The Malaysians are at it again. Photos of a semi-naked Ms Elizabeth Wong, the Honourable opposition MP from Anwar Ibrahim's PKR party, has been circulated, leading to her resigning her Selangor state Cabinet post and assembly seat. The last time a similar thing happened was when Mr Chua Soi Lek resigned his posts because he was caught on video in a hotel room engaged in activities with a person not his wife.
Since when has the naked form of a person, man or woman, proved incompetence on the part of the person? Don't we ALL have "private parts", which, if you are not aware, play important roles in keeping use alive and propagating the human race? What is there to be ashamed of if these parts are publicly displayed, especially when it is done so without the person's consent? I would like to let Ms Wong know that there is no wrong, no shame and certainly no dishonour in it, except among those who are prudes and among people - enemies - who would want to bring a person down, politically or otherwise.
Unfortunately, in Malaysia, that's how its appears the dominant UMNO wants to play politics. Anwar is already on video accusing the UMNO party of playing dirty politics. And he would be the one who has a certain 'authority' on this because somebody did him in in dirty fashion more than 10 years ago.
If politics is going to be conducted in this fashion in Malaysia from here on in (remember, just a few weeks ago, certain MPs defected to BN in Perak state, leading to a change in government of sorts). It is difficult to imagine that some political force is not behind all of these. And these forces appear to be quite powerful, and rich too, for who would want to defect, or show 'embarassing' photos' if there is not some financial incentives to do so. And who would want to part with their money if that somebody is not enriched by somebody else in some significant way?
Is Malaysia now so corrupt to the core?
Singapore's relationship with Malaysia is often characterised by a 'two steps forward one step back' dance. Undur is Malay for 'move backwards' or 'withdraw' - which Singapore had no choice but to do in 1965. The rest, as they say, is history. This blog is about Singapore-Malaysia ever since. 'Lah' is an oft used particle which ends a sentence in the Malayanish-Singlish language. This shared particle of language gives us hope for the future.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Standing the law on its head
Malaysia has been mired in controversy over the last couple of months. And it didn't begin with the dominant UMNO losing 5 Malaysia States in the last election. Of particular note is the murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaaribuu, who was blown up by explosives. One of the accused, Abdul Razak Baginda, has been acquited. Abdul Razak has 'high powered' connections and some are saying that that is why he got acquitted.
On the other hand, the 2 police officers who remain in the dock have just about been convicted of the murder because, according to the prosecution, the 2 policemen have not been able to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that they did not commit the murders.
Well, I am flabbergasted. The established rule is that the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the 2 policemen (the defendants) did committed the murder, and not for the defendants to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they did not. The judge will hand out his verdict on 9 April 2009, but if it agrees with the convoluted and unprecedented arguments put forth by the prosecution, then I'd be floored totally.
One wonders where Malaysia prosecution lawyers were trained. I only hope the learned Judges do the right thing and throw out the case because the prosecution does not seem to have proved beyond reasonable doubt their case.
See also: Mongolian model shot and blown to bits
On the other hand, the 2 police officers who remain in the dock have just about been convicted of the murder because, according to the prosecution, the 2 policemen have not been able to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that they did not commit the murders.
Well, I am flabbergasted. The established rule is that the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the 2 policemen (the defendants) did committed the murder, and not for the defendants to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they did not. The judge will hand out his verdict on 9 April 2009, but if it agrees with the convoluted and unprecedented arguments put forth by the prosecution, then I'd be floored totally.
One wonders where Malaysia prosecution lawyers were trained. I only hope the learned Judges do the right thing and throw out the case because the prosecution does not seem to have proved beyond reasonable doubt their case.
See also: Mongolian model shot and blown to bits
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)