Something was clarified today. It seems that the fire chief was the one who asked for sex, in return for advancing the women’s tenders. It’s good of ST to get that point sorted out. And it goes to show what a closer reading of words can tell. The charges said he OBTAINED sexual gratification – rather than he ACCEPTED, according to lawyers interviewed. Good too that the Home Affairs ministry made clear what it was doing about those supposed contracts the women might have received. Now I wonder what these contracts were worth…. and what monetary reward/commissions the women received from their employers.
I know some people think the women shouldn’t be named but, hey, they are adults who know what they were doing. Not exactly minors who deserve to be protected by gag orders. Still, I feel sorry for the three. Even if they weren’t hauled to court, you can bet that their lives are going to be horrible. Even if their families stood by them, I wonder how two of them can even remain employed in the same companies. How to face your co-workers like that? The companies are going to be in a fix. Because keeping them on the payroll might also lead to accusations that they condone such sex-for-contracts behaviour among their sales staff. We all know that such ”transactions” occur…so I suppose the bottomline is don’t get caught? Or don’t try it on a high-profile civil servant?