by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, in Petaling Jaya on Wednesday, September 21, 1994:
Mahathir should explain whether he is referring to the DAP or to UMNO leaders when he referred to “unsur-unsur politik di-dalam pendedahan terhadap kesalahan yang didakwa dilakukan oleh Ketua Menteri Melaka, Tan Sri Rahim Tamby Cik”.
The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamed said in Kuching yesterday that he does not rule out the possibility that there were ‘political elements’ in the expose of the allegation that Malacca Chief Minister, Tan Sri Rahim Tamby Cik had an affair with a 15-year-old schoolgirl.
Mahathir should explain whether he is referring to the DAP or to UMNO leaders when he referred to “unsur-unsur politik di-dalam pendedahan terhadap kesalahan yang didakwa dilakukan oleh Ketua Menteri Melaka, Tan Sri Rahim Tamby Cik”.
The DAP has never run away from the responsibility of standing up for what we have said or done, whether in the case of DAPSY National Chairman and MP for Kota Melaka, Lim Guan Eng’s repeated expose of the extraordinary wealth and assets of Rahim Tamby Cik completely disproportionate to his known sources of income or the DAP defence of the rights of the people of Pantai Kundor and Tanah Merah in Malacca against unjust acquisition of their ancestral land with paltry compensations.
However, we do not want to claim credit where credit is not due. The DAP had nothing to do with the allegation of Rahim having an affair with a 15-year-old girl and in particular with the first newspaper report on August 24 that Rahim would have to step-down as UMNO Youth leader because of his ‘personal problems’.
In fact, the first person to publicly talk about the allegation of Rahim having an affair with a 15-year-old girl is none other than the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamed, himself when he said in Langkawi on August 25 that the Government was investigating the allegation.
When there was problem as to whether the Police could launch investigations into the allegation when there was no official police report, Mahathir said in Genting Highlands on 28th August that there was no need for a police report before investigations could proceed into Rahim’s alleged affair with a 15-year-old girl.
Mahathir said there were times when there was no need for a police report before starting any investigation.
He said: “If something is wrong, we sometimes do not wait, for reports. When we see a robbery, do we want to ask whether a report has been made (before we start investigations)?”
When Mahathir was back in Langkawi 12 days later on September 6, Mahathir revealed that Rahim did not fully deny the allegation made against him. Mahathir said: “Dia (Rahim) kata ada yang betul (dakwaan terhadapnya) dan ada yang tidak betul … apa yang betul itu tidak perlulah saya huraikan disini”.
It is therefore quite surprising that, after close to a month since the allegation that Rahim had an affair with a 15-year-old girl became public, Mahathir should be talking about ‘political elements’ in the expose of the affair.
When did Mahathir first learnt about the allegation of Rahim having an affair with a 15-year-old girl – a few days before he publicly referred to the allegation in Langkawi on August 25 or a few weeks earlier?
A clarification by Mahathir whether he meant the DAP or UMNO leaders when he said that there appeared to be ‘political elements’ in the expose of the allegation of Rahim having an affair with a 15-year-old girl is therefore most necessary, as DAP has nothing to do with the allegation.
In fact, it would appear that when Mahathir was the first to publicly mention about the allegation of Rahim having an affair with a 15-year-old girl during his visit to Langkawi on August 25 Mahathir definitely knew more about this allegation than any DAP leader.
Can Mahathir reveal when he first received reports or complaints in connection with the allegation of Rahim having an affair with a 15-year-old girl – whether it was a few days before his Langkawi statement or a few weeks earlier?
If Mahathir had heard about the allegation a few weeks before his Langkawi statement, what action had Mahathir or the UMNO leadership taken on the matter?
Or to be more specific, when was the first time Mahathir spoke to Rahim about this serious allegation?
Mahathir’s reference to ‘political elements’ behind the expose of Rabim’s allegation has raised ‘eyebrows’ throughout the country, as it seemed to mark a back-down from earlier assurances by him and the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk SeriAnwar Ibrahim that there would be no compromise on the issue of credibility and honour of government leaders.
Mahathir should direct ACA to investigate whether Rahim illegally exercised his powers as Malacca
Chief Minister to make decisions and sign documents last weekend when he returned from his ‘forced leave’.
When he was in Kuching yesterday, Mahathir was asked to comment on my statement that all decisions made and documents signed by Rahim Tamby Cik last weekend, when he chaired the Malacca State Housing Committee, were invalid, null and void, as Rahim had been forced to go ‘on leave’ and should not exercise any powers of Malacca Chief Minister.
Mahathir seemed to defend Rahim’s action when he said: “He (Rahim) did not come back to work .. he just wanted to look into some unfinished work. That’s all”.
If this was the case, why then did Rahim chair the Malacca State Housing Committee last Saturday to discuss land fragmentation for several projects in the state?
Can Mahathir give an assurance that the Anti-Corruption Agency would be directed to investigate as to whether Rahim had illegally exercised his powers as Malacca Chief Minister last weekend when he was on ‘forced leave’ in making decisions mid signing documents he should not have done?
An Acting Malacca Chief Minister is to be sworn in later today. The Acting Malacca Chief Minister should present a full report to the Malacca State Assembly when it meets on October 25 of the entire proceedings of the Malacca State Housing Committee meeting chaired by Rahim Tamby Cik last Saturday, enumerating all decisions taken at the meeting as well as all documents signed by Rahim Tamby Cik after he was forced to go ‘on leave’ on September 8.