By Kee Thuan ChyeSo, those who surmised that the sex video revealed by ‘Datuk T’ was a political ploy have been proven right. The people behind it – three of them – have confessed to it.
They were forced to reveal themselves because PKR’s MP Johari Abdul had earlier spilled the beans on them. It all unravelled like a cheap soap opera.
Former Malacca chief minister Rahim Thamby Chik, businessman Shazryl Eskay Abdullah and Shuib Lazim, treasurer-general of Perkasa, have come out to say they are ‘Datuk T’. And they have the cheek to call for a royal commission of inquiry into the sex video.
In the first place, they have transgressed Section 292 of the Penal Code for possessing and distributing pornographic material. Regardless of who the person in the video is, the trio are culpable. Exposing a politician’s sexual activity does not protect them from the law.
After their intended target, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, had lodged a police report, the inspector-general of police, Ismail Omar, announced that the case would be investigated under Section 292.
That being so, the police should now logically arrest all three for possession and distribution of pornographic material and have them charged in court. They should have moved in right after the trio gave their press conference to reveal themselves.
If the trio were the authors of the statement given out to the media calling on the politician (said to be in the video) and his wife to quit politics, they should also be charged for blackmail.
So what’s holding the police back? Are they awaiting further instructions from Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein?
If so, Hishammuddin should observe the rule of law. He should not protect these people because they are Umno members or pro-Umno. This is where the public can judge how sincere the government really is.
If the trio go scot-free, it will be a sure sign that the government practises double standards.
The trio’s call for a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) into the sex video is unwarrantable. Why should there be one? In the case of VK Lingam in 2007, there was ample cause for an RCI – the issue of the fixing of judges was of immense public concern as it affected one of our country’s institutions.
Where is the public concern for a case involving a man, even though he may be a public figure, visiting a prostitute? How does that affect the public? It’s his own private concern, and the public is no worse for it.
In calling for an RCI, the trio appear to be trying to distract us from the offence they have actually committed. In fact, if they were also the ones who masterminded the videotaping, it would mean they are far more immoral than anyone who merely visits a prostitute. They would have no moral right to cast stones at others.
Their actions would have to be seen to be nothing less than repulsive. Even inhuman. For what kind of human being would do something as despicable as this to destroy another human being? - more
No comments:
Post a Comment