‘Indelible’ ink scandal

2

Heny Loh has composed a little rhyme about the ‘indelible’ ink that was not indelible but contained edible colouring.

indelible ink scandal

Now that some of the truth is out
The Rakyat have every reason to rant and shout!

The EC must explain
Why it cost RM7.1 million?

It is indeed most sickening
That they paid so much for food colouring.

Yes the MACC should investigate
What happened to the silver nitrate

Inconsistencies in their explanations abound
Yet somehow …
these EC officials are still around.

This entire episode about ‘indelible ink’
Is a scandal that really stinks!

– Henry Loh

Thanks for dropping by! The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

Our voluntary writers work hard to keep these articles free for all to read. But we do need funds to support our struggle for Justice, Freedom and Solidarity. To maintain our editorial independence, we do not carry any advertisements; nor do we accept funding from dubious sources. If everyone reading this was to make a donation, our fundraising target for the year would be achieved within a week. So please consider making a donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB Bank account number 8004240948.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
2 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ShakrinaLIkram
4 Jul 2013 7.42pm

First it must be called `edible’ INK as it is after all the Essence that bakers colour food and cakes with! Its not vanilla or strawberry or I would have smelt them! Second, its a forgone conclusion that it cost less than RM 7.1 million hence the secrecy of the suppliers! How many million litres were commissioned for 13.2 million voters? Out of that 11 + voters came out. What happened to the balance left? Will we be seeing it in action in Kuala Besut? NO, EC lied about it being for security reasons just as they did in GE12. This is (allegedly) more of embezzlement and pilfering protections! Next RM 200million dollar Guess, who pocketed the millions? And GE13 allocation of RM 400 have also been spent! Is Ambrin Buang still the Auditor-General? Because he will be getting apoplexy and epilepsy, with the staggering double fold cost from GE12 of RM 200 million spent. EC has to be audited thoroughly on this inside and out! Edible INK saga MUST not be used ever again until a Chemist report has been done to confirm that the… Read more »

Lim Teck Hing
Lim Teck Hing
3 Jul 2013 11.24am

What is amazing is how does EC procure the ink without its main purpose of making it “indelible”. Are there not any internal control procedures in place and checking done? To simply give excuse that you need to shake the ink well before use despite the complaints from the public meant only one thing, nobody in EC really care. Even if the excuse offered by EC that you need to shake well before use is true, why was it not instructed to the EC officers at each voting station? EC cannot claim to be ignorant of the need to shake the ink well before use as such procedures should be part of the instructions from the manufacturer. Either someone in EC did not issue such instruction to EC officers or it was not followed is for EC to answer. If proven true, some heads MUST roll and appropriate actions taken including anti-graft actions by MACC.

What a mockery this is if proven true that the ink is not “indelible”. You can only find this in BolihLand!!!