Hishamuddin was quick to suggest that the police take action against the person said to look like the actor in the video, rather than taking action against the persons who arranged for filming the sex act as well as screening the video. Najib said as much for wanting to know the identity of the person filmed, and he hoped very much that the person was indeed Anwar Ibrahim.

Malaysia would not dare to claim that there is no prostitution in the country, if it does not want to be contradicted. So there are thousands of actors doing what were filmed in the video, everyday. What action would the police and Hishamuddin take if some one chose to make it a business to video tape such acts and show them in public. Would taping and screening such videos be acceptable by the government if viewers do not have to buy a ticket as suggested by Nazri? Then accordingly Ng Yen Yen can make it as part of the campaign to attract tourists. If not, why then it was alright when viewers might form the impression that the actor in the video was Anwar Ibrahim?

UMNO ministers beginning with the prime Minister are not fit to be in their respective positions.

///KUALA LUMPUR, March 31 — Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein called today for Christian groups to be “fair and reasonable” in the ongoing Alkitab row after the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM) rejected the government’s latest overture which it said failed to address the erosion of religious rights.///–Malaysiainsider

The Christian groups are only responding to the actions of the Home Ministry. The actions by the Ministry of Home Affairs were certainly unfair and unreasonable. Yet Kerisman had the nerve to call others to be fair, when he did not even understand the words he used; fair and reasonable actions would get the same reaction. The Christian groups only reacted to the action started by the Ministry. Can the Ministry be said to be fair when it chose to ensure Muslims have the monopoly in the use of an English word Allah, and then deface the holy-book of Christians?

Kerismuddin said that the government was trying to determine ‘the integrity of the video’. Whoever was the real identity in the video, and whether or not it was manipulated, the video is pornography. The three persons who claimed that they created and screened the video are violating the laws in the country, and their actions are headlines in newspaper for days. Why have they not been arrested yet? The answer is they are UMNO members and are therefore above the law.

///Nazri was referring to the legal precedent established in the case involving the Pengkalan Kota by-election between Teoh Teik Huat and Lim Kean Siew.

The case revolved around a statement by then-finance minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who had said he would personally give more money for the improvement of Pengkalan Kota if Barisan Nasional (BN) won.

The minister in the Prime Minister’s Department had also told Parliament that handouts and goodies in the form of financial assistance to voters during elections was not a form of corruption because it was the federal government’s way of “fulfilling its promises” and manifestos.///– MalaysiaInsider

Legal precedent has lost its meaning in Malaysia when the Federal court chose to ignore legal precedent set in 1966 by the High Court in Sarawak, which ruled that the Governor of Sawarak had acted unconstitutionally in dismissing the then Chief Minister Kalong Ningkan. Under similar circumstances the then MB Nizar of Perak was dismissed by the Sultan of Peral and yet even though the High court followed legal precedent, the higher court chose to differ. So what is the price by ounce of legal precedent?

It may be the UMNO government’s way of fulfilling what it thinks is the legal way of fulfilling it promises by giving handouts prior to election, which does not say that the government’s action was legal. The promises the government made should be to the country as a whole, and not to any particular constituency. In using funds which are shared by the country to benefit only a selected group of persons, the government is enticing them to perform what its wants for the party which contests in the election. Thus the government was not fulfilling its duties, but buying votes indirectly using government funds for the benefit of the political parties which formed the government. The government leaders who made use of government resources for the benefit of their political parties are involved in corruption.

The Election Commission of Malaysia is just an extension of UMNO and so it would not know about what constitute free and fair election, which it has the responsibility to ensure. To have a fair election, political parties should not be allowed to have unfair advantage in using government funds to induce voters to vote for the party that forms the government. Clearly dispensing goodies before election is unfair to the opponents contesting the election. Yet instead of fulfilling its duties Election Commission chose to act otherwise; it even went to the extent of ignoring the decision of the Speaker of State Assembly, when the Election Commission had not the authority to do so. Malaysia is a failed state because the institutions such as the Election Commission have failed in its duties. Yet Nasri was proud to announce that the government has been doing corrupt acts as its usual ways of fulfilling its promise and manifestos. How low can UMNO government go?