Expert questions consistency of death penalty call for drunk drivers

 Road safety expert says the logic behind imposing the death penalty for drunk driving should be applied to all other forms of dangerous driving.

Harsher penalties alone may not be effective in reducing road fatalities, according to UPM’s Law Teik Hua. (File pic)

PETALING JAYA:

 A road safety expert says any move to impose the death penalty on drunk drivers in fatal accidents should also extend to other reckless driving behaviours that result in death.

Law Teik Hua of Universiti Putra Malaysia’s road safety research centre said the reasoning put forward should apply consistently across all forms of dangerous driving, as they share similar behavioural patterns and consequences.

Law Teik Hua.

“The driver consciously engages in behaviour that has a well-established probability of catastrophic harm,” he said, adding that this applies equally to drug-impaired drivers, street racers and extreme speeders.

“If one looks at this from a systems perspective, what is significant is the level of foreseeability of harm, not the cause of the impairment or recklessness,” he told FMT.

Law also questioned whether harsher punishments alone would be effective in reducing road fatalities.

“The overall body of evidence indicates that severity by itself is not particularly important in the long run unless combined with a high level of certainty and speed of enforcement.

“Drivers are swayed by the likelihood of detection, not by the relative harshness of a sentence.”

On Sunday, p-hailing rider Amirul Hafiz Omar was killed in Klang after being rammed by a car driven by a man said by police to be driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol.

The following day, Machang MP Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal called for the government to consider imposing the death penalty on drunk drivers involved in fatal accidents, saying existing penalties have failed to deter such offences.

Currently, Section 44 of the Road Transport Act 1987 states that those convicted of causing death while driving under the influence may face 10 to 15 years in prison and a fine of between RM50,000 and RM100,000, with heavier penalties for repeat offenders.

The driver, R Saktygaanapathy, has since been charged with murder, and pleaded guilty to a separate charge of self-administering drugs.

Other more effective measures

Law said there were other more effective measures to reduce cases of drink driving, such as random breath testing, visible enforcement, speed cameras and rehabilitation programmes for offenders.

“The most robust evidence supports a ‘certainty-celerity-prevention’ model over an ‘extreme penalty’ approach,” he added.

He said there was a strong case for a more consistent legal framework that focuses on outcomes and culpability rather than the specific type of offence.

“Drink driving, driving under the influence of drugs, racing, and excessive speeding would all fall into the same level of seriousness.

“This will not only improve consistency and proportionality but also align the law more closely with modern road safety science,” he said.

Wong Shaw Voon.

Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research chairman Wong Shaw Voon said while drink driving involves a conscious choice and should carry serious consequences, it is not comparable to premeditated acts of violence.

Wong said road safety should be addressed through a broader system involving drivers, vehicles and infrastructure, rather than focusing on a single behaviour.

“We need a systematic approach, not targeting only one group or one situation,” he said.

He added that enforcement, technology and public awareness all play a role in reducing risk.

Ultimately, however, drivers must make responsible choices, he said. - FMT