This unprecedented use of police force has caused serious injuries to residents who have gathered there, including beatings and head wounds. However more tragic was the use of guns by the police.
A bullet penetrated the chest and lung of Suwandi Abdul while another victim, Muhamad Azman Aziz was shot in the neck.
The disgraceful and worrying incident has made a mockery of the 50th anniversary of Merdeka that was supposed to symbolize the liberation of the people from oppression.
The statement that the police acted in self-defense is absolutely unacceptable.
There are many alternatives available to the police that the use of firearms should be the last option, not the first. There are too many questions that the police must be made answerable to the public:·
- Why did the police deny the application of permit for the programme by the organizer in the first place? Past events organized by BERSIH have been peaceful and orderly.
- Why was the police officer who shot the civilians not in police uniform while carrying out his duty? This raises doubts whether he was involved in inciting the crowd which prompted responsible civilians who were concerned about untoward incident (had) to make citizen arrest without knowing he was actually a police officer.
- Was it necessary for police officers to carry guns with live ammunition when dealing with a peaceful assembly of unarmed civilians, who have dutifully informed the police about the event? Was it necessary for a police officer to open fire into a large crowd of civilians?
International human rights law imposes strict conditions on the use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials. Article 3 of the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials states that "Law enforcement officials may use force only when strictly necessary and to the extent required for the performance of their duty."
Article 12 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials recognizes the right of everyone to participate in peaceful assembly. It further stipulates in Article 13 that the dispersal of assemblies shall "avoid the use of force or, where that is not practicable, shall restrict such force to the minimum extent necessary".
Clearly, the police who claimed the drawing of arms on the night was on the basis of self defense, did not meet this basic "necessary" and "proportionate" test.
Firstly, it was not necessary for the police to ban the public assembly as the organizers have an unblemished track record of being responsible and peaceful. The right to freedom of peaceful assembly is guaranteed under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.
Secondly, those who attended the public assembly were unarmed civilians, families, women and children. There was no reason at all for the police to carry guns with live ammunition when dealing with peaceful assembly. The carrying of guns was totally unjustified and disproportionate to the circumstances faced by the police, let alone discharging them.
In view of the gravity of the abuse of police power, which nearly took the lives of two civilians, we call on the government to set up a Royal Commission to conduct an independent and thorough inquiry into the incident and bring responsible police officers to court of justice.
We must stop the police violence immediately before the police force becomes a cold- blooded trigger-happy squad.
We are appalled that the incident has been used as an excuse by the government to impose a blanket ban on all public gatherings before the coming general election. This further reinforces the suggestion that the incident in Kuala Terengganu may have been pre-meditated and politically motivated by the Government. We call for this blanket ban to be revoked immediately and for all permits be granted without prejudice.
Endorsees:
1. Aliran Kesedaran Negara (Aliran)
2. Women's Aid Organization (WAO)
3. National Human Rights Society (Hakam)
4. Tenaganita
5. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita
6. Civil Rights Committee of The Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (CRC-KLSCAH)
7. Writers Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI)
8. ArtisProActiv
9. Center for Independent Journalism (CIJ)
10. Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)
11. Group of Concerned Citizen
12. Citizen Think Tank (CTT)
13. Amnesty International Malaysia (AI Malaysia)14. Labour Resource Center (LRC)
15. Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC)
16. Pusat Janadaya (Empower, PJD)
17. All Women's Action Malaysia (AWAM)
18. Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)
19. Women's Development Collective (WDC)
20. Persatuan Alumni PBTUSM Selangor
21. Women's Centre for Change, Penang (WCC)
22. Sisters in Islam (SIS)
23. Pesticide Action Network, Asia and the Pacific (PAN AP)
24. Pusat Khidmat Pekerja Tanjung (PKPT)
25. Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA)
26. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
相关新闻
无法接受警方开枪自卫理由民间组织批政府趁机禁集会 (当今大马）
国内26个人权与公民组织今日强烈谴责警方 ，於上周六在瓜拉登嘉楼的干净与公平选举联盟（Bersih）讲座上 ，使用过度暴力如发射催泪弹和动用实弹射击现场公众。
国民醒觉运动、妇女援助组织、隆雪华堂民权委员会、维护媒体独立撰稿人联盟、独立新闻中心、国际特赦大马分部、回教姐妹组织和大马人民之声 ，发表联署声明，批评警方使用空前的暴力和开枪射击导致现场群众蒙受重伤，包括一人胸部和另一人颈项遭子弹射中。
联署声明也表示，警方声称开枪自卫的完全不能令人接受，因为警方仍有许多方式可以解决问题，而不应该动辄开枪。
疑便衣警员煽动人群反遭逮捕声明也提出数个疑问，要求警方做出解释：
－－为何警方一开始拒绝批发集会准证予主办单位？干净与公平选举联盟在过去主办的活动皆和平及有秩序。
－－为何该名开枪射击民众的警员，在执行任务时没有穿警察制服？这令人怀疑，有关警员是否涉及煽动人群的行为，导致一些负责任的群众在不知晓其真实警员身份之下，对他进行“公民逮捕”（citizen arrest）以免发生不愉快事件。
－－警方在处理和平集会及面对手无寸铁的公民时，是否有必要携带荷枪实弹？警员是否有必要在群众之中，公然开枪？
自卫开枪不符执法人员守则
声明表示，国际人权法已制约执法人员使用武力和火器的情况，包括《联合国执法人员行为守则》第3条规定，执法人员只有在绝对必要时才能使用武力，而且不能超出执行职务所必须的范围。
《联合国执法人员使用武力和火器的基本原则》第12条文则表示，根据《世界人权宣言》和《公民权利和政治权利国际盟约》中所体现的原则，人人都可参加合法与和平的集会。第13条文也注明，在驱散非法而非暴力的集会时，执法人员应避免使用武力，或在实际无法避免时应将使用武力限制到必要的最低限度。
声明表示，警方以自卫为由拔枪射击，明显并不符合上述基本原则，尤其是警方一开始就不应该制止负责任与和平的民众集会。自由集会也是联邦宪法第10条文下赋予的基本权利。
其次，出席有关集会的人士都是手无寸铁的公民、携带家眷、女性和幼童，因此警方毫无理由以荷枪实弹处理和平集会。
设皇家委会起诉开枪警员
此外，联署的组织也呼吁政府成立皇家委员会，彻查有关事件及起诉相关的警员。
声明也对政府借这次事件为藉口，禁止在来届大选之前举行任何公开集会表示震惊，表示这无形中使到瓜登骚乱事件可能是政府的政治预谋说法甚嚣尘上。
No comments:
Post a Comment