Penetrating Evidence

Seems that our Malaysian judges are once again at the fore-front of setting dangerous precedents. According to the article in TheStar, proof of penetration is no longer required for charging someone with the act of unnatural sex in Malaysia. That is like saying that penetration is unnecessary to charge someone with rape. All that is needed is witness testimony and forensic evidence that semen was found.

Personally, I think that it is a dangerous precedent to set. There are all manner of ways in which semen samples can be found on a person and none of them require any form of copulation, natural or otherwise. However, I think that the law is quite specific about what it considers as unnatural sex.

377 – Bestiality
Voluntary carnal intercourse with an animal. Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section. (Maximum penalty: 20 years imprisonment, liable to fine and whipping)

377A – Carnal intercourse against the order of nature
Sexual connection with another person by the introduction of the penis into the anus or mouth of the other person is said to commit carnal intercourse against the order of nature. Penetration is to be sufficient to constitute the sexual connection necessary to the offence described in this section.

377B – Committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature
Whoever voluntarily commits carnal intercourse against the order of nature shall be subjected to punishment. (Maximum penalty: 20 years imprisonment, liable to fine and whipping)

377C – Committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature without consent
Carnal intercourse against the order of nature on another person without the consent, or against the will, of the other person, or by putting the other person in fear of death or hurt to the person or any other person. (Maximum penalty: 20 years imprisonment, liable to whipping, minimum sentence of 5 years imprisonment)

377CA – Sexual connection by object
Sexual connection with another person by the introduction of any object into the vagina or anus of the other person without the other person’s consent. However, this section does not extend to where the introduction of any object into the vagina or anus of any person if carried out for medical or law enforcement purposes. (Maximum penalty: 20 years imprisonment, liable to whipping and fine)

377D – Gross indecency
Any person who, in public or private, commits, or abets the commission of, or procures or attempts to procure the commission by any person of, any act of gross indecency with another person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years. (Maximum penalty: 2 years imprisonment)

377E – Inciting a child to an act of gross indecency
Any person who incites a child under the age of 14 years to any act of gross indecency with him or another person. (Maximum penalty: 5 years imprisonment, liable to whipping)

Seems like the words penetration appeared a lot of times in the penal code. In fact, the law seems to clearly spell out what it means by unnatural sex – putting ones penis into the anus or mouth of another person. Now, unless I am mistaken, there is no way to prove that carnal intercourse happened if medical evidence of penetration is discounted. I am so confused but IANAL.

I think that Anwar has just gotten a figurative one up his arse from the judges.

PS: Turns out that the only people legally allowed to shove things up your ass are people in the medical and law enforcement fields (now, one wonders why cops should be allowed to shove things up your ass). Also, turns out that video evidence of the act is insufficient to take action against known offenders such as Chua Soi Lek who definitely had his penis inside a woman’s mouth at one point.