Klang accident: out of tragedy, some radical good

 The Klang accident, which resulted in an uproar and a murder charge, has spurred government ministers, the attorney-general and even the courts to further embrace restorative justice.

In the 1972 Tamil movie “Neethi” (Justice), a lorry driver under the influence of alcohol knocks and kills a farmer. He pleads guilty in court. But instead of sending him to jail, the judge decides to do an experiment.

Noting that the farmer was the sole breadwinner of his family and was survived by a widow, two young children, aged parents, and a sister, the judge orders Raja, the character played by legendary thespian Sivaji Ganesen, to stay with the family for two years and take care of its financial needs.

The rest of the story is about how the widow hates him, how the villagers shun him and how he subsequently accepts his position and works hard to care for the family. After some dramatic twists and turns, the movie ends with the family forgiving and accepting him.

The movie impressed me; I thought it was better than incarcerating an offender at the taxpayers’ expense while the victim’s family suffered in silence.

I was reminded of this movie after reading a report in FMT on March 30 quoting transport minister Loke Siew Fook as saying his ministry had proposed amendments to the Road Transport Act 1987 to compel offenders to pay compensation to victims’ families, in addition to existing custodial sentences.

This, he said, was to ease the burden of victims’ families. “Right now, the avenue for the victim’s family is through civil action, which is tedious, time-consuming, and involves costs,” he said.

Loke said this following a March 29 fatal crash in Klang where motorcyclist Amirul Hafiz Omar, 33, was killed after being hit by a car driven by R Sakthygaanapathy, 28.

Saktygaanapathy was subsequently charged with murder in the magistrates’ court but no plea was recorded as murder cases fall under the High Court’s jurisdiction. However, he pleaded guilty to another charge of self-administering drugs under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.

Then, on April 15, attorney-general Dusuki Mokhtar ordered all deputy public prosecutors to apply to the courts to order compensation for the victims of crimes, including those killed by those driving under the influence.

Dusuki said Section 426 of the Criminal Procedure Code gave the courts the authority to order convicts to make a payment of costs for prosecution, and compensation to victims or their next of kin.

“That order can be made on top of a sentence, for the purpose of compensating the aggrieved party.”

What Loke has proposed and what Dusuki has said reflect what has come to be known as restorative justice, something that has gained traction in recent years.

Rather than ask how the perpetrator is to be punished, restorative justice asks what harm has been caused, the needs of those affected and how best to make things right for both offender and survivors.

It may sound new but restorative justice is probably as old as the hills. Only the term is new. Many indigenous cultures practised it, including the Maoris, Sami of Scandinavia, Babylonians, Arabs, Greeks and Indians. It was also practised in South East Asia.

The world is finally beginning to see the wisdom of the ancients, now that the weaknesses of the retributive or punitive legal system are clearer. We are – again – realising that the families of victims are important and their needs should be addressed; that jailing the perpetrator is not enough.

I certainly think it makes sense to give equal, if not more, focus to “what harm was caused and how it can be repaired” and not just “what law was broken?”

On April 15 too, the courts decided to leap into the restorative justice fray, although not for the first time.

FMT reported that the Kuala Terengganu High Court had reduced a maintenance worker’s jail term from seven years to 10 months after allowing his appeal over the assault of his late nephew.

In doing so, Judicial Commissioner Yusrin Faidz Yusoff ordered Zaidi Taib to pay RM25,000 in compensation to the victim’s family.

Noting that first-time offenders like Zaidi were “generally entitled to some leniency, particularly where there are prospects of rehabilitation”, he said the widow had also wanted to settle the case amicably..

“The accused is willing to pay RM25,000 compensation to them as a gesture of remorse and reconciliation,” Yusrin said, adding that the offer of compensation demonstrated genuine remorse and an effort to repair harm within a family context.

Zaidi was convicted under Section 326A of the Penal Code for assaulting his nephew, Khairuddin Rani, on Feb 2, 2023, outside a house in Kampung Durian Mas Manir. Khairuddin has since died.

It is clear that the Klang accident has invigorated government ministers and the attorney-general’s chambers to journey deeper into the arena of restorative justice. It appears that even the court has been motivated to lend a hand. This is to be welcomed.

It is clear too that from the concern shown for the widow and family of Amirul Hafiz, Malaysians will be receptive to such a move.

It means the needs of victims or their families will now be a major factor in how deputy public prosecutors fight their cases and how the courts decide.

Drivers would likely take extra precautions on the road, now that they’ll have to pay compensation on top of other penalties or sentences. It could work as most people worry more about their money than their health.

It may also persuade anyone with criminal intentions to think twice. Above all, this is a win for the long-overlooked victims, or families of victims, of crimes and accidents.

This is, therefore, not only a new direction for justice in Malaysia, it is a radical move

It shows again that even out of tragedy, some good can come. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.