Human Rights

Second urgent motion knocked out — no debate on Malaysia listed as “worst human traffic offender”

By Kit

June 20, 2007

My second of three urgent motions for Parliament this week was rejected by the Deputy Speaker Datuk Lim Si Cheng this morning.

My motion to urgently debate Malaysia’s inclusion in the United States Government’s 2007 Trafficking In Persons (TIP) Report in the Tier 3 list of the worst human trafficking offenders together with 15 other nations including Burma, Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Sudan and Saudi Arabia.was rejected on the ground that it was not urgent.

Most shocking of all, the rejection was received with table-thumping by Barisan Nasional MPs as if they were overjoyed that Parliament is denied an opportunity to clear Malaysia’s good name which had been stained internationally by the shameful listing of the country mong the worst human trafficking offenders.

When Dewan Rakyat debated the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Bill on May 9, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who piloted the bill through Parliament, referred to Malaysia’s being ranked as Tier 2 Watch List in the US Government’s 2006 TIP Report released in June last year.

Nazri did not condemn or challenge the right of the US Government to issue any TIP Report.

In January 2007, the US Government issued a Trafficking in Persons Interim Assessment “to serve as a tool by which to gauge the anti-trafficking progress of countries which may be in danger of slipping a tier in the upcoming June 2007 TIP Report and to give them guidance on how to avoid a Tier 3 ranking”.

Yet, despite the TIP Interim Assessment and guidance, Malaysia fell into Tier 3 ranking in the TIP 2007 report.

The Malaysian government is not bounden to justify its record to the US Government but it is duty-bound to vindicate its record to Parliament and the Malaysian people.

A Parliamentary debate would have furnished the government an opportunity to clear its name and vindicate its record on this matter — but the government seems to be afraid to make full use of this opportunity provided by the DAP. Why?