| Home > South-East Asia >> Malaysia | |
Rape judgement - discriminating and gender insensitive
Malaysian Socialist Party (PSM) Statement - August 29, 2012
Among the grounds given for the controversial decision was that there was consensual sex between the rapists and the minors involved. One girl was 12 years old and the one in the other case was 13. The judges' statements imply that children of this age are old enough and knowledgeable enough to make important decisions regarding their bodies, and handle the many-faceted implications thereafter. It's unthinkable that the wise men and women put up there to uphold justice are so disconnected from reality. In justifying their decision, they even disregarded the existing laws of statutory rape which consider sex with minors, consensual or forced, as rape.
We are not baying for the blood of the two young men, the first of whom the judge wanted to free because he had a 'bright bowling future', and the second, a mechanic, who 'had his future ahead of him'. But we are shocked at the glaring insensitivity and lack of concern for the girls involved. If learned judges, both male and female, can be so discriminating and gender insensitive, what chance is there that the rest of society will treat women with more respect?
These two cases are merely the tip of the iceberg. Physical intimacy between young girls and teenage boys or young adults is not uncommon and cuts across social class and ethnicity. Baby dumping and teenage pregnancy are just two unwelcome outcomes of hasty and uninformed decisions made by couples in this sort of relationship. It would do well for the judges to note that the burden of these outcomes is borne entirely by the 'consenting' minor girl, and her family.
No minor in a relationship wants to be saddled with a pregnancy and, least of all, a baby, both of which abruptly replace the dreams of childhood with premature cares of adulthood, along with the stigma of illegitimacy.
We have a responsibility to enable our children to be aware of the implications of their decisions to themselves and others, and to teach them accountability.
In that aspect, the decision of the judges is lacking. In an environment where there is effectively no sex education taking place in school, where both parents are away working, leaving children on their own with whatever stuff TV and the electronic media provide, the implications of this judgment are scary. There is nothing in the judgment, not even a provision for a period of counseling, and indeed nothing in the reasons given, to teach responsibility and accountability.
Released by
Rani Rasiah
PSM Central Committee Member
Tel 019-5638464
See also:
 |