With due respect to you, please get the facts right. You can start by reading the recent statement by Ketua Setiausaha Kementerian Kesihatan on this particular case.

In his post, he implies that Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh are not helping Dr Basmullah in the interests of pursuing justice.
He further implies that he “knows who Karpal Singh is” and that others do not.
fyi, I see Karpal Singh as someone who is dead set against Islamic Theocracy (aka “Mullahcracy”), but he is not against the freedom of any individual professing his own belief in Islam, or any in fact any other religion.
In fact, I see Karpal Singh as being against _anyone who would force his/her own religious beliefs upon others_ who do not share the same beliefs. He has been consistent throughout, in this stand.
It is NOT about “anti” any religion, but about being against the “compulsion of one religion upon others.”

I see Karpal Singh as willing to help _someone else of another religion_, simply because of the fact that someone has been subject to injustice under an unjust law or unjust application of the law.

Zack only shows his own hypocrisy by accusing others of hypocrisy. It is obvious that Zack has some preconceived ideas about the political stand or principles of others, whom he is berating others for ostensibly betraying. However, it is obvious that his own bigotry is betrayed via his outburst.
Zack portrays himself as speaking aloud for the wellbeing of Dr Basmullah, in accusing Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang of “using” him. Zack fails totally to consider the wellbeing of Dr Basmullah and his wife and family at all, if KS and LKS were not to offer their help at all.
That, is Zack’s hypocrisy.

We should not expect them to welcome such ‘intervention’ by the DAP. Politicizing issues? Sure. Nothing wrong with that!

The photo posted here is better than the one we seen for Emperor’s New Clothes. This photo shown a group of people that have the interest of the community in their heart as compared to our AAB’s family photo that have KJ’s interest in his heart.

Both are taking advantage of their political position, if Zack is in the shoe of Dr. Basmullah, whose photo would you rather have?

The greater hypocrisy can be found in those who claim that graft and corruption will be eradicated when we see only the opposite happening, when leadership claims to have Big Ears but do not tolerate dissent and don’t want to hear differing opinions, when those in power “Close one eye” and when there are leaks everywhere in the system they say “Mana ada bocor?”

What he is saying is that DAP takes advantage of Dr. Basmullah’s plight to appear in election year as political do-gooders, extending legal asistance (pro bono publico) to an indigent serban wearing doctor to drive home its political message that it fights the cause of justice for all Malaysians irrepective of race, religion and creed. And from that he labels DAP/Karpal Singh hypocrites, meaning fakery or pretentions.

Lets evaluate Zack’s accusation of political hypocrisy.

[Hypocrisy can mean several different concepts, from the basic idea of “not practising what you preach” to “consciously or subconsciously putting forward a better image of ourselves than really exists” to “hypocrisy being the act of pretending to have morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice” – courtesy of Wikipedia].

Zack’s accusation of political hypocrisy ignores a few salient aspects:

First, how does Zack know the internal concious or unconscious values of the DAP stalwarts – LKS & Karpal – to impute, without showing of basis, that the duo don’t really care or feel outraged about the injustice perpetrated on Dr. Basmullah and are doing this entirely out of political advantage?

Secondly, even if, as what Undergrad2 says – that “the DAP may be opportunistic, seeking to make political capital out of this (Dr. Basmullah) incident”, I would say so what, when the DAP has a record over 30 years of fighting for social justice – and taking political advantage of Dr. Basmullah’s predicament to advance its political agenda is entirely consistent with and in character with the DAP’s political platform and other “do good” actions of the last 30 years?

Zack should note that there is no disjunct here between political stated beliefs and actions relating to the championing of social justice regardless of race, creed and religion.

Thirdly, why would Zack or anyone have a gripe about the DAP’s taking political advantage of Dr. Basmullah’s predicament if in the consequential process of it doing so, the significant others like Dr. Basmullah – and doctors opposed to PHFSA’s iniquities – reap the benefit and also obtain advantage?

Even in such political hypocrisy alleged by Zack, if true, it is “good” hypocrisy because it benefits others. There is no element of harm to others resulting from the hypocrisy.

Now as illustration, contrast this to those who talk of the virtues and multiracial tolerance of plural society one day and on the next brandish the keris championing the cause of one ethnic group against and at the expense of the other groups; or the people who talk of religious tolerance in one breath and on the next look away at body snatching and other manifestations of extremism.

Now that is “bad” hypocrisy because here (1) there is proven disjunct between stated beliefs and actions or inaction; here there is motivation to appear moral yet, in other occasion, either avoid the cost of actually being moral or engage in behaviour and action contradictory to professed belief; (2) others get harmed by such hypocritical behaviour.

Political hypocrisy can be a pragmatic virtue or an oppressive vice in Malaysian politics : so by my measurement, it is not the question of hypocrisy per se that is wrong or who practises it but the way the hypocrisy is practised and its consequences to others, whether bringing benefits or harm.

Surely something is wrong somewhere.

….. this piece must the most hypocritical statement I have come across. If anybody believed this …. they are just a hypocrite fools! What the DAP is doing is just to “menanggok di air keruh” — Its never about the good Dr at all..its about high-lighting the “blunder” that the law created and the “weaknesses” of the BN govt. Just know who Karpal Singh is and you will find that its true!

Rumah Istana one of the Kelang’s how? Got technicalities not in his case, he got scot free!!

Double Standard – if You are a KRONY, its scot free, if you are a small nobody, or better still setinggan … habis lah…..

MOH’s decision to prosecute Dr. Basmullah and press for deterrent sentence must be viewed in context that it was merely using Dr Basmullah’s technical infraction of the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act (“PHFSA”) as a landmark case in efforts to push and coerce acceptance of PHFSA by private doctors detractors – all in the name and pretext of regulating the medical care sector to public benefit.

I say MOH has lost its plot because:-

1. it should engage the private doctors/detractors, get their input on the rucks in the fabric of the legislation, iron these rucks out so that private doctors willingly accept the PHFSA – rather than use the big stick on a scrapegoat like Dr Basmullah in a bid to coerce acceptance. MOH acts like a typical bureaucat pushing its power heedless of the power of arguments from its detractors. The detractors are educated doctors – not sheep – that you can win over by force rather than logic.

2. And where is MOH’s position from standpoint of logic? Even as a layman and non-doctor l don’t see it. First MOH talks about PHFSA regulating the medical care sector. It says that the registration procedures under PHFSA are intended to weed out bogus doctors and charlatans who are a danger to public heath.

Fine, but how does it advance PHFSA’s objective of weeding out bogus doctors and charlatans when the person weeded out and punished by custodial sentence of 3 months jail – Dr Basmullah – was in possession of an active practising certificate and hence a licensed doctor? Worse part is that MOH prosecuting Dr Basmullah and pressing for deterrent sentence is headed by non other than the Director General (“DG”) of the Ministry of Health (currently Tan Sri Dr. Ismail Merican) who by Para 1(1) of the First Schedule of our Medical Act is also the ex-officio President of the Malaysian Medical Council issuing the practising certificate to Dr Basmullah as a licensed doctor – which in the other capacity as DG of MOH he was prosecuting and securing a conviction of Dr Basmullah under the PHFSA ostensibly intended to weed out unlicensed bogus doctors and charlatans!

Surely even a layman unfamiliar with the intricacies of medical world can see the irony, inconsistency and screw-up here by MOH!

And the basic reason why MOH cannot explain and reconcile this irony, inconsistency and screw-up is the same reason why it cannot explain satifactorily its defence of the PHFSA – the logic of why private doctors who are already regulated and licensed by the Malaysian Medical Council (curently headed as president by Tan Sri Dr. Ismail Merican) need again to be additionally and doubly regulated and licensed by another tier of bureaucrats from MOH under the PHSFA headed by MOH’s DG (again the same Tan Sri Dr. Ismail Merican)!

3. It looks like there’s strong vested interests in MOH that pushed through the PHFSA without looking into the legitimate concerns of all stakeholders including sections of doctors, dentists and nurses in private sectors. Otherwise why push the legislation through with alacrity in spite of objections from certain quarters which have not been answered satisfactorily, and even after pushing it though, why enforce it with such alacrity on Dr Basmullah to send the deterrent signal to others to conform or be punished?

4. Of course, when Dr Chua Soi Lek resigned with Dato Ong Ka Ting taking over as acting minister of MOH, there is greater uncertainty in MOH in the transition period as to which way to proceed with the PHFSA, which set the backdrop for little bureaucratic napoleons within MOH to be free to assert their will, heedless of right or wrong of policy directions but just based on their whims and fancies especially their prerogatives where they feel their discretion, power and authority defied or challenged. Hence they went Dr Basmullah without concern for his mitigating circumstances.

5. I call on Dato Ong Ka Ting to do something about this unsatisfactory state of affairs in the ministry that he heads, albeit in acting capacity, by which Dr Basmullah has proven to be a collateral casualty of injustice and incoherence of policy and its administration.