Kota Kinabalu: A former student of a secondary school in Kota Belud who sued a teacher, a Principal, Education Minister and five others for refusing to teach the English subject to her, four years ago, decided to change new solicitors to represent her in the hearing.
The plaintiff Siti Nafirah Siman, 22, whose civil suit’s hearing was supposed to begin on Monday, told the High Court Judge Ismail Brahim that she wanted to find another lawyer for her case.
Siti Nafirah named Mohd Jainal Jamrin (the English teacher), Hj Suid Hj Hanapi (in his capacity as Principal of SMK Taun Gusi), SMK Taun Gusi, Kota Belud District Education Officer, Sabah Education Director, Director General of Education Malaysia, Minister of Education Malaysia and Government of Malaysia as the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth defendants, respectively.
Earlier, counsel Dominic J Omok together with counsel Roxana Jamaludin, who previously defended Siti Nafirah, applied to withdraw themselves from representing Siti Nafirah and asked for the trial to be postponed.
“Today (Monday) was supposed to be for trial, however, we as the plaintiff’s solicitors would like to apply to withdraw as solicitors for this matter. The plaintiff believes that the new solicitors should be appointed to conduct this matter.
“As such we pray that we be allowed to withdraw as solicitors for this trial, and for this trial to be adjourned to a later date to provide the plaintiff sufficient time to appoint new solicitors.
“The plaintiff is in the court today to confirm this matter,” said Dominik.
Before the plaintiff testified, Senior Federal Counsel Mohd Hafizi Abdul Halim who was assisted by Federal Counsel Fazriel Fardiansyah Abdul Kadir for the defendants, raised no objection for the plaintiff’s counsels to discharge themselves from representing the plaintiff.
“We have no objection for the application, however, this notification came in eleventh-hour and we are caught by surprise by this application as the defendants are prepared to proceed with this trial today (Monday).
“Therefore, in view of this development, we would like to ask cost of the day of RM200,” Mohd Hafizi said.
The plaintiff further confirmed that she wished to appoint new solicitors for her trial and agreed to pay the cost of RM200.
The court allowed the counsel’s application to discharge themselves from representing the plaintiff and set Oct 11 for further mention.
The court also said that since the case was an old case and that the court will fix the new trial dates in December this year.
In her statement of claim, Siti Nafirah said that the first defendant was a teacher at the school and at all material times was assigned to teach the English language subject to students at the 4 Perdagangan class (4PD), in which the plaintiff was in.
She claimed that the first defendant failed to attend and teach English classes during the said absenteeism and also claimed that the second defendant failed to take any reasonable steps to ensure that the first defendant taught the 4PD students and that with the knowledge that such failure would result the 4PD students not being prepared for the examination as prescribed by or under the Education Act.
The plaintiff is seeking, among others, a declaration that the first, second, fourth, fifth, seventh and eight defendants are in breach of their statutory duty under the Education Act by failing to; ensure that she is taught the English language during the period of February 2015 to Oct 2015; prepare her for examinations as prescribed under the Education Act.
She is also seeking a declaration that the first, second, fourth, fifth, seventh and eight defendants are in breach of their duty under Regulation 3C, 25, 26 Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1913; a declaration that the act complained off by the first, second, fourth, fifth, seventh and eight defendants amounted to misfeasance in public office.
Furthermore, she is seeking a declaration that the first, second, fourth, fifth, seventh and eight defendants have violated her constitutional right to access to education guaranteed to her under Article 5 read together with Article 12 of the Federal Constitution, damages, costs and any further and other relief which the court may deem fit to grant.
