SUHAKAM has been informed that there are on-going reviews of legislation in the country to ensure consistency with international human rights treaties. However, it is SUHAKAM’s view that the process is neither comprehensive nor systematic. Firstly, these reviews do not take into full account Malaysia’s international human rights obligations. Next, there is no explicit involvement of Parliament or SUHAKAM in the review process. SUHAKAM is of the opinion that Parliament need not wait for the Attorney General’s Chambers or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) to take the initiative in determining whether or not Malaysia should accede to a human rights treaty. Parliament could actually help to push the agenda forward. In this regard, SUHAKAM proposes that Parliament establish a committee that could analyse the status of outstanding treaties to which Malaysia is not party to, and should also be involved more formally in a systematic review of domestic legislation for consistency with international human rights instruments. CHAIRMAN’S REVIEW Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMW) 2003; and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (ICPED) 2010. In our unremitting fight against terrorism, SUHAKAM observed that the Government faced struggles in sustaining human rights in the context of counter terrorism. Likewise, the challenge for common citizens is multifarious. Concerns of civil society have grown in regard to the actual repercussions of counterterrorism legislation, policies or measures on the rights and civil liberties of all persons. SUHAKAM’s reading is that the challenge that the Government faced was how to effectively respond to possible terrorist threats without forsaking fundamental human rights principles that are the hallmark of democratic societies and proudly enshrined in our Constitution. When Malaysia passed the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA), it was professed that it would be used only when there was imminent threat to our country from terrorists. In its short lifespan, the SOSMA has been used for non-terrorism purposes, and SUHAKAM has recorded complaints alleging abuse from detainees during their 28-day detention; such as interviews being conducted under conditions designed to humiliate detainees. There are cases where individuals who have sought to exercise their right to freedom of peaceful assembly have been detained under the Act. There seemed to be a troubling trend to undermine any serious attempt to analyse the human rights compatibility of this so-called counter-terrorism legislation. Bluntly put, the broad characterisation of “security offences” under the Act appears to suggest that its ambit extends beyond terrorism offences. SUHAKAM recalls the White Paper entitled “Ke Arah Menangani Ancaman Kumpulan Islamic State” that expressed the Government’s serious concern on threats posed by the Islamic State (IS) and linked this with the proposal to strengthen SOSMA to effectively counter these threats. At the International SUHAKAM ANNUAL REPORT 2016 7 suhakam 2new.indd 7 3/23/17 5:54 PM