10,000 workers 'denied right to court hearing' (Malaysiakini)

10,000 workers 'denied right to court hearing'

5:38PM Dec 5, 2012

Labour activists are up in arms over the revelation that over 10,000 workers who were ‘wrongfully dismissed’ between 2001 and 2011, have been denied their right to have their cases determined by the Industrial Court.

Charles Hector, who represents 51 NGOs that endorsed a statement, claimed this has happened because the Human Resources Ministry has refused to refer these cases to court after attempts at conciliation with the employers failed.

 

"Clearly, these are conclusions that should never be made by the minister without considering all evidence of witnesses and documents, and listening to legal submissions, which is best done by the Industrial Court," said Hector. 

"Hence, the minister’s reasons are not acceptable, and he obviously seems to have just accepted explanations of employers over claims of aggrieved workers who have lost their jobs.”

Hector (right), a lawyer by profession, was referring to an Utusan Online report on Oct 23,  which reported that 31,714 cases had failed to be settled via conciliation.

He also referred to Human Resources Minister S Subramanian's statement in Parliament, which cited reasons why 10,016 cases had not been referred to court.

It was claimed that workers were dismissed for misconduct, that businesses were shut down by employers; or that workers were given the opportunity to return to work but had refused to do so.

Other reasons were that workers were laid off when their contract expired, or they had stopped work under a voluntary separation scheme but changed their mind after receiving compensation.

Hector said aggrieved workers whose cases are not referred to court still have the option to apply for judicial review at the High Court.

 

However,  realistically, this will not happen because most workers just do not have the needed resources or the capacity to pursue their case, he noted. 

An application to the High Court involves not only expenses but also the subsequent risk of being ordered to pay costs that could amount to some RM10,000 if the workers do not succeed, he said.

"As such, a decision of the minister not to refer the case to the Industrial Court ends an aggrieved worker’s quest for justice," he explained.

The group called for legislative amendments to ensure that all cases that cannot be resolved amicably are referred, as of right, to the Industrial Court. 

‘Anti-worker indicator’

Former Malaysian Trade Union Congress president Syed Shahir Syed Mohamud said wrongful dismissal is a serious wrongdoing which should be penalised with a deterrent court award. He said an avenue for justice should be available to all classes of workers.

 

"The government sadly places the interests of employers over the interests of workers. The rights of wrongfully dismissed workers have been eroded over the years," he said the same statement.

"The refusal of the minister to refer (to court the) 31.5 percent of wrongful dismissal cases that could not be settled amicably, is yet another anti-worker indicator.”

Syed Shahir, who is a senator, urged the expansion of Industrial Courts nationwide as only five of the 13 states and one of the three federal territories now have such a facility.

"Distance will definitely be more prejudicial to the worker than the employer. There is not just the cost of transportation and accommodation, but also the difficulty of getting witnesses to attend court," he said.

The issue is even worse for migrants workers who do not have access to justice when they are wrongfully dismissed. Their immigration visa/pass is also terminated, preventing them from staying or working legally in Malaysia.

"Even if they have filed a complaint in the Industrial Court, it is immaterial, as they cannot stay in Malaysia. If they do, they risk arrest, detention, whipping and deportation," he added. - Malaysiakini, 5/12/2011, 10,000 workers 'denied right to court hearing'

See related post, the full Joint Statement :-
52 groups fight for rights of wrongfully dismissed workers in Malaysia

AMESU makes it 53 concerned about rights of wrongfully dismissed worker's access to justice

All Malayan Estates Staff Union makes it 53

52 groups fight for rights of wrongfully dismissed workers in Malaysia

Joint Statement 5/12/2012[Now 53]

Remedy against employers that wrongfully dismiss workers is a fundamental right of all workers

- All cases of wrongful dismissal must be referred to the Industrial Court -

We, the 53 undersigned groups, organisations, trade unions and networks are appalled by the revelation that revelation that between the period of 2001 and 2011, that  31.5% or  10,016 of workers in Malaysia who claimed wrongful dismissal, were denied their right to have their cases heard and determined by the Industrial Court, by reason of the Minister of Human Resources refusal to refer these cases after attempts at conciliation with the employer had failed to reach a settlement. (Utusan Online, 23/10/2012, 31,714 kes tuntutan pekerja gagal diselesaikan secara rundingan/ 31,714 cases of workers failed to be settled vide conciliation)

In Malaysia, after workers claiming wrongful dismissal is lodged within sixty (60) days at the Industrial Relations Department(IRD), conciliation meetings are held between employer and worker in an attempt to reach an amicable settlement, and if this fails, the case is referred to the Minister to decide whether the case be referred to the Industrial Court or not. There is no right to be heard before the Minister, and his decision seems only in reliance of the report sent by his officer involved in the conciliation process. During conciliation process, workers are no longer allowed the right to be represented by lawyers by virtue of amendments to the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA) in 1989.

Datuk Seri Dr. S. Subramaniam, the Minister of Human Resources, in parliament also revealed, amongst others, the reasons why the 10,016 cases were not referred to the Industrial Court by the Minister. Amongst others, they were:-

a) Because the worker was dismissed for misconduct;

b) Because the Employer has shut down its business;

c) Because the Worker was given the opportunity to return back to work But refused to come back to work;

d) Because the worker had been terminated because the employment contract had come to an end;

e) Because the worker had voluntarily stopped work under some Voluntary Separation Scheme(VSS), and then changed their mind after receiving payment;

Clearly, these are conclusions that should never be made by the Minister without considering all evidence of witnesses and documents, and listening to legal submissions, which is best done by the Industrial Court. Hence, the Minister’s reasons are not acceptable, and he obviously seemed to have just accepted explanations of employers over claims of aggrieved workers who have lost their jobs.

The aggrieved worker, whose cases are not referred by the Minister to the Industrial Court, still do have the option to apply for Judicial Review at the High Court but realistically, this would not happen because most workers just do not have the needed resources or the capacity. The government revealed recently  that 34% of 1.3 million workers in a government study earn less than RM700, which is below the poverty line income. An application to the High Court involves not only expenses but also the subsequent risk of being ordered to pay cost that could be about RM10,000 if unsuccessful, and as such most workers elect not to apply to High Court. As such, a decision of the Minister not to refer the case to the Industrial Court  ends an aggrieved workers quest for justice.

We call for the amendment of the law, to ensure that all cases that could not be resolved amicably between parties should as of right be referred to the Industrial Court. The now existing step of referring to the Minister who then decides to refer or not a case to the Industrial Court should be removed from the law books.

Wrongfully dismissing a worker without just cause or reason is a grave injustice. When a worker’s employment is wrongfully terminated, it seriously affects the well being, livelihood and financial security of not just the workers but also their families. Obligations to pay monthly amenities bills, car/housing loan repayments, credit card payments and others payments necessary for well being of the family continue irrespective of a  loss of monthly income. 

Wrongful dismissal is a serious wrongdoing by the employer, which need to be penalized with a deterrent award, and the existence of an avenue for justice for workers wrongfully dismissed need to be available for all classes of workers.

Malaysian government sadly places the interest of employers over the interest of workers. Rights of the wrongfully dismissed workers have been eroded over the years.

In 2007, the Industrial Relations Act was amended which had the effect of reducing the entitlement of a worker found to have been wrongfully dismissed by the Industrial Court. The Industrial Court could either order the worker to be reinstated as employee, or alternatively order the employer to pay compensation in lieu of reinstatement being all salary and benefits from the date of wrongful dismissal until the date of judgment, the later being the norm. 

The 2007 amendment limited the compensation award to no more than twenty-four months’ back wages from the date of dismissal, but also limited it to be calculated based on the last-drawn salary of the person who has been dismissed without just cause or excuse hence eliminating the right to salary increments and bonuses which one would have been received had they not been wrongfully dismissed. It also allowed for deductions with reference to post-dismissal earnings of the wrongfully dismissed worker, and ‘contributory misconduct’ on the part of the worker. Worst affected were workers on probation whereby their entitlements were halved, when in Malaysia there is still no law that limits the period a worker can be  kept on probation, which in some cases it may extend to years.

The refusal of the Minister to refer 31.5% of wrongful dismissal cases that could not be settled amicably to court is yet another anti-worker indicator.

Only 5 out of the 13 States and 1 out of the 3 Federal Territories in Malaysia have Industrial Courts. Distance will definitely be more prejudicial to the worker than the employer. There is not just the cost of transportation and accommodation, but also the difficulty of getting witnesses to attend court. There should be Industrial Courts in every State and Federal Territory, and all major towns.

Now, there are moves by the Malaysian government to even completely exclude access to this avenue of justice to certain categories of workers being workers with less than one-year of continuous service, probationers, apprentices, workers in management positions; and also contract workers. The Malaysian government now permits employers to use short-term employment contracts, and most times these contracts do not exceed 12 months. Most recently the ‘contractor for labour system’ or outsourcing workers or ‘contract workers’. If the proposed amendments become law, employers will be happy as wrongfully dismissing most workers will no longer be a problem, and workers lose their right and ability to claim justice.

As it is, most migrant workers effectively do not have access, given the fact that after they be wrongfully dismissed, their immigration visa/pass is also terminated hence disabling them the ability to stay or work legally in Malaysia. Even if they have filed a complaint in the IRD, it is immaterial for they cannot stay on in Malaysia, and if they do they risk arrest, detention, whipping and deportation. 

We call on Malaysia to promote and protect worker rights and welfare, including those of their families.

We call for an amendment of the Industrial Relations Act 1967(IRA) to enable all wrongful dismissal cases that could not be resolved amicable to be referred directly to the Industrial Court. The power of the Minister to decide whether cases are referred to the Industrial Court must be extinguished.

We call for the repeal of the 2007 amendments to the IRA, including Schedule 2, that effectively reduced entitlements of workers who found to have been wrongfully dismissed by the Industrial Court, and further discriminates against workers on ‘probation’. Minimally workers should be entitled to all back-wages without loss of benefits, but justly they should be entitled to maybe double the said amount or an additional sum, which would assist workers cover all the cost, expenses, time and energy loss claiming this rights, and doubling or tripling the award sum would also serve as a deterrent to employers wrongfully dismissing workers. 

 

We call for the making of Directors and principal shareholders to be personally liable, when the Company employer is not able to pay the worker the award sum ordered by the Industrial Court. 

 

We call on the Minister of Human Resources to do the needful to ensure all the said 10,016 workers cases claiming wrongful dismissal be forthwith referred to the Industrial Court to ensure the right to a full trial is given effect.

We also call for the speedy disposal of cases of wrongful dismissal especially in cases where the claimant is a migrant worker, and that until the case is heard and settled in court, provisions be made that migrant workers be accorded the right to stay and work legally in Malaysia.

 

We reject any proposed amendments that will deprive certain classed of workers the right to claim justice in cases of wrongful dismissal. No employer should wrongfully dismiss workers, and all workers even workers on short-term employment contracts or have worked for a short period should have access to avenues of justice, and the right to claim, amongst others, reinstatement and/or compensation in lieu of reinstatement.

 

We also reiterate the call for the Malaysian government to abolish short-term contract employment and the ‘contractor for labour system’/’outsourcing’, and ensure that all workers have the right to regular permanent employment and security of tenure in a direct 2-party employment relationship.

 

Charles Hector

Syed Shahir Bin Syed Mohamud

for and on behalf of 

Aliran

All Malayan Estates Staff Union(AMESU)

Arus Pelangi

Asia Monitor Resource Centre

Burma Campaign Malaysia

CCHR (Cambodian Center for  Human Rights)

Centre for Development Resourses-CENFORD, Vietnam

Clean Clothes Campaign

Community Action Network

Community Development Services (CDS), Sri Lanka

Democratic Party for a New Society (DPNS)

FORLITAN (Forum Peduli Pertanahan Indonesia)

GoodElectronics Network

Hope Community Action Network

Human Rights Ambassador for Salem-News.com

IMPARSIAL The Indonesian Human Rights Monitor

Indonesia for Human's

JERIT (Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas), Malaysia

Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Polyplastics Asia Pacific - (KPPAP)

Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan

Kilusang Mayo Uno (May First Movement, Philippines)

Knights For Peace, International, Philippines

Legal Resources Center for Gender Justice and Human Rights /LRC-KJHAM

LIPS (Lembaga Informasi Perburuhan Sedane/Sedane Labour Resource Centre)

LPSD (The Law and Policy of Sustainable Development Research Center).

LRC-KJHAM (Legal Resources Center for Gender Justice and Human

Rights) Indonesia

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility

MAP Foundation, Thailand

makeITfair

Mindanao Migrant Center for Empowering Actions, Inc. (MMCEAI)

MIGRANTE International

NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)

National Union of Bank Employees.(NUBE), Malaysia

National Union of Transport Equipment & Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW), Malaysia.

NLD-LA (National League for Democracy-Liberated Areas), Malaysia

Pakistan Rural Workers Social Welfare Organization,(PRWSWO),

Paper Union Of Malaysia

Parti Rakyat Malaysia(PRM)

Pax Romana-ICMICA Asia

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor

PINAY (Filipino Womens' Oganization in Quebec)

Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor dan Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)

Pusat Komunikasi Masyarakat (KOMAS)

Reclasseering Indonesia KOMWIl Provinsi Sumatera Utara

Seafarers Union of Burma/Myanmar (S.U.B)

Seksualiti Merdeka

SUARAM

Tenaganita

Thai Committee for Refugees Foundation (TCR)

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

Yaung Chi Oo Workers Association (YCOWA)

Yayasan Lintas Nusa - Batam, Indonesia

52 groups fight for rights of wrongfully dismissed workers in Malaysia

Joint Statement 5/12/2012[Now 52]

Remedy against employers that wrongfully dismiss workers is a fundamental right of all workers

- All cases of wrongful dismissal must be referred to the Industrial Court -

We, the 52 undersigned groups, organisations, trade unions and networks are appalled by the revelation that revelation that between the period of 2001 and 2011, that  31.5% or  10,016 of workers in Malaysia who claimed wrongful dismissal, were denied their right to have their cases heard and determined by the Industrial Court, by reason of the Minister of Human Resources refusal to refer these cases after attempts at conciliation with the employer had failed to reach a settlement. (Utusan Online, 23/10/2012, 31,714 kes tuntutan pekerja gagal diselesaikan secara rundingan/ 31,714 cases of workers failed to be settled vide conciliation)

In Malaysia, after workers claiming wrongful dismissal is lodged within sixty (60) days at the Industrial Relations Department(IRD), conciliation meetings are held between employer and worker in an attempt to reach an amicable settlement, and if this fails, the case is referred to the Minister to decide whether the case be referred to the Industrial Court or not. There is no right to be heard before the Minister, and his decision seems only in reliance of the report sent by his officer involved in the conciliation process. During conciliation process, workers are no longer allowed the right to be represented by lawyers by virtue of amendments to the Industrial Relations Act 1967 (IRA) in 1989.

Datuk Seri Dr. S. Subramaniam, the Minister of Human Resources, in parliament also revealed, amongst others, the reasons why the 10,016 cases were not referred to the Industrial Court by the Minister. Amongst others, they were:-

a) Because the worker was dismissed for misconduct;

b) Because the Employer has shut down its business;

c) Because the Worker was given the opportunity to return back to work But refused to come back to work;

d) Because the worker had been terminated because the employment contract had come to an end;

e) Because the worker had voluntarily stopped work under some Voluntary Separation Scheme(VSS), and then changed their mind after receiving payment;

Clearly, these are conclusions that should never be made by the Minister without considering all evidence of witnesses and documents, and listening to legal submissions, which is best done by the Industrial Court. Hence, the Minister’s reasons are not acceptable, and he obviously seemed to have just accepted explanations of employers over claims of aggrieved workers who have lost their jobs.

The aggrieved worker, whose cases are not referred by the Minister to the Industrial Court, still do have the option to apply for Judicial Review at the High Court but realistically, this would not happen because most workers just do not have the needed resources or the capacity. The government revealed recently  that 34% of 1.3 million workers in a government study earn less than RM700, which is below the poverty line income. An application to the High Court involves not only expenses but also the subsequent risk of being ordered to pay cost that could be about RM10,000 if unsuccessful, and as such most workers elect not to apply to High Court. As such, a decision of the Minister not to refer the case to the Industrial Court  ends an aggrieved workers quest for justice.

We call for the amendment of the law, to ensure that all cases that could not be resolved amicably between parties should as of right be referred to the Industrial Court. The now existing step of referring to the Minister who then decides to refer or not a case to the Industrial Court should be removed from the law books.

Wrongfully dismissing a worker without just cause or reason is a grave injustice. When a worker’s employment is wrongfully terminated, it seriously affects the well being, livelihood and financial security of not just the workers but also their families. Obligations to pay monthly amenities bills, car/housing loan repayments, credit card payments and others payments necessary for well being of the family continue irrespective of a  loss of monthly income. 

Wrongful dismissal is a serious wrongdoing by the employer, which need to be penalized with a deterrent award, and the existence of an avenue for justice for workers wrongfully dismissed need to be available for all classes of workers.

Malaysian government sadly places the interest of employers over the interest of workers. Rights of the wrongfully dismissed workers have been eroded over the years.

In 2007, the Industrial Relations Act was amended which had the effect of reducing the entitlement of a worker found to have been wrongfully dismissed by the Industrial Court. The Industrial Court could either order the worker to be reinstated as employee, or alternatively order the employer to pay compensation in lieu of reinstatement being all salary and benefits from the date of wrongful dismissal until the date of judgment, the later being the norm. 

The 2007 amendment limited the compensation award to no more than twenty-four months’ back wages from the date of dismissal, but also limited it to be calculated based on the last-drawn salary of the person who has been dismissed without just cause or excuse hence eliminating the right to salary increments and bonuses which one would have been received had they not been wrongfully dismissed. It also allowed for deductions with reference to post-dismissal earnings of the wrongfully dismissed worker, and ‘contributory misconduct’ on the part of the worker. Worst affected were workers on probation whereby their entitlements were halved, when in Malaysia there is still no law that limits the period a worker can be  kept on probation, which in some cases it may extend to years.

The refusal of the Minister to refer 31.5% of wrongful dismissal cases that could not be settled amicably to court is yet another anti-worker indicator.

Only 5 out of the 13 States and 1 out of the 3 Federal Territories in Malaysia have Industrial Courts. Distance will definitely be more prejudicial to the worker than the employer. There is not just the cost of transportation and accommodation, but also the difficulty of getting witnesses to attend court. There should be Industrial Courts in every State and Federal Territory, and all major towns.

Now, there are moves by the Malaysian government to even completely exclude access to this avenue of justice to certain categories of workers being workers with less than one-year of continuous service, probationers, apprentices, workers in management positions; and also contract workers. The Malaysian government now permits employers to use short-term employment contracts, and most times these contracts do not exceed 12 months. Most recently the ‘contractor for labour system’ or outsourcing workers or ‘contract workers’. If the proposed amendments become law, employers will be happy as wrongfully dismissing most workers will no longer be a problem, and workers lose their right and ability to claim justice.

As it is, most migrant workers effectively do not have access, given the fact that after they be wrongfully dismissed, their immigration visa/pass is also terminated hence disabling them the ability to stay or work legally in Malaysia. Even if they have filed a complaint in the IRD, it is immaterial for they cannot stay on in Malaysia, and if they do they risk arrest, detention, whipping and deportation. 

We call on Malaysia to promote and protect worker rights and welfare, including those of their families.

We call for an amendment of the Industrial Relations Act 1967(IRA) to enable all wrongful dismissal cases that could not be resolved amicable to be referred directly to the Industrial Court. The power of the Minister to decide whether cases are referred to the Industrial Court must be extinguished.

We call for the repeal of the 2007 amendments to the IRA, including Schedule 2, that effectively reduced entitlements of workers who found to have been wrongfully dismissed by the Industrial Court, and further discriminates against workers on ‘probation’. Minimally workers should be entitled to all back-wages without loss of benefits, but justly they should be entitled to maybe double the said amount or an additional sum, which would assist workers cover all the cost, expenses, time and energy loss claiming this rights, and doubling or tripling the award sum would also serve as a deterrent to employers wrongfully dismissing workers. 

We call for the making of Directors and principal shareholders to be personally liable, when the Company employer is not able to pay the worker the award sum ordered by the Industrial Court. 

We call on the Minister of Human Resources to do the needful to ensure all the said 10,016 workers cases claiming wrongful dismissal be forthwith referred to the Industrial Court to ensure the right to a full trial is given effect.

We also call for the speedy disposal of cases of wrongful dismissal especially in cases where the claimant is a migrant worker, and that until the case is heard and settled in court, provisions be made that migrant workers be accorded the right to stay and work legally in Malaysia.

We reject any proposed amendments that will deprive certain classed of workers the right to claim justice in cases of wrongful dismissal. No employer should wrongfully dismiss workers, and all workers even workers on short-term employment contracts or have worked for a short period should have access to avenues of justice, and the right to claim, amongst others, reinstatement and/or compensation in lieu of reinstatement.

We also reiterate the call for the Malaysian government to abolish short-term contract employment and the ‘contractor for labour system’/’outsourcing’, and ensure that all workers have the right to regular permanent employment and security of tenure in a direct 2-party employment relationship.

Charles Hector

Syed Shahir Bin Syed Mohamud

for and on behalf of

Aliran

Arus Pelangi

Asia Monitor Resource Centre

Burma Campaign Malaysia

CCHR (Cambodian Center for  Human Rights)

Centre for Development Resourses-CENFORD, Vietnam

Clean Clothes Campaign

Community Action Network

Community Development Services (CDS), Sri Lanka

Democratic Party for a New Society (DPNS)

FORLITAN (Forum Peduli Pertanahan Indonesia)

GoodElectronics Network

Hope Community Action Network

Human Rights Ambassador for Salem-News.com

IMPARSIAL The Indonesian Human Rights Monitor

Indonesia for Human's

JERIT (Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas), Malaysia

Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Polyplastics Asia Pacific - (KPPAP)

Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan

Kilusang Mayo Uno (May First Movement, Philippines)

Knights For Peace, International, Philippines

Legal Resources Center for Gender Justice and Human Rights /LRC-KJHAM

LIPS (Lembaga Informasi Perburuhan Sedane/Sedane Labour Resource Centre)

LPSD (The Law and Policy of Sustainable Development Research Center).

LRC-KJHAM (Legal Resources Center for Gender Justice and Human

Rights) Indonesia

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility

MAP Foundation, Thailand

makeITfair

Mindanao Migrant Center for Empowering Actions, Inc. (MMCEAI)

MIGRANTE International

NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)

National Union of Bank Employees.(NUBE), Malaysia

National Union of Transport Equipment & Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW), Malaysia.

NLD-LA (National League for Democracy-Liberated Areas), Malaysia

Pakistan Rural Workers Social Welfare Organization,(PRWSWO),

Paper Union Of Malaysia

Parti Rakyat Malaysia(PRM)

Pax Romana-ICMICA Asia

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor

PINAY (Filipino Womens' Oganization in Quebec)

Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor dan Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)

Pusat Komunikasi Masyarakat (KOMAS)

Reclasseering Indonesia KOMWIl Provinsi Sumatera Utara

Seafarers Union of Burma/Myanmar (S.U.B)

Seksualiti Merdeka

SUARAM

Tenaganita

Thai Committee for Refugees Foundation (TCR)

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

Yaung Chi Oo Workers Association (YCOWA)

Yayasan Lintas Nusa - Batam, Indonesia

AEPF says no to 'outsourcing' and short-term contracts

 

What was interesting was the outcome of the workshop entitled "Combating Erosion of Worker and Trade Union Rights'', which was attended by about 80-100 participants, who did at the end of the 3 1/2 hour program on the 18th afternoon come up with recommendations, all of which were discussed and adopted unanimously. (See below)

The call was for the abolition of outsourcing [i.e. the contractor for labour system], and short-term employment contract..

 

Regular employment with security of tenure until retirement

 

2-party employment relationships between principals or owners of workplaces as employers, and workers that work in the said workplaces as employees of the said principals and owners. 

 

  

9th Asia-Europe People’s Forum

“People’s Solidarity against Poverty and for Sustainable Development: Challenging Unjust and Unequal Development, Building States of Citizens for Citizens”

Vientiane, Laos, 16-19 October, 2012

Conclusions/Recommendations from the participants of the Combating Erosion of Worker and Trade Union Rights Workshop, that took place at 2pm, 18/10/2012

A. Employment and Employment Relationship

1. Ensure that workers have the right to regular employment with security of tenure until retirement.

2. Abolish short-term or fixed duration employment contracts, and if still needed in exceptional situation should be limited in its use.

3. Ensure 2-party employment relationships between principals or owners of workplaces as employers, and workers that work in the said workplaces as employees of the said principals and owners.

4. Labour suppliers, contractors for labour or labour outsourcing companies should never be employers of workers.

5. Abolish manpower/labour outsourcing and all forms of triangular employment relationships/ arrangements.


B. Worker Rights & Access To Justice

1. Ensure that all worker rights are respected, including rights of access to avenues of justice, social security, healthcare, compliance with occupational health and safety standards and decent work. 

2. Migrant workers shall be allowed to work and stay legally until their complaints and claims are finally adjudicated and settled.

3. All workers, irrespective of their nationality or legal status, shall have the right to labour rights, including a right to form and/or join trade unions and collective bargaining, consistent with the international core labour standards.

C. Recommendation about UN/Regional Standards and Instruments
1. In cases of rights abuse, human rights defenders, including CSR/TNC compliance monitoring bodies, should issue alerts, lobby companies and governments, raise awareness among the general population and support workers who want to fight for their rights.

2. Trade unions and CSR/TNC monitoring bodies should inform the workers of codes of conduct of companies and their supply chain, as well as relevant government policies.

3. Trade unions and CSR/TNC monitoring bodies should lobby the governments to ensure that trade agreements include guarantees for labour conditions and rights of workersใ

4. CSOs in countries where the production is based and where the investment is coming from to strengthen their collaboration.

5. Trade unions and CSR/ TNC monitoring bodies should connect workers and their representatives with the global movement, including AEPF. 

D. Recommendation about Trade Unions

1. When governments and/or ASEM have discussions/engagements with Investors, Trade Union must always be part of the process.

2. Trade unions must be included in law and decision making processes at the national regional and international levels.

3. Stronger collaboration between trade unions across sectors and regions is needed, and a strong transnational network of trade unions should be developed.

4. Trade unions of countries of origin and destination countries of migrant workers shall collaborate to ensure protection of the rights of migrant workers. Portable trade union membership shall be promoted.

5. Trade unions shall strengthen their role in monitoring labour law enforcement and CSR compliance.

This workshop was organized by Workers Hub For Change(WH4C), Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia (NAMM), MAP Foundation, Mekong Migration Network (MMN), Clean Clothes Campaign(CCC), GoodElectronics Network and Asia Pacific Forum  On Women Law and Development(APWLD)

The recommendations/position of this workshop was included in the Final Statement of AEPF, that have been handed over to the relevant Minister of Laos, who has given his assurance that this statement will be handed over and hopefully considered by the leaders of the European and Asian nations that will be meeting in a few days time.

Electronics Industry Workers' Union (Southern Region) successfully campaign to secure union rights at ST Microelectronics in Muar, Malaysia

The first recognized electronic union in Malaysia

January 27, 2011

Malaysian electronics workers secure union rights

The newly formed Electronics Industry Workers' Union (Southern Region) successfully campaign to secure union rights at ST Microelectronics in Muar, Malaysia

 

MALAYSIA: January 27, 2011 was a victorious day in the long struggle of the Malaysian electronics workers to join a union of their choice. An historic milestone was reached when ST Microelectronics workers, a majority of them women workers, voted in favour to join the newly formed Electronics Industry Workers' Union (Southern Region). 

The journey to this struggle started on the August 2, 2010, when the union served claim for recognition at this electronics transnational corporation (TNC) which is located in the coastal town of Muar, where many other electronics TNCs have established manufacturing operation for a long time.

The management, instead of recognizing the union, sought to challenge its membership status. In the pending period the management resorted to all forms of anti-union tactics, including attempts to register a company controlled in-house union.

With concerted assistance from the International Metalworkers' Federation, the union foiled the company's attempts, thus paving the way for the workers to vote for union representation. Out of a workforce of about 2700 workers, slightly more than 1700 turned up to vote, with the union succeeding in securing 57 per cent of votes in favour of the union.

IMF General Secretary Jyrki Raina wrote  to the CEO of this company and received an assurance that the company would respect local labour laws and practices and ensure workers' rights are respected.

On the morning of the balloting, the police and local authorities attempted to disrupt the union from gathering outside the factory where balloting was conducted by the Ministry of Human Resources. IMF Regional Representative Arunasalam intervened and met the company's Human Resources Director, and following that the pressure from the police and local authorities reduced.

The results of the balloting were announced at 12:30am on January 28 and the union leaders who had waited since early morning hugged each other and jumped in joy. Mohd Salleh, the main coordinator of the union, expressed thanks and appreciation to the IMF for assisting in securing trade union rights in this company. He said that without IMF's assistance the union could have faced severe setbacks in its quest to represent the workers. He stressed, that since majority of the workers have voted in favour of the union, the company should recognise the union without any further delay.Jan 31, 2011 – P. Arunasalam

Source: IMF(International Metalworkers Federation) Website

31.5%(10,016) workers denied access to Industrial Court in wrongful dismissal cases

If attempts at reaching an amicable settlement between the wrongfully dismissed worker and the employer fails - it must be immediately referred to the Industrial Court....BUT in Malaysia it is referred to the Minister who then decides which case to refer and which not to... There is No Right to Be Heard before the Minister - so the Minister's decision is based on the report send by the officer than conducted the failed conciliation attempt,... 

The revelation that between the period of 2001 and 2011, 10,016 workers in Malaysia who claimed wrongful dismissal(or 31.5%) were denied their day in the Industrial Court by the Minister of Human Resources who REFUSED to refer their cases to the Industrial Court is shocking...

What is even more shocking is the reasons the Minister gives for not referring these cases to the Industrial Court. The Minister, unlike the court, does not hear witnesses or  peruse documentary evidence... so, the decision not to refer is based on WHAT? Belief in an assertion of the employer... acceptance of an opinion of an officer who failed to amicably resolve the matter between employer and dismissed worker? ...

What were the reasons given by the Minister for not referring the case to the Industrial Court.

a) Because the worker was dismissed for misconduct

b) Because the Employer has shut down its business

c) Because the Worker was given the opportunity to return back to work But refused to come back to work

d) Because the worker had been terminated because the employment contract had come to an end

e) Because the worker had voluntarily stopped work under some Voluntary Separation Scheme(VSS), and then changed their mind after receiving payment.. 

When a worker takes the trouble to rush over to the Industrial Relations Department within 60 days from the date of 'wrongful dismissal' and lodge a complaint under section 20 claiming wrongful dismissal and demanding reinstatement, and thereafter coming for the attempts at 'conciliation', naturally one should assume that the worker genuinely believes that he/was was wrongfully dismissed...and has a valid case to justify the claim.

All the grounds of non-referral of the dispute to the Industrial Court by the Minister seems to be the very reasons that the Employer would have given for the termination of the worker's employment... These obviously are matters that the aggrieved worker is disputing, proven also by the very fact that the complaint itself had been lodged by the worker...

BUT, some may say that any person aggrieved by the decision of the Minister not to refer(or refer) to the Industrial Court can always file an application at the High Court to ask the court to do a judicial review of the Minister's decision...

Well, it is possible but for such an application, you need to get a lawyer and when an application is filed in the High Court, there is always the risk that if the worker were to fail in their application to the High Court, they may be ordered to pay COST to the employer - and this could very well be RM5,000, RM10,000 or even more... 

So, now a worker wrongfully dismissed would also have to raise money for lawyers and court proceedings.... and also face the risk of having to pay COST which really may be equivalent to 10 month's salary (RM5,000) or more - .... so naturally many a worker (especially those who earn lower wages)... will just walk away...and not bother to apply to the High Court when the Minister decides that the case would not be referred to Court. Justice is denied...and yet again, it is the worker that is the victim of this 'miscarriage of justice'...here being the right to have his/her claim heard and determined by an independent judge of the Industrial Court, the right to a fair and open trial...

[In the Industrial Court, what is good is that there is NO cost that the losing party would have to pay - and for poorer workers, this is a good thing and it helps make real 'avenues of justice' available in law for workers...] 

The section 20 IRA procedure is also ODD when there is an additional step that gives the Minister power to decide whether a case be referred to the Industrial Court or NOT. In other cases, once attempts to reach an amicable settlement fails - the matter is as of right referred to the Courts to resolved after hearing evidence of witnesses, considering documentary evidence and hearing legal arguments/submissions by both the worker and the employer. Rightfully, the Ministers involvement need to be extinguished... and after attempts at amicable settlement had failed, all cases must, as of right, be referred to the Industrial Court


This was an important matter that concerns rights of workers in Malaysia, but sadly it seems that most media (including also alternative media) failed to report on this matter, which was raised to the Minister of Human Resources in Parliament. The only report that I came across was a Bahasa Malaysia report carried by the Utusan Online, which is copied and pasted below. 

Sebanyak 31,714 kes tuntutan pekerja yang diterima Jabatan Perhubungan Perusahaan dari 2001 hingga 2011 gagal diselesaikan melalui proses rundingan.

 

Menteri Sumber Manusia, Datuk Seri Dr. S. Subramaniam berkata, daripada jumlah berkenaan, sebanyak 31.5 peratus atau 10,016 kes di bawah Seksyen 20 Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967 itu tidak dirujuk ke Mahkamah Perusahaan berikutan pelbagai faktor.

"Antara sebabnya adalah pekerja diberhentikan kerja atas masalah salah laku, majikan telah menutup perniagaan dan pekerja diberi peluang untuk bekerja semula tetapi enggan berbuat demikian.

"Selain itu, perkara tersebut turut disebabkan pekerja diberhentikan kerana tamat tempoh kontrak, berhenti secara sukarela tetapi berubah fikiran menuntut bekerja semula dan telah menerima bayaran pampasan melalui Skim Pemberhentian Sukarela (VSS)," katanya menjawab soalan Khairy Jamaluddin (BN-Rembau) dalam sidang Dewan Rakyat hari ini.

Menurut Subramaniam, pekerja yang diberhentikan atas sebab-sebab seperti mengurangkan bilangan pekerja dan penstrukturan semula perniagaan wajib dibayar pampasan di bawah Akta Kerja 1955.

Katanya, bagi tuntutan untuk kembali ke pekerjaan asal, Jabatan Perhubungan Perusahaan boleh mengadakan rundingan damai di antara majikan dengan pekerja untuk menghasilkan penyelesaian.

Jelas beliau, sekiranya kes gagal diselesaikan secara rundingan, masalah tersebut dibawa kepada panel pakar sebelum diputuskan oleh pihak menteri sama ada wajar untuk dirujuk ke Mahkamah Perusahaan. - Utusan Online, 23/10/2012, 31,714 kes tuntutan pekerja gagal diselesaikan secara rundingan

RELA powers reduced...but should not this about 3 million strong volunteer corps be disbanded?

A good news for migrants in Malaysia is that the long call for the abolition of RELA has finally brought some changes. With the decision to repeal  Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 and theEssential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) Regulations 1966 also had to go, and is currently being replaced by a new law, entitled "Malaysia Volunteers Corps Bill 2012", which has been passed by Parliament on about 20/4/2012, and was then expected to be gazetted within a month. (I have not managed to find any source that confirms that this has been gazetted or when, but believe that it has been)

The struggle for the abolition of RELA, or at the very least the removal of some of its powers, has been on-going, more so since the government extended its powers vide Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) (Amendment) Regulations 2005, which also specifically targeted  "terrorist, undesirable person, illegal immigrant...". RELA was literally a dead entity, that was revived to specifically target migrants, or maybe the 'real motive' was something else, possibly a political agenda/strategy to try to regain political support for the incumbent political parties in government. After all there was already so many available avenues for 'volunteers' to join including the volunteer police force, etc... why not just encourage Malaysians to join these already existing many volunteer bodies?

In any event, the 2007 Resolution of the Malaysian Bar is enclosed, which would also give the reader an appreciation of the issue. Following this is a newspaper report and a commentary which deals with this new law...

 

 

The 61st Annual General Meeting of the Malaysian Bar held at the Grand Ballroom, Legend Hotel, Kuala Lumpur - 17 March 2007 adopted the  Resolution proposed by Charles Hector and Francis Pereira unanimously. The motion was entitled, 

Motion For The End Of The State Of Emergency And An End To Law Enforcement” By The Untrained And Armed People's Volunteer Corps ( RELA)

Whereas:-

1. On 31st August 2007, it will be 50 years since Malaysia achieved its independence and has been for over 30 years been a peaceful democratic nation.

2. It is sad that Malaysia is still in a state of Emergency as there exist today 4 Proclamation of Emergencies issued by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong that is yet to be revoked.

3. Since independence, five states of emergency have been declared under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution. The first was the only one to have been revoked. The remaining four are still in operation. The second state of emergency was proclaimed in September 1964 when the country was faced with a campaign of violence from Indonesia. Although the threat ceased within less than two years, the state of emergency was never revoked.

4. The next state of emergency was declared on 14 September 1966 following the dismissal of the Chief Minister of the state of Sarawak. No violence - or threat of violence - resulted from the crisis. The government nevertheless proclaimed an emergency, confined to Sarawak. And although the crisis was soon resolved, the state of emergency has not been revoked.

5. The fourth proclamation came on 15 May 1969 following large-scale rioting and racial violence in the capital, Kuala Lumpur, during a general election. The violence led to several hundred casualties. As a result, further elections were postponed and parts of the Constitution suspended. Normalcy was restored soon - the legislature was reconvened and normal constitutional government restored in February 1971. However, the state of emergency has yet to be revoked.

6. On 8 November 1977, the fifth Emergency, limited to the state of Kelantan, was declared following a political crisis.

7. By reason of the proclamation of emergency, numerous legislations were enacted and are still in force, including also :- 

a) Emergency (Essential Powers) Act, 1964 (30/64), today known as the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979;

 b) Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969;

c) Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975

8. For example, Section 6 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979, states that ""For so long as the Proclamation of Emergency referred to in the preamble to this Act remains in force, the regulations made under the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act, 1964 (30/64) (except those regulations which the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may by notification in the Gazette declare not to be in force) shall be in force and shall have effect as if they have been made under this Act; and the regulations may be amended, modified or repealed as if they have been made under this Act.". [The proclamation of emergency referred to in this Act was the proclamation issued on 15 May 1969.]

9. The Ikatan Relawan Rakyat or better known as RELA (a People's Volunteer Corps) came into being by virtue of Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) Regulations 1966 [P.U. 33/1966], under Emergency (Essential Powers) Act, 1964 (30/64), and continue to be in force by virtue of Section 6 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979.

10. By virtue of the Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) (Amendment) Regulations 2005, which came into operation on 1 February 2005, the powers of the Rela, have been dangerously over-extended giving RELA personnel the right to bear and use firearms, stop, search and demand documents, arrest without a warrant, and enter premises without a warrant. and all these powers can be exercised the RELA personnel has reasonable belief that any person is a terrorist, undesirable person, illegal immigrant or an occupier. Illegal immigrant and occupier (which would be Malaysians usually) was added on by this 2005 amendment.

11. These not-professionally trained volunteers has also now been accorded protection by the new amendments whereby it is stated that "...The Public Authorities Protection Act 1948 shall apply to any action, suit, prosecution or proceedings against the Ketua Pengarah Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat, Timbalan Ketua Pengarah Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat or any member of the Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat in respect of any act, neglect or default done or committed by him in good faith or any omission omitted by him in good faith, in such capacity."

12. Noting also that there has been numerous complaints that have surfaced in the media about the RELA not just from migrants but also Malaysians ranging from torture, gangster-like behavior, damage to property, wrongful arrest and detention and even the causing of deaths.

13. Its was reported that RELA arrested a total of 17,700 people believed to be illegal immigrants and screened 94,010 people up to September 2006, and that means 94,010 people (or 76,310) with proper documentations were subjected to unnecessary harassment and their right to a remedy in law is difficult. Of the people arrested, recent reports in the media indicate that many may even not be "illegal" or "undocumented" migrants at all.

- "...six foreign workers, all with legal travel and work documents, were whisked out of their quarters in a resort in Cherating in the wee hours of the morning on Dec 28 last year when RELA members "literally broke into their chalet and ordered them out." (The Star, January 12, 2007)."

- "...a team of 30 to 40 RELA members (half not in uniforms) turned up to look for foreign workers, assaulted some and allegedly stole cash and valuables during the raid. The companies, who lodged police reports, said that all the workers had legal work permits....."(The Star, December 4, 2006)

- "22 workers of an IT company were beaten and made to do a 50m "duck-walk" at Section 30 in Shah Alam..." (The Star, February 16, 2006)

- Residents of about 10 households in Taman Anggerik, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, complained that RELA personnel crashed into their homes after breaking door locks and smashing gates, and told them that they [RELA] were looking for illegal workers. The residents said the RELA personnel acted like gangsters and showed them no respect. When they asked the RELA personnel to explain why they crashed into their homes, they were told "we are the law." Cash totaling RM3,756 in a drawer was subsequently found missing. (The Star, October 17, 2006)

14. There have also been report of beatings and even deaths caused by RELA volunteers. As an example, in early 2006 it was reported that Ahmad Apik, 35, and Edy Sathurrohman, 26, both Indonesians, lost their lives, and they each left behind a wife and 2 young children. (Star, January 23, 2006).

15. The policy and practice of paying members of the People's Volunteer Corps (RELA) RM80-00 for each undocumented migrant must be stopped (The Star, January 23, 2006). Even MCA Public Services and Complaints Department head Datuk Michael Chong claimed that the reward offered had made RELA volunteers desperate to nab as many illegals as possible. (The Star January 23, 2006)

15. Malaysia is a developed country and professionally trained enforcement personnel should be used for law enforcement, and the use of volunteers like the RELA must end.

16. Some migrants may be undocumented, but they are still human beings and deserved to be treated humanely and should be accorded equal protection under the law.

17. Malaysia, a party to the April 1999 BANGKOK DECLARATION ON IRREGULAR MIGRATION, which clearly states "Irregular [undocumented] migrants should be granted humanitarian treatment, including appropriate health and other services, while the cases of irregular migration are being handled, according to law. Any unfair treatment toward them should be avoided" must adhere to its commitments.

18. New laws can always be enacted by a parliament in times of peace if needed.

IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED:-

a) That we, the Malaysian Bar, call upon the Yang Di-Pertuan Agung to revoke all existing Proclamations of Emergency in Malaysia;

b) That we, the Malaysian Bar call for the repeal all legislations and Acts that were enacted and continue to be in force by reason of the now existing unrevoked Proclamations of Emergency;

c) That we, the Malaysian Bar reiterate our call for the repeal of Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969 and the Essential (Security Cases) Regulations 1975;

d) That we, the Malaysian Bar specifically call for the repeal of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Act 1979 and all Regulations and Rules made thereunder, in particular Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) Regulations 1966 [P.U. 33/1966], as amended by the Essential (Ikatan RELAwan Rakyat) (Amendment) Regulations 2005;

e) That we, the Malaysian Bar call for the employment and usage of only properly trained professional law enforcement personnel in Malaysia;

f) That we, the Malaysian Bar urge that inquests be conducted for Ahmad Apik, Edy Sathurrohman and for the other persons who have died as result of alleged RELA actions;

g) That we, the Malaysian Bar urge that all persons including undocumented migrants and/or refugees be treated humanely and accorded equal protection of the law;

h) That we, the Malaysian Bar call on the Malaysian government to immediately ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families;

i) That we, the Malaysian Bar call on the Malaysian government to immediately ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The motion was unanimously carried. .

****
 Source: Charles Hector Blog

 2,924,065 RELA , about 90,000 armed forces, about 90,000 - 100,000 police...

THE powers of the People's Volunteer Corps (Rela) will be outlined in a new law which comes into effect next month. The new Act is aimed at preventing the abuse of power and impersonation of Rela members. Under the new law, which also sets the enrolment age for Rela members at 18 and limits their tenure to five years, they will no longer have the power to detain, arrest or carry firearms. 

PETALING JAYA: A new law to refine the powers of the People's Volunteer Corps (Rela) comes into effect next month with strict measures to curb misuse of authority and impersonation of its members.

Under the Malaysia Volunteers Corps Bill 2012 passed in Parliament on April 20 and expected to be gazetted next month, Rela members would no longer have the power to make arrests or carry firearms.

Anyone found guilty of impersonating a Rela member can be jailed up to three years, fined a maximum of RM5,000 or both.

The law also requires those who are no longer members to return their uniforms and certificate of appointment within 14 days of leaving the corps.

Previously, it was not an offence for them to keep their uniforms even after resigning from the agency.

“Those who fail to return the uniforms and certificate after leaving can now be taken to court,” said Deputy Home Minister Datuk Lee Chee Leong, adding that the maximum penalty for doing so would also be a prison term of three years, a fine of RM5,000 or both.

The new law also limits the period of enrolment for Rela members to five years, after which, the status of membership has to be renewed by an authorised officer.

Those below the age of 18 would also have their membership revoked under the increased age requirement when the Malaysia Volunteers Corps Act 2012 comes into force from June 22. The existing enrolment age for Rela members is 16 for girls and 17 for boys.

As of March 31, the total number of volunteers in the corps stood at 2,924,065.

Lee said the new law was expected to curb crime cases involving the impersonation of Rela members.

In March last year, police arrested two men who robbed and raped a woman after claiming to be police officers.

Two of their accomplices, including a Rela member who had lent his handcuffs to the duo, were held.

In 2006, robbers masquerading as Rela members drove off with RM47mil worth of microchips from the air cargo complex in Penang.

MCA Public Complaints and Services Department head Datuk Seri Michael Chong, who is also an honorary Rela member, welcomed the move to limit the membership to five years saying it would facilitate the management of members.

However, he said making Rela members return their uniforms would not be effective in addressing impersonation.

“If people want to misuse the uniform, they can easily buy it at shops or even online,” he said yesterday.

Chong said there were numerous shops selling uniforms and paraphernalia of all enforcement agencies, complete with their rank.

“This can only be addressed through strict enforcement on the sale of these uniforms,” he said.

Malaysian Crime Prevention Foundation chairman Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye said there was no reason for former members to hold on to their uniforms.

“We don't want to see people who are no longer Rela members misusing the uniforms to carry out or enforce laws,” he said.

Rela director-general Datuk Mustafa Ibrahim said the Home Minister would be making an official announcement on the Bill and several other laws passed recently.

Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein had earlier said in Parliament that the Government had taken the public's views into consideration when drafting the Bill. - Star, 28/5/2012, New law refines Rela powers

 

Volunteer corps still Rela-vant?

QUESTION TIME By P. GUNASEGARAM

The time has to come to ask whether the three million strong Rela is still relevant to our times and if it should be substantially scaled down.

ONE of the most amazing things about the People’s Volunteer Corps, or Rela, is simply its size – almost three million strong, that’s more than one for every 10 men, women and children who live in Malaysia and may be about the population of core Kuala Lumpur!

In comparison, Armed Forces personnel in Malaysia account for a mere 90,000 while the police account for a like number compared with the 2.94 million Rela members as at March 31, according to news reports.

That means Rela members outnumber Armed Forces personnel by more than 30 to one and both Armed Forces and the police personnel by more than 15 to one.

The circumstances under which it was formed are somewhat vague and why its size increased to become so large is puzzling. It was set up in 1972 under the Emergency Act 1964.

The rationale apparently was after the May 1969 racial riots, they were needed to help the police preserve and maintain national peace and security. But it was some three years after the riots.

In 2005, Rela members had their roles substantially expanded. The amendment of the Essential (Ikatan Relawan Rakyat) Regulations in 2005 expanded Rela’s powers to include the right to bear and use firearms, stop, search and demand documents, arrest without a warrant, and enter premises without a warrant.

These powers can be exercised if Rela members have reasonable belief that any person is a terrorist, undesirable person, illegal immigrant or an occupier. Under the Public Authorities Protection Act 1948, Rela officers are immune from prosecution in relation to their conduct.

Subsequently, there were many reports and allegations about Rela members exceeding their authority, including a recent case where a suspected robber was beaten to death in a condominium.

Reports also cited Rela members as having been involved in crime, while others have impersonated Rela officers to commit crimes.

It was this that probably prompted the Government to revise the laws to restrict the powers of Rela members. It was reported that under the Malaysia Volunteers Corp Bill 2012, passed in Parliament on April 12 and expected to be gazetted next month, Rela members will no longer have the power to carry firearms or make arrests.

Impersonating a Rela officer becomes a crime which is punishable with a fine and a jail sentence of up to three years, while the law requires officers to return their uniforms and certificates of appointment within 14 days of leaving the corp.

These are welcome moves by the Government, but there is also a need to severely restrict and curtail the power of Rela lest it becomes a law unto itself. With its membership outnumbering police and Armed Forces personnel by 15 to one, that is an overriding concern that the Government must address.

To have nearly three million citizens in a volunteer force which has access to arms is clearly undesirable and it is now necessary to ensure that arms held by Rela members are returned according to set procedures so that there is no chance whatsoever of them being misused.

The other factor that needs to be raised is costs. How much does it take to train three million people in the use of firearms and law and order maintenance?

The question that is crying out to be asked is why not use this money to recruit and train full-time policemen who can then be deployed on the streets to fight crime on a daily basis and who will be fully and professionally trained in the use of firearms, the law and crime-fighting?

It may be easily possible to increase the size of the force by, say, 50% and give police personnel more benefits, too.

If it is the intention of the Government to bring a large section of the public into the area of law enforcement, civil defence and as reserve force to protect the country from external threats, then the best way to do that is to go for national service so that all sections of the public are represented in the defence corp.

Otherwise, it would be better for the Government to go the full distance in terms of reforming Rela and make it a much smaller auxiliary force which will merely supplement the police in terms of non-force duties such as traffic control at events and so on.

That will mean a substantial scaling back of Rela so that its size is no more than the size of the police and armed forces combined and its members reflect the population composition of the country.

The first steps have been taken no doubt, but it would be better if reform of Rela went the whole way.

> Independent consultant and writer P. Gunasegaram detests half measures. If something is worth changing, it is worth changing well. -Star, 30/5/2012, Volunteer corps still Rela-vant?