Failing to see justice done for domestic worker Adelina Lisao in Malaysia’s criminal process, the Indonesian consulate-general in Penang has decided to facilitate the suit against the entire household where she worked before succumbing to septicaemia in February 2018.
Bambang Suharto said the government will file the suit at the High Court in George Town, Penang, on behalf of Adelina’s mother, who signed a letter of administration.
Last June, the Federal Court upheld the acquittal of Adelina’s employer, Ambika MA Shanmugam, 69, a verdict that was upheld in the entire appeal process, since her acquittal by the High Court in Penang.
“The facts of the case had not been fully argued when the deputy public prosecutor (DPP) decided to request that the defendant be given a dismissal not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA).
“The trial was at the early stage in the High Court and we feel it was not fully exercised,” Bambang said.
He added that Adelina's mother was flown from Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara, to Jakarta to sign the letter of administration at the Malaysian Embassy there to avoid having to come to Malaysia for the process.
Ambika was charged under Section 302 of the Penal Code which carries a mandatory death sentence upon conviction.
Meanwhile, her daughter, Jayavartiny Ramalue, 37, was charged under Section 55B of the Immigration Act 1959/63, for employing an undocumented worker.
Jayavartiny, too, was not convicted of the offence she was charged with.
She had been facing a fine of between RM10,000 and RM50,000, or imprisonment of up to 12 months, under Section 55B(1) of the same Act, but was given a DNAA.
On Wednesday, Malaysiakini reported that Adelina’s employers were preparing to cross the last hurdle in freeing themselves of all charges linked to her death with the submission of a representation to have Jayavartiny cleared of her charges.
The defence lawyer who secured Ambika’s acquittal, Anbananthan Yathiraju, said Adelina’s employment agents pleaded guilty to committing the immigration offence between Nov 3, 2016, and Feb 10, 2018, at a premises in Taman Kota Permai 2 in Bukit Mertajam, Penang.
“If two others charged with the same offence relating to the same worker pleaded guilty, and have paid the fine of RM10,000 each, then they have indirectly taken on the liability for the offence,” Anbananthan explained.
Adelina, who was reportedly made to sleep outside the house with a dog, had burn marks on her body, bruises on her head and face and infected wounds on her hands and legs, rights group Amnesty International said.
Her death was due to septicaemia, secondary to cellulitis from injuries related to infected skin lesions arising from untreated burns.
Why AGC didn't want to pursue the case
In an interview with Malaysiakini last July, former solicitor-general III Mohamad Hanafiah Zakaria pointed out that the deceased’s actual employer was one of Ambika’s children who lived in the same house.
Following Adelina’s death in 2018, it was reported that Ambika, Jayavartiny and her brother, whose name was never published in the media, were the first to be arrested in relation to the case.
While Jayavartiny and her mother were charged respectively, it was reported that her brother was released on police bond and was to appear as a witness.
Breaking his silence over Ambika’s acquittal, Hanafiah explained his reasons for instructing the DPP to apply for a DNAA in Ambika’s trial were due to insufficient evidence.
There have been other instances where judges have convicted those accused of murder on a lesser charge of homicide not amounting to murder, like in the death of Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia cadet officer Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain.
However, Hanafiah, who is now in private practice, said the evidence gathered in Adelina’s case would have been inadequate to even convict Ambika for the lesser offence.
He explained that the doctor who treated Adelina found that the wounds on her arm and leg were due to burns and found the injuries not grievous, but rather had been left untreated.
Hanafiah added that letting the court decide on the case (full trial) would have been the easy way out, but the accused's age was also a consideration.
“One thing that needs to be understood is that the accused was under remand (in 2018 before being charged that same year) and was aged 60,” he said.
Set free mid-trial
Meanwhile, the High Court said Ambika was set free mid-trial because the DPP was unable to offer valid grounds on why the prosecution did not wish to proceed and wanted a DNAA instead.
Judge Akhtar Tahir explained that it was not fair to leave the charge hanging over the head of the accused.
“However, if there was a valid reason for requesting a DNAA, I am willing to consider it, but in this case, there is no reason given for my consideration,” Akhtar said.
According to the Court of Appeal judgment referencing the High Court judgment, the prosecution had called three witnesses to testify before requesting the DNAA. These three were a science officer from the Chemistry Department and two reporters.
“Thereafter, on the date of the continuation of the trial, the DPP informed the trial judge that she is asking for the case to be DNAA upon an instruction received from her superior,” read the judgment.
There was an uproar after the housewife walked free over the charge and a huge backlash came from the Indonesian government and Malaysian civil society protesting the verdict.
In June 2019, then attorney-general Tommy Thomas decided to appeal as he was not consulted over the proposal to seek a DNAA.
No coroner’s report
Meanwhile, defence lawyer Anbananthan told Malaysiakini that there was no coroner’s report and the cause of death was identified based on the hospital case notes that he received at the eleventh hour.
“The whole world thought the victim (Adelina) died from torture and was abused by the employer.
“But I found out that Adelina made a self-declaration to the doctor that the injuries were self-inflicted.
“She (Adelina) said she was given a chemical to clean the toilet and while cleaning, the liquid splashed on her,” said Anbananthan, adding that Adelina admitted it was due to her negligence in handling the liquid.
He described this admittance as “self-inflicted injuries” which exonerated Ambika of any intention to kill Adelina. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.