THOSE accused of terrorism and other charges under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma) will not get a fair trial as the law runs contrary to the principles of justice, said a prominent lawyer.

Syahredzan Johan, joining the chorus urging for Sosma to be abolished or amended “if required”, said the security law has too many provisions that do not allow suspects a fair trial.

The political secretary to Iskandar Puteri MP Lim Kit Siang, in a statement issued this morning, gave as an example the gathering of evidence.

“Sosma has provisions that violate the rules and regulations of the Evidence Act. For example, Section 18A of the law states that any statement given by the accused, whether orally or in writing, to any person at any time, shall be admissible as evidence.”

Therefore, he said, confessions made under duress are admissible, and cannot be challenged in court during trial.

This is sadly the normal scenario, he said, adding that suspects would give in to pressure and sign a “confession” to end their suffering in detention.

“It is not surprising that the majority of those accused admit to being guilty, while trials often end up with convictions.”

Another unfair provision is that terror accused do not get bail, he said.

“They cannot be set free even if they are found to be innocent at the end of the trial if the government decides to appeal the court decision.

“The accused cannot be released until the appeal process is disposed of by a higher court.

“This means the accused is ‘convicted’ as long as the legal process is ongoing, which is contrary to the principle that a person cannot be punished if he is not proven guilty.”

The statement comes after 10 Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam suspects were charged with being in possession of materials linked to the now-defunct terror group.

The charges are under Section 130JB(1)(a) of the Penal Code, which provides for a maximum jail term of seven years or a fine upon conviction.

The 10 are among 12 people detained under Sosma. They were charged at sessions courts in Selangor, Perak, Penang, Malacca and Johor yesterday. All were denied bail.

Syahredzan questioned Section 20 of the law, which allows the use of protected witnesses, whose identity is concealed; the admissibility of anything and everything seized; and, the granting of special powers to the prosecution to prove its case after suspects have been prosecuted in a court of law.

Evidence tendered during trial, used by the public prosecutor to charge the accused, should be sufficient to prove the prosecution’s case, just like in criminal proceedings, he said.

He added that while he and many Malaysians are not opposed to the fight against terrorism and other threats to national security, the effects of the provisions under Sosma make a fair trial impossible.

“All laws must uphold the principles of justice and human rights, as contained in the federal constitution.” – October 30, 2019.