Safety Law. Mainly because its English name is Internal Security Act (ISA). For your convenience.
Look, call it the Internal Security Act.
1. Original purpose: to deal with horse * * * guerrilla warfare.
The emergence of the "Internal Security Act" is closely related to the guerrilla warfare and armed struggle carried out by the Malayan Communist Party of China.
Close. In 1948, due to the political situation at the time, the Malayan Communist Party gave up its peaceful struggle and moved to land.
Next, in the primeval forests of the entire Malay Peninsula, we launched armed struggles and guerrilla warfare against the British colonial rulers.
In order to cope with this guerrilla war, the British colonial rulers promulgated the Emergency Order of 1948 (Emergency
Regulations and Regulations 1948), declaring a national emergency. During this state of emergency, 12.
On July 31, 2000, 1,6960 was officially lifted. Although the state of emergency has been lifted, the controversy over Ma * * *'s guerrilla war
is not over yet. In order to cope with this protracted guerrilla war, the day after the end of the state of emergency (August 1, 1960), Congress passed the Internal Security Act, which officially came into effect. This law replaced the Emergency Regulations Act,
Therefore, the purpose of the Internal Security Act 1960, which was implemented 39 years ago, is obvious, and that is:
In order to cope with the Malaya * * * produces the party's armed struggle and guerrilla warfare, and not for other purposes.
In this regard, on June 21, 1960, 65438, the then Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior Deng Lacha stated in Congress that < Neian
The passage of this decree was in response to * * *Subversive activities of the production party. The purpose of this law was never Congress.
Changed in the middle. It has never been a tool of government to deal with other dissidents or other criminals.
2. The "Alienation" of the "Internal Security Law"
However, for many years, the "Internal Security Law" has been regarded by those in power as a political tool to exclude dissidents.
Provisions of the Act, abuse of detention without trial. In other words, anyone can be detained for an extended period of time under this law.
But you have no right to demand a public trial. There is absolutely no need for politicians to prove in open court what crime the detainee committed, as long as.
Enforce the name ISA and you can detain anyone indefinitely.
From a non-Western democratic perspective, this proves that laws like the Internal Security Act are oppressive to the ruling elite of the people.
Part of the people's state apparatus.
From the perspective of Western democracy, this law is a strict law that does not conform to the spirit of the rule of law but seriously violates the concept of the rule of law.
Law. A basic principle of the rule of law is that everyone is innocent unless the prosecution can prove his guilt.
The central idea of ??3.3. Personal Savings Account
The central idea of ??the Internal Security Act is that you can detain someone for an extended period of time without having to prove their guilt in open court. First,
can be detained for 60 days “to assist in the investigation.” Detention may then be carried out for two years on the order of the Minister of the Interior, and these two years
The period of detention may be "extended" or extended indefinitely. This inhumane spirit of the rule of law and the democratic rule of law are completely contrary to...
In this book, Gu Ruirongjun first used a large number of newspapers and periodicals to explain the views and opinions of the ruling party, the opposition party, and the people on the "Internal Security Law" at that time. Both sides made arguments for and against.
Generally speaking, public opinion tends to be against the Internal Security Law.
Chapter 2, "Massive Arrests," describes in considerable detail the major events that occurred under the Internal Security Act from the 1960s to the 1990s.
Arrest status. Gu Jun tried his best to make a list of those arrested and imprisoned over the years. This is a substantial one.
References.
If Gu Jun could explain clearly what the "Internal Security Law" is in the first part of this booklet and use some words to introduce it,
maybe this book will be more complete. .
4. Should it be “abolition”? Or "review"?
Should the "Internal Security Law" be "abolished" or "reviewed"? Some time ago, there seemed to be no consensus on this issue. At present, there seems to be a generally accepted conclusion that the recommendation that the Internal Security Act should be repealed.
Why is this?
That’s because, after a period of exploration and research, most people believe that only the abolition of the Internal Security Law can be completed.
Solve the problem of "detention without trial". A “review” of internal security laws may not achieve this goal.
The main reason is that this draconian law, regardless of any review or modification, cannot abolish "detention without trial"
It is inconsistent with the basic principles of democracy and the rule of law.
If a country wants to pursue democracy and the rule of law, it must follow certain basic principles, one of which is: do not judge at will.
To punish someone for a crime unless he is given a fair and reasonable opportunity for a public trial. There can be no public trial.
You can convict him and then punish him (such as arbitrarily detaining him or imprisoning him for a long time). This is called
detention without trial. This is the unreasonable basic spirit of the Internal Security Law.
5. How to eliminate this law of detention without trial?
If we were just conducting a review, some might suggest a shorter detention period, say two years.
The detention period is changed to "6 months", and there is no need to ask for "abolition" (internal security law).
Can such a solution completely solve the problem of detention without trial?
Definitely not, because no matter how the detention period is shortened, it is still "detention without trial." At the same time, although the detention period has been shortened, it can still be extended indefinitely, such as half a year or half a year. Therefore, if the powers that be want to detain people for 10 or 20 years, it is not a problem at all.
Perhaps, others will suggest strengthening the "judicial review" powers of the courts to ensure that those in power adopt "lawful" procedures.
An order to detain and arrest a person. However, this is still a "temporary" approach. Because the problem of "nothing" still cannot be solved
The basic problem of interrogation.
No matter how many times the "judicial review" power of judges is increased, the core content of the "Internal Security Law" - no trial interpretation
The remaining essence - cannot be solved at all.
If the result of the "review" is that the Internal Security Act should be repealed, returning to the same place would not be a big detour. That won't work
If you directly ask for its abolition.
Since the "review" of the Internal Security Act cannot touch the core content of the law "detention without trial", then,
The theory is obvious: it should be abolished immediately upon request The Internal Security Act is to solve the problem once and for all.
Interrogation and detention. "
6. In recent years, anti-ISA forces have grown stronger.
In recent years, the Internal Security Act has been repeatedly abused. Some CEOs have ignored the importance of the Internal Security Act. The original intention is to "plausibly" defend his illegal behavior of abusing this law.
Pay close attention to it. >After two years of deliberation, the Law Society finally proposed the abolition of (1998) 65438 + February 10 to the Prime Minister on International Human Rights Day
Recently ( On September 2, 1998, former Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister An Hwa-hyun was detained and later detained under the Internal Security Act. He was later charged with corruption and other criminal offences. After this incident, people were concerned, especially the Malay middle class. This led to the "Gerak", a major alliance of opposition forces. p>'s production. Gerak's members include opposition parties (People's Party, Action Party, Muslim Party and Socialist Party of Malaysia) and non-governmental organizations (such as "Voice of the People" Suaram, etc.
), and Umno members who support Anwar.
This is the first time in the history of our country that a major alliance of opposition forces has emerged to "oppose the Internal Security Law."
This shows that in recent years, the authorities have abused their arbitrary powers under the Internal Security Act to an alarming extent.
This has led to a situation where "officials force the people to rebel". Even two UMNO MPs expressed their opposition to ISA in Congress.
On the other hand, in the 1960s and 1970s, the opposition to the Internal Security Act basically came from left-wing parties.
Summary
It can be said that today, given the repeated abuse of the arbitrary power of detention without trial under the Internal Security Act, this has prompted
more People deeply realize that this law is not in line with the spirit of democracy and the rule of law, and therefore demand its immediate repeal.
It is for this reason that calls for "justice, democracy and the rule of law" have become popular among people from all walks of life recently.
The response was overwhelming. There are calls for the repeal of the Internal Security Act.
When the racial regime in South Africa was in power, China also adopted similar internal security laws to deal with political dissidents, such as South Africa.
Leaders and members of President Mandela and his party, the African National Congress (ANC), who have not left office.
Today, however, the African National Congress is in power. After Mandela became president, he repealed the Internal Security Act.
Yes. Should the people of Malaysia learn from the people of South Africa, abolish the ISA, and start improving China's "justice,
democracy and rule of law?