people and flagLet me get straight to the point: the National Security Council Bill 2015 tabled in Parliament yesterday is nothing less than a prelude to dictatorship, the final step in the ‘Zimbabweization’ of Malaysia.
The bill, now being rushed through parliament with unholy haste, is so patently and blatantly undemocratic in its intent that it staggers the imagination that any government in this day and age would even contemplate it. It is a new low from a government that has consistently and increasingly disregarded the spirit of our constitution and trampled upon the rights of the people with callousness and impunity in order to cling to power.
The bill creates, in effect, a police state wherein the government and its agents are empowered, in the name of national security, to do anything they want with total impunity and without regard to constitutional constraints and obligations.
And this from a government that has already amassed more power than any previous government. Today, the executive has untrammelled powers over almost every aspect of national life especially given the erosion of traditional checks and balances. Our citizens have never been more at the mercy of the executive, never been more vulnerable, more exposed, more intimidated.
Nevertheless, the government continues to insist that it needs more power, less checks and balances, less accountability. Why? What clear and present dangers lurk in the shadows that require such powers to deal with? What threats are out there that would justify such draconian laws?
Is it the threat of ISIS militancy?
Surely the police already have enough power to tackle that head on. What is lacking is the political will to root out Islamic militancy and radicalism and the wisdom to craft winning strategies instead of the empty rhetoric that we keep hearing.
Is it to meet the kind of incursion that Sabah experienced not too long ago?
Again, we have all the firepower, the manpower and the necessary legal framework to deal with such contingencies. After all, we’ve spent billions on defence and training. We have warplanes and submarines and tanks and all the other hardware that is needed. Again, what is lacking is leadership. Our men in uniform are brave and dedicated but the same cannot be said of our leaders who were indecisive and incompetent throughout the crisis.
Is it to meet the kind of civil disturbance brought on by extremists groups like the Red Shirts who recently threatened a bloodbath in Petaling Street?
Again, we don’t need more laws; what is needed is for the government itself to take a clear, consistent and unequivocal stand against extremism, racism and religious intolerance. After all, if the Chinese ambassador could single-handedly calm the situation in Petaling Street, think what the Prime Minister could do if he really wanted to.
Clearly, therefore, this bill is more about consolidating power, silencing dissent, stifling the opposition and intimidating the people than anything else. It is a power grab plain and simple, the end game in UMNO’s strategy of acquiring absolute and total power. It will crush what’s left of our democracy. It will institutionalize kleptocracy. It will bring us closer to the day when we will once again be ruled by a national operations council. It will make peaceful change impossible.

It is an act of desperation by a government fearful of its own people and terrified of change. As the man in the street knows all too well, the greatest threat to Malaysia today is not from subversion, incursion or invasion but from a government which has increasingly abused its authority, corrupted our institutions, and undermined our social fabric just to stay in power.
To be sure, government apologists will demand that we trust the government, arguing that it is acting in the best interests of the nation, that we live in an increasingly dangerous world. Baloney to all that; this is a government with a long history of betrayal and broken promises and a litany of abusive actions and undemocratic behaviour. It simply cannot be trusted with such power.
The day this bill become law will be a day of infamy and shame, a day of mourning, the blackest day in our history. Parliament must rise to the occasion and reject this draconian measure before the lights go out on our already feeble democracy. 
[Dennis Ignatius, a former Malaysian ambassador, firmly believes that we should put our trust not in the leadership of great men but in the sanctity of great institutions – our secular and democratic constitution, a democratically elected parliament, an independent judiciary, a free press and a government fully accountable to the people. He blogs at]

Why such haste and urgency to this NSC bill.? 
Is Najib recognizing that his camp is fighting a losing battle in the UMNO "civil war" 
and the whole lot of them is about to be dislodged 
and this NSC bill when passed 
can give him access to some draconian weapons to turn things around- ,
 and it is a last ditch desperate counter offensive weapon to his power preservation at all cost?

 Draconian Bill opens door for unprecedented abuse
Terrorists may be kept at bay but the personal freedoms
and rights of Malaysians will be severely threatened under the
National Security Council Bill.

by Malaysian Progressives United Kingdom
The National Security Council (NSC) Bill was passed yesterday 
after a short two-day reading in Parliament. 
Let us see what it really means and how it has been framed to combat threats to national 
security and what other implications it has.
Firstly let us discuss anti-terrorism laws and what these are like in other countries.
Anti-terrorism laws are laws enacted to circumvent terrorism by allowing authorities to 
limit personal freedom for society’s collective security.
Terrorists operate in secrecy and this makes it hard to detect. 
Therefore, society has to give up some freedom to allow authorities to weed out terrorists. 
Although this compromise is broadly agreed with, the extent of scrutiny by authorities 
might impede on fundamental human rights, especially individual privacy.
Everyone knows there is a price to pay in privacy for collective security. 
The question is: how much?
Terrorist attacks like 9/11, the Boston Marathon bombing, 
and the recent Paris shootings, pushed anti-terrorism laws to the centre again.
Malaysian Anti-Terrorism Laws
In the past, we had the Internal Security Act 1960 (repealed in 2012) 
which enabled authorities (Home Minister) to detain a person for a period,
 if they were believed to be a threat to national security. 
Later, the Emergency Ordinance 1969 (repealed in 2013) 
upon the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong’s emergency declaration, 
gave police the full right to detain, arrest, question, and search 
individuals without a warrant.
The recent Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma)
 allows detention for up to 28 days and for tracking devices to be placed 
onto released suspects.
On the other hand, the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (Pota), allows for detention, 
without warrant, up to a maximum of 60 days if a person is suspected of terrorist activities.
Anti-terrorism laws around the world
1. United States: Patriot Act.
This Act allows the President to seize the property of any foreigner suspected 
of war or attack on the US, surveillance by interception of telephone calls 
(most controversial) and tighter border control. 
It may also require banks to stop terrorist money-laundering.
2. United Kingdom: Anti-Crime, Terrorism and Security Act 2001
It allows for indefinite detention of foreign nationals suspected of terrorism without trial 
and freezing of assets.
The highest court in UK expressly disapproved of this legislation as it contravened 
human rights, with Lord Hoffmann famously quoted as saying, 
“The real threat to the life of the nation … comes not from terrorism 
but from laws such as these.”
3. Canada: Anti-Terrorism Act 2001
Allows for ‘secret’ trials, preemptive detention and expansive security and surveillance
 powers. Many sunset provisions expired, but were renewed in the Combating Terrorism
 Act 2012 after the Boston bombing incident.
It was amended to include crimes for leaving Canada to join terrorist groups, 
with increased maximum prison sentences.
National Security Council Bill 2015
The Bill was passed in Parliament on Thursday, December 3, 2015. 
Primarily intended to combat terrorism, a National Security Council (NSC) will be 
established and headed by the Prime Minister under the law. It encompasses broad 
powers to declare ‘security areas’ and arrest, detain and seize property without warrant.
Why are we concerned?
1. Wide powers under certain clauses lack transparency, accountability and respect
 for individual rights.
  • Clause 6: NSC consists of PM, DPM, Minister of Defence, 
  • Minister of Home Affairs, Minister of Communication and Multimedia, 
  • Chief Secretary to the Government, Chief of Defence Forces, 
  • and the Inspector-General of Police. All are appointed by the PM
  •  and report directly to the PM.
  • Clause 18 (1): PM has full discretion to decide where a ‘security area’ is.
  • Clause 18 (3) and (4): Initial declaration of a ‘security area’ lasts for six months 
  • but may be renewed by PM indefinitely.
  • Clause 22-30: security forces can arrest without warrant; stop and search; 
  • enter and search premises; take possession of any land, building or 
  • movable property.
  • Clause 37: All NSC’s affairs are done in absolute secrecy.
  • Clause 38: No action or lawsuit can be brought against the NSC.
  • The term “national security” was not clearly defined. 
  • It can be ‘economic stability’, ‘national unity’, or ‘political stability.’
2. Hasty passage of the Bill
The Bill was presented to Parliament and passed within two days. 
Members of Parliament, lawyers and human rights activists have raised concerns
 over the lack of consultation. One MP called it the ‘death to democracy in Malaysia.’
3. Constitutional validity: 
Overstepping the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA)’s powers?
The Bill effectively provides the PM emergency powers without the need to declare
 a state of emergency under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution, which was a 
power previously exclusive to the YDPA. 
The extensive powers also mimic those under the Emergency Ordinances, a 
law that was repealed by the parliament in 2011.
The potential abuse of the law is unsettling. 
Never have we had a law that places wider and unfettered powers in the hands 
of a few executive elites. 
Since there are already enough laws to combat terrorism in Malaysia, 
a new law that further encroaches on individual liberty is grossly alarming.
The hurried manner in which it was passed only fuels speculation on the real basis 
behind it. 
We strongly urge the government to withdraw the National Security Bill 2015.
Malaysian Progressives United Kingdom are a group of concerned Malaysians 
who keep abreast of developments in the country and speak out against injustice.

sourced: draconian-bill-opens-door-for-unprecedented-abuse/