AUG 19 — From sex DVDs, private photos, sex video clips to a spy copter found near MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong’s home, a series of similar incidents has not only highlighted the trend of deteriorating political quality, but also sparked a debatable question: do politicians have the right to privacy?
In fact, with the rapidly advancing and easy to get spying and eavesdropping equipment, together with the popularity of computers and mobile phones, politicians have helplessly learnt that all their words and deeds can be exposed at any time and they actually enjoy not privacy at all.
There are many examples where the private lives of politicians, as well as their words and deeds, were uploaded and commented by Internet users during the general election earlier this year, reflecting the change of political climate. Young people nowadays yearn for freedom and dare to say no to traditions, as well as the authorities. The trend has indeed worried some corrupt officials. However, it has at the same time caused troubles to the innocent ones. Examples of discredit and false incrimination could be found everywhere, polluting the political arena and confusing the values. As a result, people can no longer distinguish between what is wrong and what is right.
Of course, politicians have greater power compared to ordinary members of society due to their special status. That is also why they are having greater influence in society. Therefore, they should be overseen by the public. Today, politicians are not only required to comply with various legal regulations and ethics, but their private lives are also highly concerned. In other words, since it is related to the public’s right to know, the privacy of politicians is subject to a certain level of limitation. It is the price of joining politics.
However, there should be a bottom line in exposing their privacy, that is, it must be related to public interests. For instance, whether their personal property status is suspicious and contrary to incorruptibility; and whether their words and deeds are inconsistent and not worth the people’s trust.
As for the spying attempt on Wee Ka Siong, it is indeed a shocking incident, regardless of whether it was a move of someone inside the MCA or a political opponent outside the party.
Whether the assets of politicians are in line with their income might be related to public affairs, but the information should be gathered through legitimate means. For whatever reason, trying to spy a politician’s house with a remote-controlled helicopter is definitely an unacceptable dirty means.
Sex video clips and DVDs are relatively more controversial. From the personal privacy protection standpoint, sexual activities are personal behaviour that should be granted with the greatest privacy and should not be made public. It is not allowed by the law either. However, if a politician is having a chaotic personal life, including extramarital affairs, should we protect the privacy of these hypocrite politicians or the right of the public to know? Under such circumstances, where is the bottom line for the public’s right to know? Should the use of pinhole cameras be allowed to expose the evil deeds of these hypocrites? If such secret videotaping is allowed, would it encourage the use of dirty political ploys? — mysinchew.com
Obviously, it is not easy to achieve a consensus here.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malay Mail Online.
