Court to rule on June 28 whether to call defence in maid abuse case

 

Ong Su Ping has pleaded not guilty to the maid abuse charges at the Ampang sessions court. (Bernama pic)

AMPANG: The sessions court here will rule on June 28 whether two women will have to enter their defence to a charge of human trafficking, with one also awaiting her fate on charges of attempted murder and causing grievous hurt to an Indonesian maid at a house in Pandan Jaya, Hulu Langat, 10 years ago.

Trial judge Wan Norisham Wan Yaakob said he needs time to review the submissions of both the prosecution and defence.

Earlier, lawyer S Preakas, representing the accused Ong Su Ping and Sang Yoke Leng, argued that his clients should not have been charged under Section 13 of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 as they had not subjected the alleged victim, Meriance Kabu, to forced labour.

“She (Meriance) came here voluntarily and was recruited through a maid agency.

“The accused produced documentary evidence to establish she was recruited legally,” he said.

Preakas said a clerk who worked with the maid agency had testified that Meriance was not exploited or forced into working for the accused.

The lawyer also submitted that the prosecution had failed to prove the attempted murder and causing grievous hurt charges against Ong.

He said there was no evidence of any injury that could have led to death, as required under Section 307 of the Penal Code.

Preakas also said Meriance had, in her testimony, agreed that there had been no attempt to murder her.

On the allegation of causing grievous hurt, brought under Section 320 of the Penal Code, the defence suggested that the alleged victim’s injury may have been self-inflicted, based on her admission that her shirt tore while she was asleep.

The defence also dismissed claims that the accused had removed four of Meriance’s teeth using a plier, citing a finding by a medical expert who testified that her gum appeared “clean”, which was consistent with extraction by someone equipped with dental equipment and expertise.

“All four teeth were gone. If they were broken, there may have been remnants but the X-rays showed that the affected area was clean. There was also no evidence of gum disease.

“You must be an expert and have proper dental instruments to remove them without leaving any remnants,” he said.

In reply, the prosecution said it would have been impossible for the alleged victim to cause injury to her own face.

“The defence claimed that the injury was caused by self-harm, but they were referring to the shirt being torn, not bodily injury.

“How does tearing up a shirt lead to injury to the face?” said deputy public prosecutor Anisah Pisol.

Anisah said if the alleged victim was prone to self-harm, the accused would have returned her to the agency as she would be deemed as “dangerous”.

As regards the human trafficking charge, Anisah said: “The charges against the accused are not defective just because the prosecution did not elaborate on the nature of ‘forced labour.’

“The defence’s contention is that the victim came into the country voluntarily, but the charge concerns exploitation, violence and other forms of coercion.”

She said that while the documentation proves the victim consented to work here, she “did not consent to be a punching bag”. - FMT