MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Malaysia: the practice of caning

14.12.2010

with request for inclusion in the agenda for the debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law
pursuant to Rule 122 of the Rules of Procedure

Charles Tannock, Adam Bielan, Michał Tomasz Kamiński, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Tomasz Piotr Poręba, Ryszard Czarnecki on behalf of the ECR Group

See also joint motion for a resolution RC-B7-0708/2010

B7‑0725/2010

European Parliament resolution on the situation in Malaysia: the practice of caning

The European Parliament,

–       having regard to its resolution of 7 October 2010 on the World day against the death penalty,

–       having regard to its resolution of 8 May 2008 on the Annual Report on Human Rights in the World 2007 and the European Union's policy on the matter (2007/2274(INI)),

–      having regard to Malaysia - European Community Strategy Paper for the period 2007 - 2013,

 

–       having regard to the 2010 Report by Amnesty International "A blow to Humanity: Torture by judicial caning in Malaysia",

–       having regards to the letter dated 23 April 2010 from the Permanent Representative of Malaysia to the United Nations referring to Malaysia's intention to submit candidature for the Human Rights Council for the period 2010 - 2013,

–       having regard to Rule 122(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

 

 

 

A. whereas the Human rights organisations assess that at least 10,000 prisoners and 6,000 refugees are caned in Malaysia each year;

 

B. whereas Malaysian authorities in their statement insist that the practice of caning is a legitimate punishment and there are no plans to amend the law in this respect;

 

C.    whereas according to the findings of the Amnesty International Report "caning violates the absolute prohibition against torture and ill-treatment under international law";

 

D. whereas the Bar Council of Malaysia, which represents 8,000 lawyers, has called for such punishment to be abolished claiming it is against all international human rights norms and the various conventions on torture;

 

E.    whereas judicial caning causes severe pain, serious localised injury and sometimes lasting physical and mental effects and the doctors involved in the process - whose role is no more than to certify prisoners as being eligible for caning and resuscitate them in case they lose consciousness - are violating medical ethics;

 

F.   whereas the officials who carry out the task of caning are specially trained, and receive an additional payment for each stroke they administer;

 

G.    whereas Malaysia provides no comprehensive statistics on judicial caning and the Human Rights organisations report Indonesian immigration offenders incur the most canings of any group apart from local criminals;

 

H.    whereas according to statistics there are around 1.2 million Indonesian migrant workers in Malaysia and, according to Indonesian authorities, Malaysia encourages it partly due to manual-labour-scarce;

 

I.      whereas Malaysia does not officially recognise the refugee status and in 2002 the parliament made immigration violations such as illegal entry and document falsification punishable by up to six strokes of the cane;

 

J.      whereas the number of offenses subject to caning under Malaysian criminal law has increased to more than 60 in recent years and the use of the practice of caning has expanded;

 

 

 

1. Condemns the practice of caning of prisoners in the 21st century;

 

2.     Is particularly alarmed that such corporal punishment is applied without an appropriate medically qualified staff monitoring and that the process leaves room for the system of bribes within prisons, where guards accept cash not to carry out the punishment;

 

3. Reminds the Malaysian Government that it has to fulfil its obligations and commitments regarding the fundamental principles and human rights and calls on Malaysian Government to review the law in this respect;

 

4. Encourages further negotiations between the governments of Indonesia and Malaysia in view of an agreement guaranteeing minimum legal protections for workers;

 

5.      Calls on the Council and the Commission to address the concerns over inhuman physical treatment of prisoners and illegal immigrants in their contacts with the Malaysian Government;

6.      Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Prime Minister of Malaysia Najib Tun Razak, the UN Secretary‑General, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the governments of the ASEAN Member States.