A Vote for BN is a Vote for ISA

By Vijay Kumar Murugavell

The home minister has said that protests, whether for or against the ISA, are not necessary as the act is being reviewed. The most controversial sections under ISA are sections 73 and 8; police detention of 60 days and the Home Minister's discretion for 2 year detentions that can be renewed indefinitely. I know BN will never repeal it but they are now cracking their heads as to how to review it without affecting these two sections and yet fool the people into thinking they have done a satisfactory review.

The sweeping discretionary powers given under these two sections have without a doubt been abused.
The biggest argument the proponents of the ISA have is :-
1) It is for the greater good and the security of the nation;
2) The people voted the BN government into power repeatedly therefore the majority of Malaysians support the ISA; 3) The ISA was never a major election issue because it has safeguards.

All of the above reasons are poppycock. We all know it is abused to quell legitimate political dissent by the Home Minister to detain as he likes  – many lampoon the acronym ISA as "Ikut Suka Aku" (ISA) which means "as I wish".

When public opinion polls started going against them, they pathetically resorted to "Pro ISA" demonstrations
where a few half-witted monkeys paraded "Sokong ISA" t-shirts.

I wonder if these were "mat rempits"  paid a token sum by Pewaris.
If Martin Luther King were alive he would have died of shock that there exists retarded human beings who would
actually demonstrate for more restrictions on civil freedoms.
They were even so pathetic as to use ex-ISA detainees like Zabidi Mohamed, a former legal adviser of the banned deviant group Al-Arqam, and Faiz Abu Bakar Bafana, a former treasurer of the Jemaah Islamiah to agree publicly that the ISA should be upheld.

Many brain-dead individuals argue on the premise of #2; they say that since BN continues being re-elected
despite maintaining the ISA, it proves that the majority support this law.These people will draw a similar logic
from this experiment – Shout at a spider, it jumps -> cut off all its legs -> shout at it again -> it does not move.
Conclusion : spiders hear through their legs.

The emergency ended in 1960 and with it ended the powers contained in that ordinance as it was repealed. The power of preventive detention was however not relinquished and in fact became an embedded feature of Malaysian law. In 1960 itself, the government passed the Internal Security Act under Article 149 of the Malaysian Constitution.

As for point #3, this is what Tun Dr Ismail said about safeguards from abuse, note last para:
"I maintained then and I maintain now the view that the Internal Security Act is essential to the security of this country especially when democracy is interpreted the way it is interpreted in this country. To those in opposition to the government democracy is interpreted to mean absolute freedom, even the freedom to subvert the nation. When cornered by the argument that democracy in the Western sense means freedom in an ordered society and an ordered society is one in which the rule of law prevails, they seek refuge in the slogan that we should imitate Western democracy one hundred per cent.
I am convinced that the Internal Security Act as practiced in Malaysia is not contrary to the fundamentals of democracy. Abuse of the Act can be prevented by vigilant public opinion via elections, a free Press and above all the Parliament."

I wonder what Tun Dr.Ismail would say about the state of the 3 institutions today!

Which brings us to the question – why was the ISA not featured prominently in past election campaigns by the opposition?

Next General Elections, the message should be "A VOTE FOR BN IS A VOTE FOR ISA".

I dare Home Minister Hishamuddin to conduct a nationwide referendum to see just how many support this anachronism of a law.