary orders be given to all those affected by such orders?
Remember, these are orders issued even before the owner or those linked to this account are even charged in court. This means that at this stage, the prosecution even does not have sufficient evidence to charge the [suspect] in court.
Section 44(5) states:
(5) An order made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect after ninety days from the date of the order, if the person against whom the order was made has not been charged with an offence under this Act or a terrorism financing offence,…
Note also the legal principle, is that one “should not be charged in Court until the investigation into the case against him has been completed and there is prima facie evidence to prosecute him of the charge. In other words, a person should not be put in peril of a criminal trial unless the prosecution is able to prove the case against him”. This was also stated by late Supreme Court Judge Harun Mahmud Hashim in the 1980 judgment in the Tan Kim San case.
So, if GISB or those linked to the company are being investigated for Amla offences, and they have not yet even been charged, great care must be taken in issuing such orders prematurely.
The primary concern is that money may be transferred overseas. So would not a different order suffice to prevent the transfer of money overseas beyond the court’s jurisdiction at this stage? Once the person is charged, the order could be varied because only then would the prosecution be confident that they have sufficient evidence to prove the person’s guilt in court.
We reiterate that PM Anwar stated that “suspects should not be punished beforehand”.
Extraordinary orders?
Najib Razak is also being charged and tried for an Amla offence. One wonders whether all his bank accounts have been frozen, his house and property seized, his horses and pets ‘confiscated’? In the SRC case too, he was convicted of an Amla offence.
Looking at other Amla cases, did they too suffer a similar bank account freezing, land or property seizures and other pre-conviction ‘punishments’ like what we are seeing with these GISB-related cases? Remember, our Constitution guarantees equality.
In this case, GISB or its subsidiaries have not even been charged. They have only been suspected of offences by the police. But what is happening to them may be a gross injustice.
What happens if after trial (if it happens), they are shown to be innocent of the charges? The damage has been done, and it is uncertain whether their business will survive, or the prejudice created will ever go away.
In the infamous 1980s McMartin preschool case (in California), where a similar allegation of child abuse was made, it ultimately ended with no convictions, and a revelation that the reports were baseless or false.
Forty years later, the losses suffered by the owner families and employees concerned and the business cannot be remedied – they remain victims of a gross injustice.
Now what happened in this case is considered “the epic failure of trusted institutions: law enforcement, courts, the child-therapy establishment and the media”.
The worry is that the employees, owners and GISB companies may suffer similar irreparable injustice if the allegations are, at the end of the day, found to be false or baseless.
We do not want to create new victims of injustice – the alleged perpetrators of the crimes investigated, who may end up being innocent.
Child abuse or religious deviants?
Allegations of crimes against children, including abuse and sexual abuse, must be promptly acted on without delay. Suspected victims must be speedily ‘rescued’, as any delay poses the risk of the child suffering further abuse or more children falling victim.
Did the police delay in this case, as when it acted, it involved many different child homes at one go? Reasonably, an earlier report would have been about one incident at one home – or did the allegations of these abuses surface all at the same time involving cases of child abuse at several different childcare establishments?
The police admit that police reports had been made since 2011. So why did the police not act sooner?
The fact that the police operation was called ‘Ops Global’ also does not augur well, as the name relates to an action against GISB for suspected criminal activities other than child abuse. Was it really about crimes against children or was it all the time an action against GIBS? Prime Minister Anwar must clarify.
Pas secretary general Takiyuddin Hassan bravely asked a relevant question whether what is happening is by reason of “reckless sentiments, prejudices, business rivalries, or political agendas”. He rightly expressed worry about the injustices that may befall “its innocent members or on the legitimate, law-abiding, and beneficial aspects of GISBH’s activities”.
To date, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has not yet specifically responded to these concerns.
Better to have separate investigations
Allegations of child abuse naturally create serious concern and anger among the people and demands immediate action.
Likewise, allegations of religious deviation results in anger amongst Muslim in Malaysia
Madpet believes that to ensure professionalism in investigation and the administration of criminal justice, these crimes should best be acted on separately, without allowing anger or prejudice about religious deviation to affect investigations of crimes against children. Note always the presumption of innocence until proven guilty after a fair trial in court.
Maybe the police ought to focus on the crimes against children and any other crimes like Amla crimes. Leave the investigation of allegations of religious deviants or crimes of Muslims as contained in Sharia criminal laws to Islamic law enforcers.
Prejudice and anger linked to alleged crimes of religious deviants can risk the professional investigation of other crimes, not linked to religion.
Prejudices, whether based on ethnicity, religion, class or gender, should never affect or even compromise professional investigations and the prosecution of crimes.
Madpet calls for professional and unbiased investigations against the alleged suspects.
Madpet calls for all alleged suspects, after investigation, to be charged and accorded a fair trial. Laws allowing detention without trial should never be used again, as was done in the 1994 crackdown on Al-Arqam.
Madpet calls for the end to offers of compound to suspects of crimes affecting children, corruption, abuse of powers and offences under Amla. Only a conviction after a fair trial would prove guilt and show no abuse by the government and law enforcement agencies.
Madpet calls for a repeal of provisions in Amla and other laws that allow enforcement agencies to issue pre-conviction order that will affect suspects and others. The power to issue any such orders should only be given to the courts. Those affected by such orders should be allowed to participate in court hearings and apply for revocation and variation of the orders. They should also have the right to appeal against such orders.
Madpet also asks for the enactment of criminal compensation legislation that will compensate victims of false arrest, detention, baseless prosecution and other damage caused by pre-conviction actions like the freezing of accounts and the closure of business.
Madpet calls for the establishment of a royal commission of inquiry, as previously proposed by the child rights commissioner and G25, but to look at all aspects of the actions taken against GISB and others. – Madpet
Charles Hector issued this statement on behalf of Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet).
AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama
- Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
- Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
- Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
- Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
- Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
