Culture of violence making PKR seriously ill

The bottom line of every democratic contest is that there must be no violence. If there are no clear limits to an electoral contest, then competition would lose its meaning.

Reports and videos showed that a PKR Subang candidate assaulted PKR deputy presidential candidate Rafizi Ramli yesterday in Keningau, Sabah. It is common knowledge among PKR members that Keningau is Rafizi’s stronghold, with his close ally Raymond Ahuar commanding substantial Murut support.

With a party election going down to the wire, one division like Keningau would make a huge difference. The reason for the assault is yet to be fully disclosed, but video evidence had shown that the PKR Subang candidate shouted insults at Rafizi and threatened to attack him.

Although there is no video evidence to prove that Rafizi was physically punched, eyewitness accounts suggest this too had taken place.

Even if we assume that no punches landed on Rafizi, the video evidence showing the shouting of insults and threats to attack is sufficient to constitute a criminal act, deserving of investigation, arrest, and prosecution.

This is because, in law, assault doesn’t require physical touch. Section 351 of the Penal Code states that assault requires only words and gestures that could give rise to the apprehension that the person will use criminal force.

Therefore, since the video shows the PKR Subang candidate shouted insults directly at Rafizi while approaching him aggressively to the point of necessitating Rafizi to be protected, then this is a criminal act of assault.

In the tense Keningau hall where the PKR Subang candidate ran amok, everyone knew there was a grave chance of him acting violently against Rafizi — this is a real act of criminality.

The seriousness of this act cannot be underestimated. Democracy doesn’t give you a licence to step outside the bounds of the law. Although our democracy is not mature enough to provide equality of arms in terms of resources, the fundamental guarantee of our democracy is that there is equality in the face of the law.

No one could rise above the law simply because they are angry; no one could rise above the law because they are backed by powerful elites; no one could rise above the law simply because they want to win.

Democracy without violence

Democracy will have no meaning if such violence is condoned, especially when it is exercised against a legitimate candidate of the second-highest office in the largest party of the country. Not only must law enforcers act swiftly, impartially, and fairly against agents of violence, our society must also speak in one voice to denounce violence.

You can only justify keeping a democracy if you can practise it with civility and good sense. Everyone within the party and beyond should display severe and unreserved criticism against what had happened. This is the only way you could preserve the remnants of democracy.

I see with bottomless regret Azmin Ali’s statement in response to the situation. Hours after
the assault had broken out, he tweeted to call the incident a staged act of provocation, and a pathetic orchestration to draw sympathy.

Although Azmin did not make direct reference to the incident, this rare break of character and the proximity of time indicates its connection.

As an incumbent deputy president who also is a senior minister of the country, Azmin should have taken issue against such act of violence instead of taking sides. In essence, Azmin is suggesting that Rafizi, a victim of violent assault, is guilty of staging the entire scuffle.
Azmin’s disingenuous response

First, this appears highly disingenuous because the video evidence showed the assault was immediate and spontaneous, necessitating off-the-cuff protection and an unstructured exit —making it impossible for Rafizi to have planned it against himself. The suggestion is also devoid of logic: why would you plan a scuffle in an area you are confident of winning big? Instead, a sensible man would want to make sure it runs as peacefully as possible so your votes are counted without commotion.

Second and more importantly, converting a victim of violence into a perpetrator is reminiscent of victim-blaming and victim-bullying we see every day. It essentially condones violence and removes the bricks of our democratic infrastructure.

In alarming events of violence, Azmin should take exception and not take sides. Everyone should take the side of democracy. Even though Rafizi is Azmin’s opponent in this contest, Azmin should have extended his arm of statesmanship to protect the core of our democracy: prefer peace, denounce violence, make no room for criminality.

The party is gravely ill as the culture of violence has penetrated its core, with its key leader suffering a direct injury. The last thing Azmin should do is to stand on the side that inflicts the bruise.

---

JAMES CHAI works at a law firm. His voyage in life is made less lonely with a family of deep love, friends of good humour and teachers of selfless giving. This affirms his conviction in the common goodness of people: the better angels of our nature. He tweets at @JamesJSChai. - Mkini

✍ Sumber Pautan : ☕ Malaysians Must Know the TRUTH

Kredit kepada pemilik laman asal dan sekira berminat untuk meneruskan bacaan sila klik link atau copy paste ke web server : https://ift.tt/2PE3Wsd

(✿◠‿◠)✌ Mukah Pages : Pautan Viral Media Sensasi Tanpa Henti. Memuat-naik beraneka jenis artikel menarik setiap detik tanpa henti dari pelbagai sumber. Selamat membaca dan jangan lupa untuk 👍 Like & 💕 Share di media sosial anda!