Syahredzan Johan
COMMENT | On April 13, the Johor Bahru High Court allowed the appeal by the public prosecutor and convicted clerk Sam Ke Ting for the offence of reckless driving under Section 41(1) of the Road Transport Act 1987.
Sam was sentenced to imprisonment of six years and fined RM6,000, amongst others. Her application for stay was also denied by the High Court, which meant that she had to serve her jail time immediately.
Sam was accused to have caused the death of eight cyclists at 3.20am on Feb 18, 2017. The cyclists were said to be youths who participated in the ‘basikal lajak’ activity; drag racing modified bicycles on public roads.
The clerk was twice acquitted by the Magistrate’s Court, first in 2019 and again in 2021. Upon appeal, both decisions were reversed.
The magistrate’s grounds of decision for acquitting Sam is a 40-plus page judgment which examined the evidence thoroughly. Amongst others, the magistrate found that there were about 30 cyclists at the time of the incident and that Sam had limited sight distance as she was driving uphill and the youths were just beyond the crest of the road.
Meanwhile, the High Court judgment focused on Sam’s defence, which according to the judge, was not enough to raise a reasonable doubt for her defence.
On April 18, Sam successfully obtained leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. She was also granted a stay on her prison sentence, pending the outcome of the appeal. Arguments from both sides will be heard when the appeal is eventually heard.
Sam’s case has garnered a lot of public interest. Her conviction and sentence caused a massive uproar. Many believed she did nothing wrong. While they sympathised with the families of the deceased, they felt that a motorist using a public road at 3am in the morning could not have possibly anticipated that there would be a group of ‘basikal lajak’ cyclists racing on the road.
They questioned why underaged youths could be out partaking in a dangerous activity without knowledge and supervision of their parents or guardians. Many wanted the parents to bear some responsibility for the tragedy.
Not a racial issue
Sam herself has expressed disappointment with how certain quarters blamed the judiciary for her conviction. Through her lawyer, she also was reported to have said that her case is not a racial issue but a public interest matter.
The incident is not only about a court case of a motorist who was said to have caused the death of eight young persons. It is also about the socio-economic situation of the families of these basikal lajak cyclists and the responsibility of the parents or society as a whole for the actions of our youths.
In addition, it is also about the culpability of road users when faced with dangerous activities by others on the same road. There are lessons to be learned from the tragedy.
But as Sam has rightly pointed out, the incident is not about the ethnicities of those involved. The race of the accused and the deceased should not be a factor. Despite some attempts by certain quarters to racialise the incident, most do not view it through racial lenses.
And rightly so; should we allow racists to hijack the discourse, the real lessons regarding that fateful and tragic night in Johor Bahru would be lost in the debate.
COMMENT | On April 13, the Johor Bahru High Court allowed the appeal by the public prosecutor and convicted clerk Sam Ke Ting for the offence of reckless driving under Section 41(1) of the Road Transport Act 1987.
Sam was sentenced to imprisonment of six years and fined RM6,000, amongst others. Her application for stay was also denied by the High Court, which meant that she had to serve her jail time immediately.
Sam was accused to have caused the death of eight cyclists at 3.20am on Feb 18, 2017. The cyclists were said to be youths who participated in the ‘basikal lajak’ activity; drag racing modified bicycles on public roads.
The clerk was twice acquitted by the Magistrate’s Court, first in 2019 and again in 2021. Upon appeal, both decisions were reversed.
The magistrate’s grounds of decision for acquitting Sam is a 40-plus page judgment which examined the evidence thoroughly. Amongst others, the magistrate found that there were about 30 cyclists at the time of the incident and that Sam had limited sight distance as she was driving uphill and the youths were just beyond the crest of the road.
Meanwhile, the High Court judgment focused on Sam’s defence, which according to the judge, was not enough to raise a reasonable doubt for her defence.
On April 18, Sam successfully obtained leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. She was also granted a stay on her prison sentence, pending the outcome of the appeal. Arguments from both sides will be heard when the appeal is eventually heard.
Sam’s case has garnered a lot of public interest. Her conviction and sentence caused a massive uproar. Many believed she did nothing wrong. While they sympathised with the families of the deceased, they felt that a motorist using a public road at 3am in the morning could not have possibly anticipated that there would be a group of ‘basikal lajak’ cyclists racing on the road.
They questioned why underaged youths could be out partaking in a dangerous activity without knowledge and supervision of their parents or guardians. Many wanted the parents to bear some responsibility for the tragedy.
Not a racial issue
Sam herself has expressed disappointment with how certain quarters blamed the judiciary for her conviction. Through her lawyer, she also was reported to have said that her case is not a racial issue but a public interest matter.
The incident is not only about a court case of a motorist who was said to have caused the death of eight young persons. It is also about the socio-economic situation of the families of these basikal lajak cyclists and the responsibility of the parents or society as a whole for the actions of our youths.
In addition, it is also about the culpability of road users when faced with dangerous activities by others on the same road. There are lessons to be learned from the tragedy.
But as Sam has rightly pointed out, the incident is not about the ethnicities of those involved. The race of the accused and the deceased should not be a factor. Despite some attempts by certain quarters to racialise the incident, most do not view it through racial lenses.
And rightly so; should we allow racists to hijack the discourse, the real lessons regarding that fateful and tragic night in Johor Bahru would be lost in the debate.
SYAHREDZAN JOHAN is a civil liberties lawyer and political secretary to Iskandar Puteri MP Lim Kit Siang.
No comments:
Post a Comment