Page  1 2 3 4

• Zainur Zakaria's conviction offended Malaysian national law, the common law that is part of Malaysian law and the minimum standards regarding rights to representation and rights to advocate that have been accepted as forming the foundation of both democracies and the rule of law. 
• the conviction of Zainur Zakaria was contrary to the Federal Constitution Articles 5(1), 7(1) and 10(1)(a). The citation for contempt contravened the rights to representation set out in the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, Articles 1, 13, 14, and 15. The duty of governments and courts to ensure that lawyers are free to provide full representation without threat to their personal safety are further outlined in Articles 16 to 22. 
• Zainur Zakaria's conviction also contravened the principles set out in the Declaration on the Rights and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, (Declaration on Human Rights Defenders) Articles 5, 9(1), 9(3)(a) & (c), 11, 12, 17 and 18(2)
• Such use of contempt doesn't only preclude fair trials by preventing full representation but also prevents a proper analysis of the law and prohibits meaningful discussion of cases before the court. 
• The resulting prejudice to fair trials is inevitable in criminal trials where the accused is always against the state, where the authorities that gather the evidence must be open to question as a part of the process of elucidation of the truth. Such a use of contempt powers tends to contribute to destroying belief in the law and legal system as an effective alternative to brute force.
• the ambiguity of the offence of scandalizing the court allows judges to pursue their personal predilections thereby entrusting the limits of advocacy rights to the moment-to-moment judgment of the judge whose sensibilities have been offended by some behaviour of counsel.
  

LRWC wrote letters to the Malaysian Human Rights Commission urging the Commission to uphold the various principles relating to lawyers' advocacy rights by calling for an acquittal as an intervener. LRWC also wrote to the Attorney General of Malaysia asking him, as chief law officer of Malaysia to order an investigation of the allegations of evidence fabrication. The Malaysian Human Rights Commission saying that our concerns will be considered.

Tian Chua is a long time political activist and member of the human rights group Suaram. He has campaigned for greater political freedom in the wake of the conviction of former Deputy Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim. On April 10th 2001, Tian Chua was arrested under the Malaysian Internal Security Act (ISA) for allegedly helping to organize an April 14th rally to commemorate the second anniversary of the imprisonment of former Deputy Prime Minister Ibrahim. He was denied visits for 43 days and was denied access to legal counsel and medical care. Reports indicated that he was subjected to significant ill treatment while incarcerated. In view of Tian Chua’s long history of peaceful activism and the absence of any charges against him, it is widely believed that his detention was politically motivated. A habeas corpus application (a judicial mandate to a prison official ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody), filed on April 13th 2001 was dismissed by the High Court on April 25th 2001. On September 6th 2002, the Federal Court allowed the application as it applied to the first two months of detention on the basis of the illegality of that period of incarceration. At this point the authorities continued to refuse to release him.

Up-date
In December 2002 the ISA review board recommended that Tian Chua and 4 other ISA detainees be released. Tian Chua was finally released from custody May 30th 2003. (Amnesty International Index ASA 28/005/2002) He reported that being held in solitary confinement was very difficult. “It was killing me…I was blindfolded and handcuffed every time I left the cell…It was deliberate mental torture…There no sunlight. The air-con and the lights were on 24 hours a day.” Tian Chua and the other 5 detainees released are suing the Malaysian government for illegal detention.

Page  1 2 3 4