Key Issues treaties, free trade agreements or contracts for investment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) is an example where the Government of Malaysia appeared to have sidelined not only the need to conduct a human rights impact assessment, but also meaningful consultation with the public to participate in the process. The Government’s decision to go ahead with the TPPA had met with much protest that appeared to go unheeded. The Commission underscores the responsibility of everyone in society to respect human rights. It is important that this be nurtured as a way of life, alongside laws that aim to effectively redress violations. 10. LAW REVIEW In 2015, human rights in Malaysia suffered some setbacks following the introduction of new, and revision of existing, legislations that effectively stifle the rights to a free and fair trial, and freedom of expression. At the outset, the Commission expresses its disappointment over the hasty manner in which some of these laws were enacted. Further, the lack of public consultations in the course of developing and/or amending those laws effectively denies the public’s right to participate in their government and in the conduct of public affairs. (a) Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (POTA) that was enacted to replace the repealed Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) has reinvigorated detention without trial. Persons detained under this law are neither guaranteed legal representation nor provided assurance that they will be informed of the grounds of their arrest. Investigations under the law also depart from the normal rules of evidence and criminal procedure given that Inquiry Officers (IO) may obtain evidence by any means. Further, POTA abandons powers of independent judicial review to examine detention and restriction orders, which clearly contradicts the right to equality and equal protection before the law as guaranteed by the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. Instead, POTA introduces the Prevention of Terrorism Board (POTB) whose impartiality has been questioned by the public in view of the fact that members are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong based upon the advice of the Government, and can be dismissed at any time. In addition, the objectivity of the POTB is also a concern since it can impose renewable detention and restriction orders on persons who are not represented by legal counsel, based solely on the IO’s investigation report. Moreover, POTA contains no provision to allow the POTB to inquire into the investigation report or to compel further investigation. Granted that POTA deals with the dangerous issue of terrorism, the Commission stresses that this should not be used as a basis to violate basic human rights. As such, the Commission 27 BOOK-ANR2016-01-latest.indb 27 08/04/2016 3:32 PM