Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Tamby Chik stressed that he had RAPED A 15-YEAR-OLD SCHOOLGIRL "national responsibility" in the sex act.

Former Malacca chief minister Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Tamby Chik stressed that he had  "national responsibility" to reveal who were involved in the sex act.like

 

BACK IN 1994, THE THEN CHIEF MINISTER OF MALACCA, ABDUL RAHIM THAMBY CHIK, WAS REPORTED TO HAVE RAPED A 15-YEAR-OLD SCHOOLGIRL (UNDER MALAYSIAN LAW, SEX WITH A MINOR CONSTITUTES STATUTORY RAPE). LIM GUAN ENG, CURRENTLY THE CHIEF MINISTER OF PENANG AND THE THEN MP FOR KOTA MELAKA, SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE RAPE OF A MINOR AFTER THE GIRL’S GRANDMOTHER-CUM-GUARDIAN, WHO WAS ALSO LIM’S CONSTITUENT, TURNED TO HIM FOR HELP.

15

HOWEVER, FAR FROM DESERVING JUSTICE, BOTH LIM AND THE SCHOOLGIRL RECEIVED THEIR “DUES”. LIM WAS JAILED FOR THREE YEARS FOR SPEAKING UP AGAINST THE RAPE WHILE THE GIRL WAS GIVEN THREE YEARS “PROTECTIVE CUSTODY”. AS FOR RAHIM, BECAUSE OF THE RAPE AND PENDING CORRUPTION CHARGES, HE WAS FORCED TO RESIGN, AFTER A 12-YEAR STINT AS MALACCA’S CHIEF MINISTER.

BUT THE JUDICIARY SAW RAHIM ESCAPE PUNISHMENT FOR A CRIME COMMITTED; THIS CAME ABOUT AFTER THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR WITHDREW THE CHARGE CITING LACK OF EVIDENCE. THE CORRUPTION CHARGES AGAINST RAHIM WERE ALSO DROPPED

By now, most of us are familiar with the story of the 11-year-old girl who was raped by 19 young men. The story gets worse: this little girl, who was gang-raped, has become the target of victim blaming. A TV anchor quoted one of the rapists, who defended himself by saying, "She looked older than 11."

Then came a statement from the victim's father, who said, "She may look older than 11, but she still has the mind of a child."

It doesn't really matter what her father said, because he shouldn't have had to be on the defensive. I still cannot fathom how these men could even attempt to blame her, but I know that in reality, victim blaming is an all-too-common reaction in cases of sexual assault.

Many sexual assault victims who comment on my articles too often state that their family and friends do not support their admissions of rape, because they know their rapist. For some reason, people often invalidate rape victims because they find the fact that their rapist was an ex-partner, friend or family member unbelievable. They could not be more wrong.

Healing from sexual assault is very difficult, especially when your friends and family not only invalidate your claims but blame you for being raped. Victim blaming, however, is a huge part of our culture. I'm sure you've heard these all-too-classic lines, probably more than once:

• "She was dressed provocatively."
• "She had a bad reputation."
• "She should have known better than to put herself in that situation."

Through speaking with many other victims of sexual assault, it has become evident that in general, experiencing a rape is something others often refuse to validate. This is especially true in the case of acquaintance rape, as well as being raped by an ex, a current partner or a family member. Many people are quick to scoff at these types of "rape" claims.

Why is it that people are often more apt to take up arms against the rape victim rather than the rapist? Is it because they have never experienced the pain and humiliation of sexual assault and therefore can't possibly understand how a rape could happen between a person and their partner, spouse, co-worker or relative? Perhaps they place the blame on the victim because they didn't fight back? This doesn't make it any less of a rape than if the victim had violently protested. It is hard for most people to imagine the fear that rape victims experience when they are isolated and then sexually assaulted. It is especially confusing when you are raped by someone you know and trusted. Acquaintance rape happens more often than you think.

It is time to put an end to the biggest rape myth of all time. The rape myth I am talking about is that of the scary monster in the alley, because that is what many people think of when they hear the term "rapist." Although there are many violent and random rapes that happen both inside and outside the home, the fact is that 84 percent of rapes are executed by someone the victim knows. In fact, according to the Office of Crime Victims Advocacy, "Most of the time a person is raped by someone they know, trust, or love."

The scary monster in the alley is a convenient myth because the truth is much scarier. Assuming a rape cannot possibly occur between friends, colleagues or family members is on par with how most children define the term "stranger." In elementary school, when we learned about stranger danger, our teacher tricked us by asking if a dangerous stranger always looks mean and scary.

"Of course they do!" We vigorously shook our little heads in unison.

Clearly anticipating this response, she told us we were wrong and reminded us that a dangerous stranger can look nice and even friendly. This is often the same for rapists.

For most people, it is generally hard to accept that a person they spent many Christmas dinners with, or someone who came to their Fourth of July picnics, had the capacity to commit one of the most heinous crimes known to humankind. It is a fact that most victims know their rapists, and the discomfort a person may experience when learning that a person they know has committed a rape is no reason to invalidate the victim.

If someone tells you they've been sexually assaulted, there are a few things you can do:

1. Believe them. As the Office of Crime Victims Advocacy says, "Believe them. A person has very little to gain by making up a story about sexual assault."
2. Encourage counseling. Tell them about RAINN, the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network, and direct them to their website, centers.rainn.org. The site provides telephone numbers for sexual assault hotlines and has a great search engine that locates rape crisis centers in your area.
3. Take them to get medical attention. Ask the victim if they want to go to the hospital. If the assault recently occurred, it is important to immediately seek medical attention for several reasons.
4. Seek out law enforcement. Ask them if they want to report their assault to the police. If they want to go, it is helpful if they have a friend to accompany them. If they don't want to go, be understanding.
5. Lend an ear. Just listening to their story and being there is probably one of the best things you can do to help a friend or relative who has been sexually assaulted. Validation is indispensable, especially because many victims of sexual assault incorrectly blame themselves.

 

Dear Guan Eng,

As you languish in prison, I have had plenty of time to reflect on you and your idealism.

Rightly or wrongly, the Democratic Action Party has long tried to have a 'MALAYSIAN' character when the vast majority in the country still perceive it to be essentially a political party for the ethnic Chinese.

I realise that recently people like you have tried hard to attract Malaysians, especially Malays, to make the DAP truly Malaysian, but not too successfully, in my view.

Then came an explosive event- the Rahim Thamby Chik case- which made a lot of Malays sit up and change their perceptions of the DAP.

That case rocked MALAY society to its very foundation.

Your conduct and role in pursuit of truth in that scandal earned my deepest admiration. The series of events following that scandal, culminating in the judicial proceedings against you, have turned out to be a classic example of how a verdict in a ' court of law' has become subordinate to the ' court of public opinion'.

Ask any MALAY mother anywhere. Few would agree that the famous grandmother in that scandal should have been abandoned by UMNO, and the under-aged girl should have been so blatantly violated and her family silenced.

By your words and deeds, you challenged the government, police, media, and the judiciary, and exposed yourself to certain incarceration and vindictive punishment by Dr. Mahathir and the political elite.

I have always believed that God works in mysterious ways.Inexplicably, He chose you to put the DAP into sharp focus. He chose you to force Malaysians to look at themselves and reflect on the abuse of basic values in our society.

To that extent, God in His wisdom made the DAP no longer just a Chinese political party, but, overnight, into a truly Malaysian one which fights for the deprived.

I am a MALAY with a family of my own.

I shall remember you as a CHINESE father who fought for the rights of a MALAY grand-mother and her sexually abused grand-daughter.

I know that when you decided to take on the case, you knew the price for your action would be heavy for you and your family, personally and politically.

Today, you are still paying the price.

You languish alone in prison. Ironically, as in Nelson Mandela's case, the longer they lock you up, the greater will be your stature, the more powerful the focus on the issues you fought for.

I also know that, all through this, you can look into the eyes of your wife, children and parents,and say, with deserved pride and honour, that "Guan Eng has not prostituted his dignity, decency and self-respect in the face of oppression and tyranny".

You have truly given new meaning to the maxim, 'Politics With Honour'.

More importantly, you have made me look in the mirror and ask, 'Who Am I?

What have I done to speak out against the evil forces which confronted two Malay kampong women? Why have I remained silent? Have I lost my decency and self-respect?'

In all honesty, I cannot say I have the guts to look into the eyes of my family members and say I have done them proud. I have kept silent.

I owe it to you, Guan Eng, for opening my eyes and stirring my conscience.

Our inaction and apathy have allowed oppression, tyranny and injustice to continue. We have to search our hearts and souls to find ways to make up for our negligence and ineptitude.

To you, Guan Eng, I offer prayers from my family.

May the blessings of the Almighty continue to give you strength, courage and tenacity to do what is right and just for all Malaysians.

Yours Sincerely,

Narmi Saila
Petaling Jaya, Selangor 


(This letter was published in the December 1998 issue of ALIRAN MONTHLY.)

Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, in responding to criticism against his person and his office, has once again displayed his arrogance and bad faith. Adopting the tone and manner of his boss, Dato Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad, he tries to avoid answering his critics – the latest among whom was Mohamed Ezam Mohamed Noor – by threatening to use the Sedition Act against them. He hopes that this will put a stop to accusations that his office is negligent and impotent.

I repeat my reproach of Mohtar and his office over the practice of both selective and malicious prosecution and for colluding with political conspirators. Mohtar stands out as the most repulsive attorney-general in Malaysian history, one who would pawn principles and the dignity of his office for mere self interest. Indeed, he has reduced the attorney-general’s office to the level of a department subservient to the executive branch of government.

Following are among my reasons for saying so:

1. Lim Guan Eng, Member of Parliament for Kota Melaka, was prosecuted for championing the cause of an underaged Malay girl who had reported that she had been raped. But the case against Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik, accused of a sex crime and corruption, was dropped.

2. The affidavit presented by Mohtar’s office in the case of Dato Nallakarupan was tailored to suit Mahathir’s political strategy. It received wide publicity on 3 September 1998, a day after I was sacked. This affidavit was presented together with one prepared by Musa Hassan, the official henchman of Tan Sri Rahim Noor (the former Inspector-General of Police). The contents include accusations of graft involving 60 million ringgit, sex offences and that I leaked government secrets and served as secret agent to a foreign country.

3. He ignored my verbal assurance, which was backed by a letter from my solicitor, that I would surrender to the police any time I was required to. Instead there was a Gestapo-style raid on my residence that could easily have resulted in bloodshed. Under his instruction, I was detained under Section 377B of the Penal Code.

4. His right-hand man, Dato Gani Patail, was at Bukit Aman on the night of 20 September 1998, while criminal violence was being inflicted on me in the same building. It was afterwards decided that I should be detained under the Internal Security Act so that my injuries would be concealed from the public. This led to widespread suspicion that his office was involved in a conspiracy to cover up a crime.

5. Gani knew I was severely wounded and saw for himself the condition I was in when I first appeared in court. Despite this, he tried to prevent me from making a complaint, saying the injuries were too slight. It is patently clear that he lied in court. In fact, he has lied to the entire nation. Coming from a senior official, such a blatant attempt to deceive must count as a serious crime indeed. It is nothing less than abetment in a cover-up.

6. In dealing with the issue of my injuries, Mohtar deliberately ignored the report submitted by police investigator ACP Mat Zain Ibrahim, which implicates Gani and Deputy Public Prosecutor Azhar Mohamad. They plotted to downplay the findings of doctors and specialists who examined me. Instead, Mohtar appointed his own consultant, Dr Abdul Rahman Yusof, who gave his findings without examining me. Mohtar said in a statement that some of my claims were false. The royal commission which inquired into my injuries found, on the contrary, that Rahim Noor’s assault was so severe that I could have died. Mohtar’s negligence and feebleness in handling the case – how he dragged his feet before acting upon the police and medical reports -- were plain for all to see.

7. The statutory declaration of lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon implicates Mohtar, Gani and Azhar in a scheme to pressure Nallakarupan to disgrace me in exchange for a guarantee of release from prosecution that could lead to the death sentence. But Dato Nalla would rather face prosecution than lie.

8. Mohtar and his office have ignored serious allegations by Dr Munawar Anees, Sukma Darmawan, Mior Abdul Razak, Azmin Mohamad Ali and others that the police were guilty not only of extortion and torture to extract false confessions that they had been sodomised but also of calumny against me, Ustaz Dato Harun Din and the late Tan Sri Yahaya Ahmad. Instead of prosecuting the police or even investigating the allegations, Mohtar’s office has decided to prosecute Sukma, Mior and Azmin for questioning police methods.

9. Mohtar connived with Mahathir to use malicious prosecution as a threat to pressure me to resign. Mahathir denies this, but I spoke of this threat even before 20 September 1998, in front of scores of friends. Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak was reported on 5 October to have confirmed that there was indeed such a threat.

10. Mohtar discussed with Tun Daim Zainuddin proposals to charge me with either leaking government secrets or committing sex offences if I refused to resign. Tun Daim intimated this to me on 12 August 1998. In court, I asked why in the world would the Attorney-General plot and scheme with Tun Daim? Can money buy and decide everything?

11. Throughout my trial, Mohtar used the full strength of his official power, his penchant for issuing threats and his arrogance and vengefulness to destroy my character. Then, after doing everything he could to shame me as much as possible, he changed the charges. In fact, a witness testified to being intimidated and to catching prosecutors and prosecution witnesses in the act of planning this vilification.

12. During the trial, I was prepared to provide proof that there was a political conspiracy in a case of selective prosecution. This pertained to a document, signed by Gani and presented to me by Mohtar, recommending that a senior minister be prosecuted for corruption. He can make excuses, or threaten me with the Official Secrets Act, but here nevertheless was proof that he practises selective prosecution under Mahathir’s direction. Furthermore, as I stressed in court, the Official Secrets Act cannot be used to cover up the malpractices, corruption and greed of those in power.

13. I have referred to personal letters which three corporate figures wrote to Daim during his previous stint as Finance Minister. These letters pledge to Daim’s person funds and corporate shares worth a total of nearly half a billion ringgit. Mohtar, who is wont to loquaciously condemning corruption among minor officials, seems to be tongue-tied in this particular case. He has to wait for Mahathir to issue an order of selective prosecution, so close is the cooperation between them.

14. During the trial, I was prepared too to provide evidence of selective prosecution by mentioning serious sex charges against Mahathir. However, I do not have Mahathir’s capacity for the cruelty that is born of vengefulness; I would not name the sex partners or the witnesses. After all, he is 73 years old and a grandfather. My intention here is only to show how Mahathir, using Mohtar, would seize upon any opportunity to apply selective prosecution against those he disfavours, even if it means concocting evidence. What about Rahim Tamby Chik’s case and other cases, implicating others who are still in Mahathir's favour? What about the official said to have used his private jet to import women through the VIP lounge at Subang? Customs and immigration officials know about this. And what has happened to allegations that a minister was involved in the Mustakizah murder case?

15. I tried to mention in court many other cases of corruption, but these were declared irrelevant. Indeed, prosecuting officers would jump to their feet to object every time I tried to present evidence of corruption, especially if Mahathir’s or Daim’s name was mentioned. I referred to the Perwaja issue, to the nation’s loss of nearly 6 billion ringgit, saying I had documents showing that Mahathir directed Tan Sri Eric Chia to give a contract to a certain firm. Is it not corruption when Mahathir, who is directly responsible for Petronas, approves nearly 2 billion ringgit for his son? And what about the approval of privatisation projects, contracts and corporate shares for his children, whose wealth runs into billions of ringgit and who sit as directors in hundreds of companies?

16. Mohtar too has studied the Anti-Corruption Agency’s reports regarding leaders who own enormous wealth in the form of corporate shares, land, and personal and family property. But these documents are simply filed away. And, surely, Mohtar is well aware of Daim’s obvious wealth, which he accumulated during his previous tenure as Finance Minister. In fact, he has now become the one Finance Minister with a bank of his own, the International Bank of Malaysia. All of these are open secrets, but the practice of selective prosecution has obstructed the effort to eradicate corruption and establish justice.

I do believe that by issuing this firm statement, I expose myself to further prosecution on various counts, including corruption, sex offences and treason, for which evidence will be vigorously invented. The prosecution’s intrigues are well known to the people and they will make their judgment. Mahathir’s lust for revenge is not yet satisfied, even though I have been physically assaulted and jailed for six years. The instruments of state, including Mohtar and the Attorney-General’s Office and media organisations under the control of the powers-that-be and wealthy businessmen will be worked to their maximum capacity to blind the people to injustice, corruption, cronyism and nepotism, especially as the election approaches. So-called leaders who are unjust and corrupt are terrified of the possibility that I would continue to expose their misdeeds. I will be kept away from the people. But they can plan; it is Allah Almighty Who disposes.

I am not sure why Mohtar’s ill will towards me had increased. It could have been caused by talk about the ACA investigating a report that he had holidayed in Italy with a corporate figure. I explained in my letter to the PM, dated 25 August 1998, that I knew nothing of such an investigation although it was alleged that I had ordered it. Nevertheless, I would not have prevented the ACA from doing its work. Another possible cause was a rumour spread by an ambitious lawyer that I would have him replace Mohtar as soon as I had the opportunity. This was false, but it nevertheless worried Mohtar.

I would like to stress to Mohtar that his worth is measured by his courage in ensuring justice without fear or favour, even if it means acting against a national hero or a wealthy merchant. It is not counted courageous to persecute an ordinary policeman for receiving a 20-ringgit bribe or a minor official for taking a tiny plot of land while we allow the big-time marauders to run amok, fleecing the nation of millions of ringgit and grabbing land by the thousands of acres.

Mohtar has no claim to glory when all he does is act as a gofer in a conspiracy serving the interest of a greedy and corrupt political clique. He should set himself free and repel attempts by the PM or Daim to control him. He should drop his phony conceit; he has no reason to feel great over his ability to make threats against young people who voice their concern over injustices in our system, including the practice of selective and malicious prosecution.

Anwar Ibrahim

Sungai Buloh Prison

May 20, 1999

Go ahead, Mohtar, make my day

Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, in responding to criticism against his person and his office, has once again displayed his arrogance and bad faith. Adopting the tone and manner of his boss, Dato Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad, he tries to avoid answering his critics – the latest among whom was Mohamed Ezam Mohamed Noor – by threatening to use the Sedition Act against them. He hopes that this will put a stop to accusations that his office is negligent and impotent.

I repeat my reproach of Mohtar and his office over the practice of both selective and malicious prosecution and for colluding with political conspirators. Mohtar stands out as the most repulsive attorney-general in Malaysian history, one who would pawn principles and the dignity of his office for mere self interest. Indeed, he has reduced the attorney-general’s office to the level of a department subservient to the executive branch of government.

Following are among my reasons for saying so:

1. Lim Guan Eng, Member of Parliament for Kota Melaka, was prosecuted for championing the cause of an underaged Malay girl who had reported that she had been raped. But the case against Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik, accused of a sex crime and corruption, was dropped.

2. The affidavit presented by Mohtar’s office in the case of Dato Nallakarupan was tailored to suit Mahathir’s political strategy. It received wide publicity on 3 September 1998, a day after I was sacked. This affidavit was presented together with one prepared by Musa Hassan, the official henchman of Tan Sri Rahim Noor (the former Inspector-General of Police). The contents include accusations of graft involving 60 million ringgit, sex offences and that I leaked government secrets and served as secret agent to a foreign country.

3. He ignored my verbal assurance, which was backed by a letter from my solicitor, that I would surrender to the police any time I was required to. Instead there was a Gestapo-style raid on my residence that could easily have resulted in bloodshed. Under his instruction, I was detained under Section 377B of the Penal Code.

4. His right-hand man, Dato Gani Patail, was at Bukit Aman on the night of 20 September 1998, while criminal violence was being inflicted on me in the same building. It was afterwards decided that I should be detained under the Internal Security Act so that my injuries would be concealed from the public. This led to widespread suspicion that his office was involved in a conspiracy to cover up a crime.

5. Gani knew I was severely wounded and saw for himself the condition I was in when I first appeared in court. Despite this, he tried to prevent me from making a complaint, saying the injuries were too slight. It is patently clear that he lied in court. In fact, he has lied to the entire nation. Coming from a senior official, such a blatant attempt to deceive must count as a serious crime indeed. It is nothing less than abetment in a cover-up.

6. In dealing with the issue of my injuries, Mohtar deliberately ignored the report submitted by police investigator ACP Mat Zain Ibrahim, which implicates Gani and Deputy Public Prosecutor Azhar Mohamad. They plotted to downplay the findings of doctors and specialists who examined me. Instead, Mohtar appointed his own consultant, Dr Abdul Rahman Yusof, who gave his findings without examining me. Mohtar said in a statement that some of my claims were false. The royal commission which inquired into my injuries found, on the contrary, that Rahim Noor’s assault was so severe that I could have died. Mohtar’s negligence and feebleness in handling the case – how he dragged his feet before acting upon the police and medical reports -- were plain for all to see.

7. The statutory declaration of lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon implicates Mohtar, Gani and Azhar in a scheme to pressure Nallakarupan to disgrace me in exchange for a guarantee of release from prosecution that could lead to the death sentence. But Dato Nalla would rather face prosecution than lie.

8. Mohtar and his office have ignored serious allegations by Dr Munawar Anees, Sukma Darmawan, Mior Abdul Razak, Azmin Mohamad Ali and others that the police were guilty not only of extortion and torture to extract false confessions that they had been sodomised but also of calumny against me, Ustaz Dato Harun Din and the late Tan Sri Yahaya Ahmad. Instead of prosecuting the police or even investigating the allegations, Mohtar’s office has decided to prosecute Sukma, Mior and Azmin for questioning police methods.

9. Mohtar connived with Mahathir to use malicious prosecution as a threat to pressure me to resign. Mahathir denies this, but I spoke of this threat even before 20 September 1998, in front of scores of friends. Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak was reported on 5 October to have confirmed that there was indeed such a threat.

10. Mohtar discussed with Tun Daim Zainuddin proposals to charge me with either leaking government secrets or committing sex offences if I refused to resign. Tun Daim intimated this to me on 12 August 1998. In court, I asked why in the world would the Attorney-General plot and scheme with Tun Daim? Can money buy and decide everything?

11. Throughout my trial, Mohtar used the full strength of his official power, his penchant for issuing threats and his arrogance and vengefulness to destroy my character. Then, after doing everything he could to shame me as much as possible, he changed the charges. In fact, a witness testified to being intimidated and to catching prosecutors and prosecution witnesses in the act of planning this vilification.

12. During the trial, I was prepared to provide proof that there was a political conspiracy in a case of selective prosecution. This pertained to a document, signed by Gani and presented to me by Mohtar, recommending that a senior minister be prosecuted for corruption. He can make excuses, or threaten me with the Official Secrets Act, but here nevertheless was proof that he practises selective prosecution under Mahathir’s direction. Furthermore, as I stressed in court, the Official Secrets Act cannot be used to cover up the malpractices, corruption and greed of those in power.

13. I have referred to personal letters which three corporate figures wrote to Daim during his previous stint as Finance Minister. These letters pledge to Daim’s person funds and corporate shares worth a total of nearly half a billion ringgit. Mohtar, who is wont to loquaciously condemning corruption among minor officials, seems to be tongue-tied in this particular case. He has to wait for Mahathir to issue an order of selective prosecution, so close is the cooperation between them.

14. During the trial, I was prepared too to provide evidence of selective prosecution by mentioning serious sex charges against Mahathir. However, I do not have Mahathir’s capacity for the cruelty that is born of vengefulness; I would not name the sex partners or the witnesses. After all, he is 73 years old and a grandfather. My intention here is only to show how Mahathir, using Mohtar, would seize upon any opportunity to apply selective prosecution against those he disfavours, even if it means concocting evidence. What about Rahim Tamby Chik’s case and other cases, implicating others who are still in Mahathir's favour? What about the official said to have used his private jet to import women through the VIP lounge at Subang? Customs and immigration officials know about this. And what has happened to allegations that a minister was involved in the Mustakizah murder case?

15. I tried to mention in court many other cases of corruption, but these were declared irrelevant. Indeed, prosecuting officers would jump to their feet to object every time I tried to present evidence of corruption, especially if Mahathir’s or Daim’s name was mentioned. I referred to the Perwaja issue, to the nation’s loss of nearly 6 billion ringgit, saying I had documents showing that Mahathir directed Tan Sri Eric Chia to give a contract to a certain firm. Is it not corruption when Mahathir, who is directly responsible for Petronas, approves nearly 2 billion ringgit for his son? And what about the approval of privatisation projects, contracts and corporate shares for his children, whose wealth runs into billions of ringgit and who sit as directors in hundreds of companies?

16. Mohtar too has studied the Anti-Corruption Agency’s reports regarding leaders who own enormous wealth in the form of corporate shares, land, and personal and family property. But these documents are simply filed away. And, surely, Mohtar is well aware of Daim’s obvious wealth, which he accumulated during his previous tenure as Finance Minister. In fact, he has now become the one Finance Minister with a bank of his own, the International Bank of Malaysia. All of these are open secrets, but the practice of selective prosecution has obstructed the effort to eradicate corruption and establish justice.

I do believe that by issuing this firm statement, I expose myself to further prosecution on various counts, including corruption, sex offences and treason, for which evidence will be vigorously invented. The prosecution’s intrigues are well known to the people and they will make their judgment. Mahathir’s lust for revenge is not yet satisfied, even though I have been physically assaulted and jailed for six years. The instruments of state, including Mohtar and the Attorney-General’s Office and media organisations under the control of the powers-that-be and wealthy businessmen will be worked to their maximum capacity to blind the people to injustice, corruption, cronyism and nepotism, especially as the election approaches. So-called leaders who are unjust and corrupt are terrified of the possibility that I would continue to expose their misdeeds. I will be kept away from the people. But they can plan; it is Allah Almighty Who disposes.

I am not sure why Mohtar’s ill will towards me had increased. It could have been caused by talk about the ACA investigating a report that he had holidayed in Italy with a corporate figure. I explained in my letter to the PM, dated 25 August 1998, that I knew nothing of such an investigation although it was alleged that I had ordered it. Nevertheless, I would not have prevented the ACA from doing its work. Another possible cause was a rumour spread by an ambitious lawyer that I would have him replace Mohtar as soon as I had the opportunity. This was false, but it nevertheless worried Mohtar.

I would like to stress to Mohtar that his worth is measured by his courage in ensuring justice without fear or favour, even if it means acting against a national hero or a wealthy merchant. It is not counted courageous to persecute an ordinary policeman for receiving a 20-ringgit bribe or a minor official for taking a tiny plot of land while we allow the big-time marauders to run amok, fleecing the nation of millions of ringgit and grabbing land by the thousands of acres.

Mohtar has no claim to glory when all he does is act as a gofer in a conspiracy serving the interest of a greedy and corrupt political clique. He should set himself free and repel attempts by the PM or Daim to control him. He should drop his phony conceit; he has no reason to feel great over his ability to make threats against young people who voice their concern over injustices in our system, including the practice of selective and malicious prosecution.

Anwar Ibrahim

Sungai Buloh Prison

May 20, 1999

The Supreme Court’s latest missive on khaps must be sweet music to the self-styled village councils. The apex court has reportedly said that District Magistrates will be held liable if they fail to rein in village councils --- such as Haryana’s khaps and Tamil Nadu’s kattas --- from acting like kangaroo courts. Khaps will be happy. What more can a bunch of men with mob-mentality want than for someone else to be punished for their crime? Further, the Court’s faith in the police is touching.

Reports say that the apex court has also said that State machinery should institute criminal charges against khap members if they’ve harmed a couple. But khap panchayats have always said they do not issue directives to harm couples, let alone kill them. After the murder of a couple, khaps have invariably, and naturally so, distanced themselves from the two families involved. The men who have killed, mostly family members, are trotted off to jail. At best, a couple of men are sentenced for a murder an entire village kept quiet on. If a case makes it to the newspapers, the police come in only to maintain ‘peace’, buy silence, lament the state of affairs and certainly their helplessness.

The absurdly termed ‘honour killings’ are not like other murders. Murders of couples are only one end of a spectrum of crimes that communities inflict on their own. Community crime flourishes across India in a hundred different shades, all dark and scary --- ‘honour killings’ only one extreme.

The focus cannot be on punishing a few individuals. The village must feel some pain. The focus must be on penalizing the village. Villagers must be made ‘stakeholders’ in crimes committed with the sanction of all of them. Holding DMs liable isn’t the issue really. The problem isn’t with law enforcement alone; the problem is in the absence of an applicable law for community crime, which is what honour killings are.

Community crimes make it to the news almost every day. If one day it is a woman in Indore made to walk with burning coal in her hands to prove she is not a thief, the next day it is villagers near Delhi threatening to kidnap all the girls of an enemy village. Yesterday it was two widows killed for having an “affair”. Recall the anganwadi worker who had her arms chopped off for defying child marriage. Or the visuals of the gruesome dragging of villagers tied to motorbikes. The blame of allowing the atrocities lies as much with the bystanders as with the actual culprits.

There’s nothing to stop the economic and social sanctions that villagers impose either. In Haryana, a khap barred shops from selling any item, including cattle fodder, to the mother-sister duo of killed couple Manoj-Babli. Chandrapati was feted for having the guts to continue fighting for justice despite being isolated in her own village. But even after the court convicted the killers, the community continued to isolate Chandrapati. Her younger son keeps his identity hidden. The stories are dime-a-dozen. In UP’s Kinanagar, near Meerut, stunned labourer-fathers of a teenage boy and girl killed with cutlasses by the girl’s brothers (arrested) were tersely told by their khap not to grieve as it was 'meant to be'. Stealing of property by village councils, throwing out of entire families are fodder for full-page features in newspapers and that’s it.

None of these crimes, all committed by community sanction, can be punished. At a public meeting, Brinda Karat said she visited the village threatened with the kidnap of its girls. This was in retaliation to a resident’s elopement with a girl of the bully-village. The attention had the police register a case of ‘thuggery’. Karat was stumped. In the Indore case, a couple of policemen were suspended. There’s no closure and there’s no stopping such behaviour. There's no law under which such crimes can be suitably dealt with.

To bring home how skewed our take on community crime is, take the example of Sunita Murmu. Her case throws into eerily sharp focus the strange workings of the nation’s mind. Sixteen-year-old Murmu from West Bengal is among the 23 children who won the 2010 National Bravery Awards for Children. Murmu even got a special mention.

Murmu was attacked when she was caught talking to a boy outside her community in their Santhal village. She was stripped, paraded naked and molested by her own tribesmen. She reportedly raced through fields across three or four villages, where no man or woman or official intervened to protect her; however, she was easy prey and was molested repeatedly. Some recorded the attacks and the MMS spread. NGOs spotted it, and police were pressured to step in. Murmu’s bravery, we are told, lies in her daring to identify some of the attackers. And so we impose upon her a cold bravery award. And India plumbs its own sorry depths of insensitivity.

Murmu is certainly not the first child-woman to be stripped and paraded naked. Neither is she the first to have identified some of the molesters. But importantly, it’s not enough to nab a few out of tens or hundreds of men and women who jeered at her, mocked her, who didn’t step in to either stop the molesters or drag her to protection. Arrests are part of the deal only to appease the Other India. Molesters, attackers pooh-pooh their way out. Remorse, regret, guilt are alien sentiments.

Those who were asked to look at the possibilities of a law for ‘honour killing’ believe too that the community must face some penalty. They are thus mooting for a community crime law that brings into its ambit a range of such attacks. The idea is that the law must focus on protecting an individual’s right and penalize those individuals and community organisations such as khaps who obstruct the exercise of that right. At the most basic level, that includes a person’s freedom to speak to or marry of their choice. Such a law will also strengthen the voices within the community that do want to speak out but remain muted in the absence of any form of support. Into any such law must also be woven some form of sanctions on the villagers/ the community: stop funds perhaps.

In Murmu’s case, what will stop her community from repeating such an attack on another 15-year-old? In twisted logic, the village might celebrate the chances of winning another bravery award. Surely, awarding punishment on the villages that have so cruelly forced a ‘past’ into young Murmu’s life would have served the child, and the nation, better. If only there were a law to punish her tormentors. To that end, the Supreme Court’s attempt at tackling the so-called ‘honour killings’ via DMs is more an exercise in arm wringing.

he is willing to face legal action over the screening of a video recording of a sex act involving a man resembling opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

"If those behind the screening are charged in court, so be it, as upholding the interest of the country is far bigger than facing court action," he told reporters at a function here on Sunday.

He was commenting on a news report that police may charge the "Datuk T" trio responsible for screening the video recording.

On Monday, deputy CID director Datuk Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani said police did not dismiss this possibility as it was an offence under Section 292 of the Penal Code, to screen pornographic material.

However,The Supreme Court’s latest missive on khaps must be sweet music to the self-styled village councils. The apex court has reportedly said that District Magistrates will be held liable if they fail to rein in village councils --- such as Haryana’s khaps and Tamil Nadu’s kattas --- from acting like kangaroo courts. Khaps will be happy. What more can a bunch of men with mob-mentality want than for someone else to be punished for their crime? Further, the Court’s faith in the police is touching.

Reports say that the apex court has also said that State machinery should institute criminal charges against khap members if they’ve harmed a couple. But khap panchayats have always said they do not issue directives to harm couples, let alone kill them. After the murder of a couple, khaps have invariably, and naturally so, distanced themselves from the two families involved. The men who have killed, mostly family members, are trotted off to jail. At best, a couple of men are sentenced for a murder an entire village kept quiet on. If a case makes it to the newspapers, the police come in only to maintain ‘peace’, buy silence, lament the state of affairs and certainly their helplessness.

The absurdly termed ‘honour killings’ are not like other murders. Murders of couples are only one end of a spectrum of crimes that communities inflict on their own. Community crime flourishes across India in a hundred different shades, all dark and scary --- ‘honour killings’ only one extreme.

The focus cannot be on punishing a few individuals. The village must feel some pain. The focus must be on penalizing the village. Villagers must be made ‘stakeholders’ in crimes committed with the sanction of all of them. Holding DMs liable isn’t the issue really. The problem isn’t with law enforcement alone; the problem is in the absence of an applicable law for community crime, which is what honour killings are.

Community crimes make it to the news almost every day. If one day it is a woman in Indore made to walk with burning coal in her hands to prove she is not a thief, the next day it is villagers near Delhi threatening to kidnap all the girls of an enemy village. Yesterday it was two widows killed for having an “affair”. Recall the anganwadi worker who had her arms chopped off for defying child marriage. Or the visuals of the gruesome dragging of villagers tied to motorbikes. The blame of allowing the atrocities lies as much with the bystanders as with the actual culprits.

There’s nothing to stop the economic and social sanctions that villagers impose either. In Haryana, a khap barred shops from selling any item, including cattle fodder, to the mother-sister duo of killed couple Manoj-Babli. Chandrapati was feted for having the guts to continue fighting for justice despite being isolated in her own village. But even after the court convicted the killers, the community continued to isolate Chandrapati. Her younger son keeps his identity hidden. The stories are dime-a-dozen. In UP’s Kinanagar, near Meerut, stunned labourer-fathers of a teenage boy and girl killed with cutlasses by the girl’s brothers (arrested) were tersely told by their khap not to grieve as it was 'meant to be'. Stealing of property by village councils, throwing out of entire families are fodder for full-page features in newspapers and that’s it.

None of these crimes, all committed by community sanction, can be punished. At a public meeting, Brinda Karat said she visited the village threatened with the kidnap of its girls. This was in retaliation to a resident’s elopement with a girl of the bully-village. The attention had the police register a case of ‘thuggery’. Karat was stumped. In the Indore case, a couple of policemen were suspended. There’s no closure and there’s no stopping such behaviour. There's no law under which such crimes can be suitably dealt with.

To bring home how skewed our take on community crime is, take the example of Sunita Murmu. Her case throws into eerily sharp focus the strange workings of the nation’s mind. Sixteen-year-old Murmu from West Bengal is among the 23 children who won the 2010 National Bravery Awards for Children. Murmu even got a special mention.

Murmu was attacked when she was caught talking to a boy outside her community in their Santhal village. She was stripped, paraded naked and molested by her own tribesmen. She reportedly raced through fields across three or four villages, where no man or woman or official intervened to protect her; however, she was easy prey and was molested repeatedly. Some recorded the attacks and the MMS spread. NGOs spotted it, and police were pressured to step in. Murmu’s bravery, we are told, lies in her daring to identify some of the attackers. And so we impose upon her a cold bravery award. And India plumbs its own sorry depths of insensitivity.

Murmu is certainly not the first child-woman to be stripped and paraded naked. Neither is she the first to have identified some of the molesters. But importantly, it’s not enough to nab a few out of tens or hundreds of men and women who jeered at her, mocked her, who didn’t step in to either stop the molesters or drag her to protection. Arrests are part of the deal only to appease the Other India. Molesters, attackers pooh-pooh their way out. Remorse, regret, guilt are alien sentiments.

Those who were asked to look at the possibilities of a law for ‘honour killing’ believe too that the community must face some penalty. They are thus mooting for a community crime law that brings into its ambit a range of such attacks. The idea is that the law must focus on protecting an individual’s right and penalize those individuals and community organisations such as khaps who obstruct the exercise of that right. At the most basic level, that includes a person’s freedom to speak to or marry of their choice. Such a law will also strengthen the voices within the community that do want to speak out but remain muted in the absence of any form of support. Into any such law must also be woven some form of sanctions on the villagers/ the community: stop funds perhaps.

In Murmu’s case, what will stop her community from repeating such an attack on another 15-year-old? In twisted logic, the village might celebrate the chances of winning another bravery award. Surely, awarding punishment on the villages that have so cruelly forced a ‘past’ into young Murmu’s life would have served the child, and the nation, better. If only there were a law to punish her tormentors. To that end, the Supreme Court’s attempt at tackling the so-called ‘honour killings’ via DMs is more an exercise in arm wringing.