Many people will not agree with MGG Pilai's main assertion in [#1] Mahathir deserves immunity[/#] (April 2), but such discussion is timely. Many misunderstand the meaning of 'absolute immunity', as well as that of 'absolute freedom'.

They interpret 'absolute freedom' to the letter rather than according to its true spirit. There is no absolute freedom. If Mr Smith is free to spy on Mary, it will jeopardise Mary's right and freedom to prevent the likes of Mr Smith from invading her privacy.

When it comes to absolute immunity, one might think that a person like Pol Pot, the notorious leader of the Khmer Rouge, doesn't deserve it; where immunity is used to prevent one from being prosecuted politically.

However, absolute immunity is used to keep the political leader who is being prosecuted in 'one piece' before bringing him or her to the International court. In a worst-case scenario, absolute immunity takes away the suicide option from a disgraced leader before he or she is forced to step down.