objectives of the RTD were to bridge differences between stakeholders and to discuss further on the non-discrimination agendas and policies of the local Government. The workshop for local Government officials was specifically tailored to create awareness on human rights and antidiscrimination standards as contained in ICERD. 2. CHAPTER 1 Sarawak is seen to be a good example as people of various ethnic groups are co-existing and living there harmoniously. The Commission observed that a unique feature, which has contributed to the healthy relationship between the peoples of Sarawak, is the acceptance and respect of its people of towards the beliefs and rights of others and not merely a tolerance of the existence of other ethnic groups. This key feature has enabled the people of Sarawak to embrace the concept of non-discrimination and enabled 27 main ethnic groups to live and exist peacefully with one another.18 THE COMMISSION’S ROLE IN COURT (a) Civil Courts In an ideal legal system, recognition of international human rights principles is important to uphold the fundamental rights as enshrined in the Federal Constitution. The Commission firmly believes that the judicial system is a vital organ of the State to protect and provide checks and balances with regard to those rights. In furtherance to that, the Commission as mandated by its founding Act19 and with the support of the Judiciary has taken the initiative to hold watching briefs in court proceedings involving human rights issues. The Commission would submit the relevant principles and standards as enshrined under international treaties and would highlight the State’s obligation under international human right treaties and documents for the Court’s reference. For the year 2016, the Commission held watching briefs in the Court for Children, Coroner’s Court, Magistrate’s Court, and High Court in the following cases: i) Pendakwa Raya v Lena Hendry: on freedom of expression; ii) Pendakwa Raya v Azmi Sharom: on freedom of expression and opinion; iii) Shashikumar A/L Selvam: on custodial death; iv) Rosliza binti Ibrahim v State Government of Selangor: on freedom of religion; v) Yayasan Chow Kit v Pejabat Kebajikan Masyarakat Daerah Hulu Langat: on the application for legal custody of stateless children; and 18 Portal 1 Klik, “Portal Negeri Sarawak”, <http://pmr.penerangan.gov.my/index.php/maklumat-kenegaraan/9043-profil-negeri-sarawak. html> 19 Section 4(2) of the SUHAKAM Act provides that, the Commission may, inter alia, undertake appropriate activities as are necessary for the purpose discharging its functions. SUHAKAM ANNUAL REPORT 2016 39 suhakam 2new.indd 39 3/23/17 5:54 PM