A bold statement from a High Court judge has sparked a crucial debate: should taxpayers continue to foot the bill for police misconduct and abuses?
In a recent ruling, Judge Su Tiang Joo highlighted the growing burden on taxpayers due to large court awards. He suggested that the federal government should consider seeking compensation from those at fault in civil suits against the State.
The judge's remarks were prompted by two high-profile cases: the enforced disappearance of Pastor Raymond Koh and the negligence in the police investigation of activist Amri Che Mat. The government was ordered to pay nearly RM37 million to Koh's family and over RM3 million to Amri's family.
Judge Su, in his detailed judgment, warned that ever-increasing damages reflect the judiciary's abhorrence but ultimately place a heavier financial burden on the public. He emphasized that the responsible parties are entrusted with maintaining peace and security, including crime prevention and offender prosecution.
"By seeking contribution and indemnity, we can hold the wrongdoers accountable and protect the reputation of the majority of good men and women in these institutions," Judge Su stated.
But here's where it gets controversial...
Judge Su pointed out the irony of taxpayers funding compensation for government servant misconduct. He quoted former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who famously said, "There is no such thing as public money; it's taxpayers' money."
In awarding damages to Amri's wife, Norhayati Mohd Ariffin, Judge Su acknowledged her significant mental anguish and the torment of uncertainty. He condemned the defendants' callous disregard for her suffering and experiences.
"Despite her diligent efforts to gather evidence and push for inquiries, the authorities, including the defendants, showed little regard for her plight. To suggest she wouldn't be distressed is heartless and irrational," Judge Su remarked.
The judge further highlighted the prolonged hostile cross-examination during the trial and the lack of closure in the case, which aggravated Norhayati's suffering.
For these reasons, Judge Su awarded RM2 million in general and aggravated damages. He also awarded RM1 million in exemplary damages, rejecting the defendants' argument that their conduct wasn't outrageous enough to warrant condemnation.
In addition, Norhayati was granted RM14,254 in special damages to cover her daughters' school fees for the duration of Amri's disappearance.
This ruling came after Norhayati filed a lawsuit in 2019, seeking information and compensation based on a special task force report. In 2019, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) concluded that Amri's disappearance was an enforced one, carried out by police agents.
And this is the part most people miss...
The judge's remarks and ruling highlight a critical issue: should taxpayers continue to pay for police abuses, or should those responsible be held accountable? It's a complex question that sparks differing opinions.
What do you think? Should the government seek compensation from wrongdoers, or is this an unfair burden on taxpayers? Share your thoughts in the comments; let's spark a thoughtful discussion!
