Shocking interpretations of slapping offence and statutory rape

My article was earlier published in TheAntDaily.com on 29/3/2014

During the Chinese New Year celebration last January, Seputeh Member of Parliament (MP) Teresa Kok published a comedy video clip alleging blatant corruption, power abuse and mismanagement in the government.

The reactions by Umno supporters and pro-Umno NGOs, combined under the so-called Coalition of Muslim NGOs, were fast, furious and even crude. They staged various demonstrations and slaughtered chickens in public to threaten Kok and accused her of insulting the Malays and Islam.

At several protests held by these groups, they even offered a RM1,200 reward to whoever who could slap Kok and produce evidence to show it.

Kok lodged a police report on the slap threat but Home Minister and Umno vice-president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said the slap threat was not an offence, indirectly telling police to disregard the police report by the DAP leader.

This means, to Umno, slapping or any attempt or threat to slap anyone from the opposition is permissible as long as the threats came from Umno, Umno-linked NGOs, their members or supporters.

Then, another “slap threat” scenario emerged when a controversial 1Malaysia bomoh by the name of Ibrahim Mat Zain threatened to slap Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, who is also the Youth and Sports Minister.

Ibrahim was upset with Khairy for reportedly calling for him to be arrested over his so-called “Laksamana Do Re Mi” rituals at the KLIA in relation to the search for the missing MH370.

A pro-BN NGO immediately lodged a police report against the bomoh over his threat, saying that Section 506 of the Penal Code should be applied in this case. The police were quick to respond by initiating a criminal investigation against the bomoh over his slap threat on Khairy.

This has raised a disturbing question: Why are threats against Kok and Khairy treated differently? Well, the only obvious reason is that Kok is an opposition leader while Khairy is from the ruling party.

Perhaps Zahid should clarify whether Section 506 of the Penal Code differentiates offences by political and racial backgrounds of the offenders and complainants? It would seem that implementation wise, two sets of Section 506 are applicable for the purpose of politicking and not curbing crime.

Then, recently one of Zahid’s men, Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar created yet another controversy with his reply in parliament regarding statutory rape cases.

Wan Junaidi said reported statutory rape cases had dropped in 2013, with 1,147 cases involving the Malays, 62 cases the Chinese and 32 cases the Indians. He also said the high number of cases among the Malays could be because they were more sensitive to report such cases compared to the other two races.

Wan Junaidi has since asked Parliament to have his controversial remarks expunged from the Hansard. He said his statement could cause hurt if taken out of context but stressed that he had no ill intention when he read it out.

But there is a lesson to be learnt here: Statements with racial undertones are inflammatory and should be avoided at all costs.

First of all, why is this kind of reports being systematically prepared in accordance with race or religion? Rape and sexual abuse are both criminal offences, whatever the race of the offenders.

The deputy minister should be reminded that all Malaysians, regardless of race or religion, want stern action to be taken against such crimes. What is important is not the race of the victims or offenders, but to find out the root causes so that effective action can be taken to fight this social problem.

It is sad when politics seems to rear its ugly head again in the fight against crimes. Our people simply cannot afford to be divided in combating negative elements.

It makes one wonder where all those BN women MPs were when this comment was made in parliament and why they did not object to the remark deemed racist by many people.