ONE usually associates peeping toms with perverts invading the privacy of others in a clandestine manner, not enforcement officers on official duty.
This is the serious accusation being hurled at the Subang Jaya City Council’s (MBSJ) enforcement personnel who recently raided a beauty salon in SS14, Subang Jaya.
A customer – Sharifah Zamaera Syed Zafilen Al Edros – claims that a member of the raiding party had filmed her whilst she was getting a massage from a female masseuse.
Wow….berat dakwaan ni… Seorang anggota/pegawai MBSJ didakwa merakam wanita sedang berurut (dengan tukang urut wanita) ketika sebuah operasi serbuan berlangsung…. pic.twitter.com/SiEyr9buen
— MYNEWSHUB (@mynewshub) December 7, 2024
Both parties have lodged police reports with the MBSJ crew claiming that Zamaera was obstructing them from carrying out their duties. Her alleged crime? For refusing to hand over her identity card.
Her allegations are altogether more serious though police have confirmed that no incriminating evidence was found when the accused officer’s phone was inspected.
Police confirmed that investigations were on-going based on reports filed by both parties under Section 186/509 of the Penal Code for obstructing a public servant in the discharge of their duties, insulting the modesty of an individual and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 for the distribution of a video from the MBSJ operation.
View this post on Instagram
The video taken by Zamaera of the raid has since garnered attention online.
The incident was shared on X by feminist and anti-racist Loretta (@lorettabagg) who asked why Zamaera was being made the scapegoat. The answer is that the police were duty-bound to investigate as MBSJ had also filed a police report.
More pertinently, the poster asked why there were NO women enforcement officers present for a raid on a beauty salon?
Wow what even MBSJ, why is she being investigated for calling out an invasion of privacy by the municipal? Where were your women staff? Nothing she brought up was wrong. You going after her is an abuse of power
Shame on you Subang Jaya https://t.co/WxmbXxJLAX pic.twitter.com/g1vbmzr13e
— Loretta (@lorettabagg) December 7, 2024
In the video, the rapper could be heard asking the enforcement officers why the need to invade a person’s privacy when they are supposed to take care of citizens’ well-being.
A few netizens pointedly asked just where were the female enforcement officers? Given that this was beauty salon, it would be logical to assume that the customers would be ladies who have done nothing wrong by the way. After all, this was a licensing issue, not vice-related.
One netizen hoped that the enraged artiste would sue MBSJ. She further added that this is why local council office bearers should be elected to make them accountable.
Another commenter agreed whole-heartedly, contending that abuses would be exposed if they are beholden to the electorate.
This incident brings up several issues. Firstly, to have female enforcement officers present was a no-brainer.
Just what sort of brain freeze did MBSJ have when conducting this raid or were they assuming that there would be no Muslim customers to kick up a fuss about enraging one’s modesty?
How can the police say that the SOPs (standard operating procedures) were followed when no female enforcement officers were present for this raid?
Secondly, whether the officer took pictures or videos or not is irrelevant. The simple act of removing the blinds itself was an invasion of privacy, not to mention an affront to the customer’s modesty.
Thirdly, the complainant was said to run foul Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 for the distribution of a video from the MBSJ operation. How else is she to prove the MBSJ’s alleged wrong doing?
FocusM hopes that real explanations be provided instead of empty platitudes. – Dec 11, 2024
Main image credit: zamaeraaa/Instagram
