The Malaysian Insight

WHAT is justice?

Two women caned for allegedly attempting to have sex with a sex toy? How about a minister having his corruption case discharged instead of being put on full trial to determine guilt or innocence?

The last time a woman was to be caned for a religious crime was in March 2010 but the Pahang sultan spared Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno of the ignominy then.

The same did not happen in the neighbouring state of Terengganu today, when two women charged and found guilty of same-sex relations were caned after sentencing was postponed from last week.

The duo, aged 32 and 22, were caned this morning in front of 100 witnesses, after being found guilty of having sex in their car on April 8. This is the first time women have been punished in such a manner under shariah law in Terengganu.

Of course, public caning has happened in the past but only once in Sabah in 2016, and twice in 2011 or 2012. Another sentence in 2014 was apparently never carried out. 

All cases were for adultery and none of the guilty spent time in prison.

But should all this be done in this day and age? Criminal law states only men can be caned, and only those up to the age of 50 and those who are imprisoned. 

Shariah law is different and that is Malaysia’s conundrum as the states, not the federal government hold sway over Islamic laws. Shouldn’t everyone be equal under the law? Well yes, but obviously not when it comes to religious laws.

Pakatan Harapan can talk about rule of law but that goes only as far as what it can do as the federal government and perhaps in the states where it is also the government. 

On that note, questions are also being raised about the court decision to fully acquit Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng and his former landlady of corruption and abetment charges filed during the time of the previous Barisan Nasional government.

Lim had always maintained that there were political reasons for the charges. But that can’t be tested now as the judge has agreed to acquit him. 

The previous attorney-general thought there was enough evidence to charge Lim in court but the current attorney-general does not think so. 

Just as the previous attorney-general had thought there wasn’t enough proof to charge then prime minister Najib Razak for offences related to money flowing into his personal accounts, but the current one thinks otherwise.

Both cases involve the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), which has said there was enough evidence to charge both Najib and Lim. The MACC now has to back up the assertions or be seen as bowing to political pressure, then and now.

In the end, it is about what is criminal in Malaysia and the rule of law. And that Malaysia delivers justice to Malaysians of all religious stripes and political hues.

Today shows we haven’t moved at all from the days of injustice in Malaysia. We need to ensure that justice is done and is seen to be done – no matter which court system is used. We didn’t get that today. –  September 3, 2018.