Monday, February 28, 2022

海外生子女公民权批核迟缓 开学逼近母亲心急如焚 (马新社华语新闻 2月27日)

 


碍于官僚制度僵化,妈妈们也提交了申请文件,但还是迟迟等不到国民登记局发出的公民身份证。
随着新学年开课近在眉睫,小孩没有身份证书就难以顺利入学,家长心急如焚....
记者:#李于晴



採訪手稿:

  1. What are the recent developments for the court case? 该法庭案件的最新进展是什么?

On 21 February 2022, the National Registration Department issued the citizenship certificate (Sijil Pengesahan Taraf) to three plaintiffs in the Suriani Kempe case. JPN had requested the plaintiffs to be present at the JPN Headquarters in Putrajaya on 21 February 2022 for the issuance of their children’s citizenship certificates; this was in response to a letter served to the Government by Family Frontiers’ legal team. 


The three Malaysian mothers submitted their documents to JPN under Article 14(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution on 29 December 2021, following the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of the Government’s stay of execution application on 22 December 2021. 


两天前,国家登记局向Suriani Kempe案的三位原告颁发了公民身份证书(Sijil Pengesahan Taraf)。国家登记局曾要求原告在当天亲临布城总部以获得签发其子女的公民身份证书;政府这动作其实是对家庭前线法律团队早前向政府传递信函要求执行庭令的回应。


在上诉法院于去年12月22日驳回政府的暂缓执行申请后,三位原告妈妈们去年12月29日就根据《联邦宪法》第14(1)(b)条向国家登记局提交了文件。



  1. What are the responses from both the government and the plaintiffs & affected mothers & children? 


政府和原告及受影响的母亲和儿童的反应是什么?


This is a long-overdue and momentous occasion today for the three plaintiffs whose children received their citizenship documents, and a reason to hope for Malaysian mothers across Malaysia and all over the world who continue to wait for their children’s citizenship documents. 


However, the struggle is not over. The other three plaintiffs and other impacted Malaysian mothers have yet to receive the confirmation of citizenship for their children. There has been growing anxiety and uncertainty among impacted Malaysian mothers who are struggling to cope with the emotional and bureaucratic rollercoaster that the Government is putting them through. 


对于三名原告来说,前天是一个等了太久、久违的重要时刻,因为他们的孩子终于要收到了他们应得的公民身份文件。对于全国和全世界还在继续等待他们孩子的公民身份文件的大马母亲们来说,这是一个天大的好消息,点燃了希望。


然而,斗争还没结束。其他三位原告和其他受影响的妈妈们还没收到他们孩子的公民身份确认书。要知道,受影响的妈妈们其实还相当焦虑因为仍有很多不确定的因素。由于政府的上诉举动还有官僚方式处理这得来不易的权利,让她们的心情像坐了过山车般,正努力调适着自己的期待。但我可以肯定的是,没有人现在要放弃争取权利。



  1. What are the difficulties faced during the whole court case process & getting the citizenship certificates for the three plaintiffs‘ children? 


在整个法庭诉讼过程中,以及在为三名原告的孩子办理公民身份证明时,面临的困难是什么?


The rights we are asking for Malaysian women is not new, these are rights that have been accorded to men. We faced resistance and pushback from the Government at every step of the way during the court process – initially the Government tried to strike out the case before we were even given a chance to be heard in Court. Once the 9 September 2021 judgment was delivered, within just 72 hours, the Government filed an appeal against the decision and filed for stay of execution to temporarily halt implementation pending appeal. 


Despite the stay application being unanimously dismissed by the Court of Appeal, the Government continued to delay the issuance of citizenship certificate to Malaysian mothers. It was only after the Family Frontiers legal team served a letter to the Government – highlighting the discrepancies between the process of issuance of citizenship documents for Malaysian mothers and that of Malaysian fathers, and requesting updates on the plaintiffs’ submission of the required document – that Family Frontiers and the plaintiffs received a letter from JPN on 18 February 2022, requesting the plaintiffs to be present at the JPN Headquarters in Putrajaya on 21 February 2022 to receive their children’s citizenship certificates.  


The struggle is not over as the other three plaintiffs and other Malaysian mothers in similar circumstances are yet to receive the citizenship certificates for their children. 



对于我们为大马籍母亲们争取孩子公民权案件,其实也不是什么新鲜事,因为这些权利一直以来都赋予大马籍爸爸们的。在法庭审理过程中,我们尝试走的每一步都面对来自政府的阻力和反击--当初政府甚至在我们获得法庭审理的机会之前,就试图撤消这案件。去年9月9日的判决一出,在短短72小时内,政府就对该判决提出了上诉,并申请暂缓执行庭令,以暂时停止执行颁发公民身份证书,同时等待上诉。


尽管暂缓庭令的申请被上诉法院一致驳回,但政府还继续拖延向大马籍母亲们发放公民身份证书。直到家庭前线法律团队发给政府一封信--明确指出大马籍母亲和父亲的孩子公民身份文件发放程序之间的差异,并要求政府向原告报告提交文件后的最新进展--因此家庭前线和原告才在2月18日收到了来自马来西亚国家警察的一封信,要求原告在前天2月21日到布城的国民登记局总部领取他们孩子的公民身份证书。 


这场斗争还没有结束,因为其他三名原告和其他处于类似情况的大马籍母亲们还没收到她们孩子的公民身份证书。



  1. How many mothers are still waiting to get citizenship for their children? What is Family Frontiers going to do about it?   有多少母亲仍在等待为她们的孩子获得公民身份?家庭前线打算怎么做?  


There are many Malaysian mothers who have been denied their rights for more than 60 years, it is for the Government to set right the wrongs and harms inflicted on Malaysian women and their children and accord them equal rights as citizens. The judgement clearly includes not just the plaintiffs but also women in similar situations. 


Family Frontiers continues to strongly urge the Government to uphold this judgement, withdraw its appeal and give true meaning to their tagline Keluarga Malaysia.  



60多年来,有许多大马籍母亲被剥夺了权利,政府应该纠正对这些家庭妇女及孩子们造成的错误和伤害,给予她们作为公民的平等权利。9月的判决显然不只包括原告,还包括处于类似情况的大马籍母亲们。


家庭前线在这里要强烈敦促政府接受和维持这一判决,并撤回其上诉,这样才能真正地赋予其标语大马一家(Keluarga Malaysia)真正的意义。



  1. What are the main concerns here now? 现在这里的主要关注点是什么?


The High Court order from 9 September 2021 applies to all Malaysian mothers and their children facing similar obstacles. Feedback that FF has received in the ensuing months from mothers who went to submit their documents demonstrates that there is a lack of procedural clarity among JPN branches and embassies or high commissions. Some mothers were given a list of different requirements and varying instructions when submitting their documents. It seems that some embassies/high commissions did not even receive instructions from Putrajaya. 


There need to be clear guidelines that standardise the confirmation of citizenship for children, to ensure that Malaysian mothers do not have to jump through additional bureaucratic hoops that Malaysian fathers have never had to, in order to ensure their foreign-born children receive citizenship. 


Family Frontiers strongly urges the Malaysian Government to withdraw the appeal and expedite the implementation of the 9 September 2021 High Court order. 


Now, more than ever, it is crucial for the Government to solidify the High Court judgment into law by withdrawing the appeal, and to expedite its implementation without further delay. This development is proof it is possible to lift the hardships of non-citizenship off Malaysian mothers and their overseas-born children. So long as the appeal stands, Malaysian mothers and their children are denied their constitutionally vested rights.


This is an urgent matter considering schools have reopened and impacted children are yet to be enrolled into public schools; mothers are faced with high uncertainty and left in limbo while having to rush back and forth to relevant departments. Overseas, children are awaiting to return to their tanah air with their Malaysian mothers after over two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Surely, they deserve to enjoy the fruits of the High Court judgement and be provided the same access to fundamental rights as their Malaysian siblings, family members and friends.



高等法院去年9月9日的庭令适用于所有面临类似问题的大马籍母亲和孩子们。家庭前线在随后的几个月里收到去提交文件的妈妈们的反馈得知,国民登记局全国支部和大使馆或领事馆之间缺乏程序上的明确指示。一些母亲在提交文件程序时获得不同的清单要求和指示。有些大使馆或领事馆甚至没有收到来自布城的指示。


家庭前线在此声明,国家登记局需要有明确的准则来执行儿童公民身份确认程序。这样一来,马来西亚母亲们不必为了确保她们在海外出生的孩子事情上经历那么多额外的官僚繁琐的陷阱而获得公民身份。这些都是马来西亚爸爸们在海外不需经历的事。


家庭前线再次大力敦促马来西亚政府撤回上诉,并加快执行去年9月9日的高等法院命令。


现在政府更有必要通过撤回上诉,将高等法院的判决作为巩固法律的基础,不再拖延、尽快执行这权利。如此一来,这样的事态发展才有可能解除大马籍母亲和她们海外出生的孩子们因非公民身份而受到的苦难。如果过后政府上诉成功,那么这些妈妈们和她们的孩子就被剥夺了宪法赋予的权利。


政府必须要考虑到学校如今已重开,而受影响的孩子们还没办法进入公立学校,这是一个紧迫的问题;母亲们面对高度的不确定性,她们不得不来回奔波于相关部门,这种情况也让她们陷入困境。在海外,孩子们经历了两年多的冠病瘟疫后,正等待着与他们的母亲一起回到他们的国土家园。当然,现在他们应该享受高等法院判决的成果,并获得与他们在大马的兄弟姐妹、家人和朋友一样的基本权利。





Thursday, February 24, 2022

确诊隔离后,无需再检测!(Astro Radio News interview: 22 Feb)

 訪問文檔:

 

 

Omicron的潛伏期大約3天,Delta毒株大約4天,最早期的武漢病毒則是5天。這意味著感染omicron者更快出現症狀。要注意的症狀有包括咳嗽、疲勞、鼻塞傷風、頭痛和喉嚨痛,比較起之前的毒株和一般的感冒,這些症狀也沒有什麼特別。

症狀會維持多久就要看個人的免疫力。一般人在6天後就會清掉病毒,症狀應該會出現在感染後的第三或第四天,一般維持兩三天。

 

 

得知接觸確診病患後,先別慌張。請回想最後一天接觸那人是什麼時候,在什麼樣的環境下還有什麼互動?要先確認自己是不是符合密切接觸者定義。根據衛生部指南,若你可以確定你是(密切接觸者)的話,就從最後一天接觸那確診病患的日期算起,若無症狀可以在4天後進行檢測,或者不檢測自行隔離57天也可以。若有症狀,請立刻去安排PCR檢測。

 

是的,若時間不對,比如說太早去做PCR檢測,病毒載量還不高,醫療人員取樣本時自然沒拿到,就會發生偽陰性的結果。若不小心以為自己沒事可以出門,這會把病毒傳染風險帶給其他人。

 

 

如果自我檢測盒的結果是陽性,加上你認為自己正確使用檢測盒,比如說檢測前至少半小時沒吃喝或抽煙,那麼你不該質疑結果--偽陽性的結果可能性很低。不然的話,你可以使用另一品牌的檢測盒再試試看。

目前政府對待自我檢測盒陽性的結果如同PCR陽性,只要你通報這結果,你不需要去額外花錢去做PCR檢測。CT值如何,其實也不太重要。如果你有症狀要注意和通報,若有必要及時尋求治療。

 


很多人誤解CT值的用意。它其實只是個指標告訴你樣本裡的病毒大概有多少。它不能告訴你這些病毒還有沒有傳染性。CT值越低,代表PCR機器僅需更少的擴增週期就可偵查到樣本裡的病毒基因,意味著你本來就有很多病毒。CT值越高,就代表PCR要跑更多擴增週期才可以偵查到有病毒,意味著樣本裡的病毒本來就不多。

 

一般上CT29以下是較強的訊號,如果是38或以上就不能用了,其他3037之間,就只是一個病毒多或寡的比較性參考而已。

 

 

根據衛生部指南,確診者在7天或十天後結束隔離,不需做PCR檢測,就可當作康復了。條件是那人已沒有症狀。

康復者身體裡面或許還有病毒的殘骸,有些人需要更長的時間才能把所有病毒殘骸排出來,但那些病毒已被摧毀了,不再有感染力,PCR陽性結果不能告訴你這個事實。

如果哪家公司還有類似的隔離後PCR檢測政策,他們或許已遲了靠近兩年了!衛生部老早就不做第二次檢測才放人,那已是20205月的事。

 

您如何看待政府即将落实 无症状密切接触医护人员无需隔离并逐步扩大的措施?

 

可以理解為何政府要端出如此的措施,因為病毒傳染得太快太多,關鍵領域的員工人手就被嚴重影響,特別是如果連密切接觸者也得隔離的話。

我認為這必須是無可奈何的暫時性妥協方案,特別是在疫情高峰期間。畢竟類似的措施必定會帶來疏漏然後增加社區感染的風險,即使政府提出要以定期檢測來替代。

這暫時性的方案如果擴大到社會和經濟的各大層面,那麼政府就更難控制疫情、比如說鼓勵公司讓員工居家工作。因為無需隔離的政策與居家工作的鼓勵是有所衝突的,它變相鼓勵私人企業利用這措施要求員工報到工作崗位。

 

 

 

 

播出片段:https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode/961086

 


Wednesday, February 23, 2022

For Malaysian tourism, decision on borders an anxious wait (Al-Jazeera: 23 Feb 2022)

 However, Lim Chee Han, a public health expert and researcher with the Agora Society Malaysia, said authorities should consider maintaining quarantine measures to help control the virus.

“The government can review and revise this order after the Omicron-led pandemic wave has come down,” Lim told Al Jazeera, predicting that the surge would subside by May.

“The latest genome sequencing data reported until 28 January shows that 90.7 percent of Omicron variant cases found in Malaysia were imported,” Lim added.

Full article here: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/economy/2022/2/23/for-malaysian-tourism-decision-on-borders-an-anxious-wait


Thursday, February 17, 2022

Decentralisation of Malaysia’s Supplementary Food Program (RMT): Could Sabah State and Local Governments Contribute? (16 Feb 2022)

 


Introduction: 

Last 20 January 2022, 𝗮 𝗽𝗶𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗳𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘃𝘆 𝘄𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘃𝗶𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗻 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸 with the account holder claiming it was a meal served to students under Malaysia’s Supplementary Food Programme (RMT).
The Facebook user also questioned 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗠𝗧 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝘀𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗳𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀?
"𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘸𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘳. 𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙞𝙣𝙫𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙜𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙤𝙙 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙞𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙬𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙫𝙞𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝙬𝙖𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙙 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙍𝙈𝙏 𝙧𝙚𝙘𝙞𝙥𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙘𝙝𝙤𝙤𝙡." (Datuk Dr Radzi Jidin, 2022).
Nevertheless, with the constant frequent inflation of food production costs, how financially sustainable is the RMT?
𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 to support supplementary meals for underprivileged students?
WISDOM Foundation invites you to dive into the discussion with:
1. Dr Lim Chee Han
Co-Founder, Agora Society Malaysia
2. YB Datuk Seri Panglima Wilfred Madius Tangau
MP Tuaran P170
3. Lasimin Majani@Lasmin
Former Yang Dipertua Majlis Guru Besar Sabah (MGB), EXCO MGB Malaysia
𝐓𝐢𝐭𝐥𝐞: Decentralisation of Malaysia’s Supplementary Food Program (RMT): Could Sabah State and Local Governments Contribute?
𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐞: 16 February 2022, Wednesday
𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞: 8:00pm – 9:30pm

Live recorded video here: https://www.facebook.com/myWISDOMF/videos/274316821490087

AgoraPOV#3: Reopen the borders after the omicron wave comes down, mandatory quarantine might still needed.

AgoraPOV#3

I would like to emphasise that reopening the international borders is a matter of time, eventually we have to do this. So what we need to argue and discuss today is about the timing: when is the better timing to do that, given that the Omicron-led pandemic wave is rising in Malaysia and expected to peak by the end of March?


Bear in mind that yesterday (14 Feb) the number was already 21 thousand cases. If the government were to reopen the international borders on 1st March, would that come too soon? Did the National Recovery Council take full consideration of the impacts of the current wave of global pandemic? Now we know that the Omicron variant is highly contagious and easily spread. The more cases we have in the communities,higher the number of hospitalisation, will stress our healthcare system and cripple the economy due to quarantined absentees.

As it stands, the NRC policy recommendation is just an advice to the Cabinet. The Prime Minister’s statement clarifies that the proposal has not yet been discussed and approved in the Cabinet, and he ordered more studies looking into the proposal especially by the Health ministry.

So, what would be the immediate impacts of reopening the international borders to all by 1st March?

The current border measure is that, only Malaysians, Permanent Residents and certain visa holders are allowed to come back but have to take Covid tests and observe mandatory quarantine for a period of 5-10 days depending on their vaccination status. Singapore-Malaysia VTL and Langkawi ‘travel bubble’ pilot projects are the two exceptions. So, if Malaysia reopens the borders to all, that means any traveller could enter Malaysia without subject to mandatory quarantine other than COVID test requirement as suggested by the NRC chairperson Muhyiddin Yassin. This would mean significantly more travellers, be it Malaysians abroad and foreigners, could be allowed in without quarantine. The question is, how effective is the control of just COVID tests to deter the transmission from the travellers to the local community?

Looking at the MOH COVID Github data, since the end of last year, the number of daily imported cases hovering around 100-500. It should come as no surprise because the Omicron-led pandemic wave was hitting many countries in the world earlier than Malaysia, and it is still serious currently. The latest genome sequencing data reported until 28 Jan 2022 shows that 90.7% of Omicron variant cases found in Malaysia were imported, while GISAID database shows that 92.3% Europe-UK and 90.5% North American cases were sequenced to be Omicron on 31 Jan. The variant trend might have changed for Malaysia since then, but it is not overstated that the Omicron variant has already dominated in other countries.

Even if I am ok for the government to allow all to enter, but to do away with mandatory quarantine order, to me, it is ill-thought given the current pandemic scenario and the health authority are working hard to keep the local infections under control.

If the borders were to reopen as Muhyiddin had suggested, many Malaysians and family members abroad might take the opportunity to come back to visit during the peak of the Omicron-led pandemic wave in March. This would put them at risk too, for the flight journey where they have to be extra-cautious, as well as back home facing probably rising local risk due to the worst period of the Omicron-led pandemic.

The news could be very welcoming for some who want to travel to Malaysia for tourism activities. Given that some countries are still facing high levels of infection cases, it is very likely that some might carry the viruses across or acquired during the flight, bringing them to Malaysia. The nature of tourism activities includes visiting many places across the country, then it could be likely that some of the unfortunate cases serve to seed further local infections.

Besides, credits have to go to the health authority and Malaysian government for warding off the Omicron viruses initially, keeping the local infection in check through active border health surveillance activities. Mandatory quarantine policy does help prevent many imported cases spilling to the local community. Just to compare, Omicron finally breached into the local community and spiking the cases in Malaysia at least one to two month later than most countries. This buys the country a lot of time, and certainly allowed CNY family reunions possible this year.

So I urge the authority to consider amending the NCR proposal to at least include some quarantine measures in the reopening border policy, just to help disease control at the moment. The government can review and revoke this order after the Omicron-led pandemic wave has come down. Surely quarantine measures also cannot be kept indefinitely

Tuesday, February 15, 2022

COVID-19: When is the right time to reopen borders? (Interview by Astro Awani's Saraya Mia, 14 Feb 2022)

 Astro Awani Tonight description:

It is just a matter of time until Malaysia reopens its international borders. We ask public health researcher, Dr Lim Chee Han about the right time and way to do it.


Facebook link here
Twitter link here


Friday, February 11, 2022

Malaysians question Muhyiddin’s plan to reopen borders amid Omicron surge (Interviewed by SCMP - 9 Feb 2022)

Written by Hadi Azmi


National Recovery Council head’s recommendation to fully reopen to international tourists by March

raises eyebrows just a day after minister warned of a surge in infections Some experts warn the move

prioritises the economy over public health, while sceptical members of the public suggest a political

motive.

...

Lim Chee Han, of the research group Third World Network, said it was apparent from Muhyiddin’s remarks that his emphasis was on economic recovery. The expert likened the proposal to what he said was the government’s “mistake” in December 2020 to reopen state borders.

That move is widely seen as an error that eventually led to Muhyiddin – then prime minister – declaring a state of national emergency. “Based on what [Muhyiddin] said, you can tell that it is not based on a public health perspective,” Lim said.

...


Read the full article here.


Health experts raise concerns on recommendation to open borders (Interviewed by Mkini: 11 Feb 2022)

Written by Hariz Mohd

The National Recovery Council's (NRC) recommendation that Malaysia's borders should be reopened fully to all countries as early as next month has triggered concerns among several pandemic experts.

They warned that doing so when the Omicron wave is expected to be peaking may lead to an overload of positive Covid-19 cases in the country and risk overwhelming Malaysia's healthcare system.

"I don't think our borders should be fully opened by early March, as the Omicron surge is expected to peak in March.

"The borders should only open after the Omicron surge is flattened in order not to further burden our healthcare resources," Dr Moy Foong Ming told Malaysiakini when contacted yesterday.

Moy is a professor in epidemiology at the Centre of Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Practice, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya.

Two days ago, NRC chairperson Muhyiddin Yassin told a press conference that they suggested Malaysia's borders be fully opened to all countries as early as March 1 without requiring travellers to undergo compulsory quarantine and rely on double testing before departure and upon arrival in Malaysia.

Muhyiddin said the recommendation was made in the interest of Malaysia's economic recovery and because it is difficult to ban only certain countries since the Omicron variant of the Covid-19 virus has been detected throughout the world.

However, Moy argued that fully reopening the borders for economic recovery may inflict further damages if the number of Covid-19 cases spikes.

"The opening of borders is to boost the tourism and economy sectors. Although Omicron is already in our community, if the international travellers come in with the virus, they may spread the virus to locals and increase the surge further.

"This may affect our economic sectors if too many people are infected and need to be quarantined. There will be a shortage of workers, which will affect the economy," she said.

'Repeat of past mistake'

Public health policy researcher Dr Lim Chee Han, meanwhile, described the suggestion as an adoption of the "European way" in handling border control.

He warned that the country may pay a high price should it decide to rely on testing alone, without imposing mandatory quarantine on travellers.

"I wonder when will they learn that health is wealth? If people seriously still want to come or return to Malaysia, quarantine them for at least five days. Why should it be a big deal?

"If the government wants to do it the European way, then prepare to suffer like their (European) healthcare system and pay the social cost," he said.

Lim said reopening Malaysia's borders when the country is facing the Omicron wave may also lead to a repeat of what transpired in December 2020.

This was when the country saw spikes in the number of cases when the government decided to reopen state borders, a decision Lim described as "premature".

"The measure is also not wise as it encourages Malaysian family members abroad to come back while it is probably riskier here.

"At the same time, many Omicron cases are actually imported cases. The move to open borders means that the government is prepared to let Omicron viruses overload and dominate in the local transmission.

"I am not too sure how leaky the two PCR tests are to prevent more imported cases as such," Lim said.


Read the full article here: https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/610300
BM translated article: https://m.malaysiakini.com/news/610326

Monday, February 07, 2022

全面認知傳染疾病防範和控制(342)法令修正案 (翻譯版本長文)

去年12月,1988年傳染疾病防範和控制法令Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988342法令)的修正案引起國會以及公眾的激烈反應。有網民和活躍分子發起運動反對修正該法令,原因主要集中在法令修正後的犯規懲罰程度: (一)發給個人和公司罰單的最高數額;(二)提高一般懲罰條款裡的最高罰款和監禁期。

此文我將分析修正法案倡議的每一項(包括一讀和後來妥協修改的條例),以讓讀者能全面了解這議題。

首先,要了解每項修正倡議的目的和功能,同時明白342法令目前存在的弱點、局限和漏洞。這個已32歲的法律過去有6次修正,但全部都僅把新增的傳染疾病納入法令下的第一列表。最近的一次修改是在20206月,為的是增加2019年冠狀疾病(COVID-19)。現在是時候更新法令納入一些實際和需要的改變。

342法令修正案正是對冠病疫情的直接反應,因為這個病毒如今依然肆虐,其突變產生的變種毒株帶來的傳染威脅不是在列表裡的其他29個傳染病可匹敵。冠病對我國的挑戰前所未有,截至今年120日,它已奪走了接近31800人性命和感染了282萬人。無可否認,針對政府官員處理疫情手法,公眾有諸多不滿和投訴——從篩檢、追蹤病例、隔離到疾病管控,特別是標準作業程序(SOP)的執法。衛生部的人力資源在疫情惡化時期變得嚴重緊張和受限制,尤其是執行上述的疾病防控職務。

去年1月國家頒布緊急狀態後,國家安全理事會(Majlis Keselamatan Negara,MKN)成為國家最高決策單位。那個時期出台的政策有時出自公共衛生以外的考量,導致政策不協調造成公眾的困惑和爭議。那些臨時的政策有時妥協甚至削弱了原本衛生部權限下執行冠病防控措施的有效性。如今緊急狀態已結束,其緊急法令也隨著失效。衛生部需再次面對342法令留下來的局限和不確定因素。

整體上,修正法案倡議是為了對症下藥,可看出衛生部從過去超過兩年的疫情抗戰經驗中吸取了教訓同時也要準備未來的挑戰。如今Omicron變種毒株的冒出是一個警示告訴我們冠病還未全面受控制。目前的法令不足以應對目前和未來的瘟疫及相關衛生威脅,因此修正案有其需要允許衛生部處理眼前的危機以及未來其他的新興疾病帶來的公共衛生挑戰。

同時已有證據顯示,有些人或團體因不遵守SOP導致疫情病例飆升,造成感染簇群甚至死亡。因此違反SOP的風險和後果有目共睹。在沒有足夠和有效的疾病控制之下,公共資源負擔和匱乏以及無辜生命的犧牲將加深公眾對政府的怨氣和不信任。要知道,法令若沒針對違規者附上相稱的懲罰條例產生合理的阻嚇作用,若法律無法合理、公平和有效執行,相信沒有人會認真看待該法令。

就在這個背景下了解為何政府迫切地尋求在上次的國會會議通過修正案,主要是年秒假期公眾會大量相聚交流,衛生部顧慮Omicron毒株的火速傳染力會在社區傳開。儘管初步數據說明Omicron造成的重病風險相對輕微,但若社區傳染如歐洲般嚴重,那麼我們國家社會或將再次付出慘重的代價。公眾也需要保持警惕避免集體陷入冠病SOP“疲勞

且讓我們端倪修正案倡議。針對第二條文的修改,是為了更新負責官員的定義,用環境衛生官員或任何適合人物來取代過時的稱呼衛生檢查員health inspector)。新的定義也有條文賦權地方政府官員同時協助執行法令。

針對第十條文第二款的修正:醫務人員需要呈報任何可疑的感染病例給衛生當局,即使該病例還未通過實驗室檢測結果確認。這將允許衛生部有更充足時間、更迅速反應指示某人隔離防止疾病進一步擴散。確實,有人擔憂若因某些原因沒辦到而面對罰單懲罰的風險。

再來,原文法令下條規指定的表格,修正案建議改為衛生總監指定的任何形式的文件。在需迅速回應疫情新狀況,需要端出更多文件給不同功能作用的當兒,這總比等待衛生部長每次都需要憲報允許各種新表格來得實際。

現有的法令只認得隔離中心(quarantine station而目前已是非常普遍接受的住家隔離措施其實沒有法律根據。所以修正案要增設新條文14A。確實在14A條文第二款下讓人有所顧慮,因為官員被賦權使用必要的暴力(’kekerasan’)確保遵守隔離指令。持平而論,現有法令第15條文第二款也有同樣的詞句。我認為政府應考慮添加合理‘munasabah’)這字眼並在條規裡提出相關例子。雖然確實發生不少不遵守住家隔離指令的個案,但執法者若要使用暴力,縱使合法,也該伴隨著權力監督和檢查。

再來,15A新條文倡議指示確診病人或可疑病例或親密接觸者佩戴追蹤器以方便監控住家隔離。這個重要的科技器材不是32年前制定法令時可想象的需求。

新條文21A則賦權衛生總監發出攸關防病的一般或特別指示給任何個人或團體,任何人違反指令將被視為犯規。這允許衛生當局順應新局勢,伸縮性發出新指示。當然有些人擔憂這個新權力可能被濫用,但確實有情況衛生總監需要立刻行動,發出指示。若沒變,有人不聽從指示挑戰當局的合法性,該怎麼辦?

還有名為執法(’Penguatkuasaan’)的新增部分(Bahagian) IVA,賦權官員必要的調查權力執行法令,引用刑事訴訟法(第21B條款),同時要求有關人士提供任何與疾病防控的訊息給執法官員(第21C條款)。這個新增部分也為了賦權衛生部和其他官員能更有效執法收集相關和重要的資訊來防止疾病擴散。

22A新條文添加了一個新的犯規者類別,即是公司 (pertubuhan perbadanan)目前的342法令僅包括個人責任,因此沒有任何法律基礎對付公司。公司或機構裡包括很多決策者比如董事和經理,他們需要為該公司違反SOP和其後果負責。第22A條文第2款也包括了負責工人的代理,他們也需要負責。然而現有的法令並沒分辨不同等級的犯規者,所以針對個人的罰單最高數額僅一千令吉。

前年,當有家位於巴生的手套廠被爆出違反SOP,他們僅能被罰款一千令吉,輿論嘩然。去年首相依斯邁沙比里100天政績宣傳活動的主辦單位明顯違反SOP後,也僅接獲一千令吉的罰單,公眾大感憤怒喊雙重標準。那是罰單的最高數額罰款。若計算通貨膨脹,1988年的一千令吉大約是去年底的2310令吉。

這就是現有法令的局限。相信大部分公眾都應該會同意對於如此規模的SOP違規,一千令吉罰單像是個兒戲。我想大多數會讚同提高罰款數額,只是爭議的是增幅的大小而已。先有這個共識很重要,一個法律必須要有相稱的懲罰對付違規者,如此一來該法律才會有合理的阻嚇效果,同時也能伸張正義確保那些把感染風險帶給社群和威脅公共衛生的不負責任人士繩之以法。

有人指責第22A條文根本就是舉證責任倒置的例子,因此喊不公平。但是此類型的法律條文在確立公司責任的相關法律上是相當普遍的。可制衡的是,公司可以證明該違規他們並不知情或同意過,同時他們也已採取了一切合理的步驟以及付出了適當的努力來避免此事。如此的辯護理由也寫入第22A條文。

最後我們進入最備受爭議的3項修正法案。

第一份法案倡議修正第25條文允許衛生當局發出罰單給違規的個人(最高數額一萬令吉)或公司(最高數額一百萬令吉)。隨後政府下調至公司50萬令吉給及個人一千令吉。

法案也建議修改有關一般懲罰的第24條文給那些無特定懲罰說明事項的犯規者。對於個人,該罰款不超過10萬令吉或7年監禁或兩者兼施。由於有人抗議,衛生部後來也同意下調至最高2千令吉或兩年監禁或兩者兼施。而針對公司的懲罰,則不能超過兩百萬令吉。

最後,第31條文賦權衛生部長制定條規。第一份修正法案加入了一個全新的313)條款:任何違反條規的個人都被視為犯法,可被罰不超過五萬令吉或兩年監禁或兩者兼施。目前政府也同意下調至最高1500令吉或兩年監禁或兩者兼施。針對公司的,最高罰款則是一百萬。必須說明的是,除了罰單罰款,其他的懲罰將會由法庭裁決,意味著涉案的個人或公司將會在342法令下被提控,然後在審訊中抗辯。

或許大部分公眾沒注意到衛生部其實曾公開建議三個懲罰等級的罰單制度,而這些等級與犯規的嚴重程度掛鉤。這也表示,大部分人誤以為他們會因小過,例如沒在強制性地方佩戴口罩或沒使用吾安app登入場所,而被貼上最高數額的罰單。這是非常普遍但錯誤的假設認知。

為了顯示透明及安撫公眾的焦慮擔憂,政府應直接宣佈一個清單建議各種違規類別和相應的罰單數額。但最新的事態發展是,政府已妥協維持個人的罰單最高數額為一千令吉。

有反對者拿刑事法典如企圖殺人和疏忽致死罪的最高刑罰例子來比較,表示當初342法令修正案的最高懲罰程度不公平和不相稱。我不同意此說法。

去年3月至9月,單單就工作單位的感染簇群就有2,369個,造成接近20萬病例和522人死亡。平均每個簇群有82個病例,每4.5簇群就有一人死亡。這期間最大的工作簇群是瑟纳旺工業區簇群,爆發2178病例和15人死亡。

僱主們真的不需要為違反SOP或疏忽導致人命傷亡和造成僱員或親屬的悲痛,而負上法律責任嗎?任何涉及的公司或僱主或已違反了公認的生命與生計的權利”(Right to Life and Livelihood)原則,意即工作環境情況必須安全、衛生和不踐踏人類尊嚴。若造成的傷害好比如住院、進入加護病房甚至死亡呢?若說這些僱主是慣犯呢?那麼比較起刑事法典的疏忽致死案例,那個原先最高懲罰數額真的是不相稱或太過分了嗎?

冠病瘟疫已是社會上多個家庭的悲劇。如果有不負責任的單位肇禍,為何不可開出更高數額的罰單或提控他們上法庭裁決更高的懲罰?如果最高懲罰數額不公平,那麼反對者也應該提議和捍衛自己提出的數額號碼。擴大法令執法範圍至公司也可以有公平的結果,比如區分小型企業和大公司集團。

我可以明白公眾普遍上對執法當局不信任,特別是緊急狀態時期針對小過錯開出的最高數額罰單以及對政治人物的雙重標準。我不支持濫權,但也承認目前有必要確保342法令提供合適的法律基礎和相稱懲罰來應付疫情需要。

最後我呼籲公眾全面看待、明白和支持342修正案的需要。政府、在野黨議員和公民社會組織還可以繼續商討一般懲罰和罰單的最高數額,以及其他的顧慮。但事不宜遲,在下一波Omicron引發的疫情來襲前,政府需盡快在下季國會會議裡完成342法令的修正,讓目前一些已執行和未來的防疫措施有足夠的法律基礎行事。