RULE OF LAW: AN INITIAL ANALYSIS OF SECURITY OFFENCES (SPECIAL MEASURES) ACT (SOSMA) 2012

Authors

  • Saroja Dhanapal Senior Lecturer Taylor's Business School Taylor's University
  • Johan Shamsuddin Sabaruddin Universiti Malaya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumlj.v23i1.143

Keywords:

internal security, Internal Security Act 1960, Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012, rule of law

Abstract

The term ‘Internal Security Act’ is often given to a piece of legislation laying down regulations that enable the executive government of a jurisdiction to preserve the internal security of the nation. In some jurisdictions, it authorises the government to arrest and detain individuals without trial. The Malaysian Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960 was originally enacted by the Malaysian government in 1960 under Article 149 of the Malaysian Constitution. However, there were numerous concerns raised as to the implications of this Act at various levels over the years and this led to it being repealed. On 15 September 2011, ISA 1960 was repealed and replaced by the Security Offences (Special Measures) (SOSMA) Act 2012. SOSMA 2012 was enacted in answer to the criticism of the ISA 1960 and it does show some positive changes. However, the debate as to the concerns with regards to ISA has not been laid to rest. It is advocated and generally accepted by most people around the world that the nation’s emphasis on domestic stability cannot be said to negate the presence of the Rule of Law (RoL). The purpose of this research is to analyse the relatively intriguing new Act, the SOSMA 2012 with the specific objective to identify whether it upholds the principles deemed necessary under the RoL.

 

 

Author Biography

Saroja Dhanapal, Senior Lecturer Taylor's Business School Taylor's University

Senior Lecturer

Business School

Taylors University

Downloads

Published

2015-05-12

How to Cite

Dhanapal, S., & Sabaruddin, J. S. (2015). RULE OF LAW: AN INITIAL ANALYSIS OF SECURITY OFFENCES (SPECIAL MEASURES) ACT (SOSMA) 2012. IIUM Law Journal, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumlj.v23i1.143