Recently, many news articles (that have since been deleted) had reported about a differently-abled Malaysian e-hailing driver that was allegedly assaulted by a bodyguard of someone from the Johor royal family in Kuala Lumpur.
The Deaf man had apparently reported the incident to the police and later chose to drop the case, making it seem like things had been settled.
Now, the Malaysian Deaf Advocacy and Well-being Organisation (DAWN) has released a statement to call for justice for the Deaf man, after they disclosed details into the case which shows that the Deaf man was apparently coerced into dropping the case.
This image is for illustration purposes only.
They wrote, “DAWN expressed profound disappointment upon receiving a firsthand account from the Deaf Grab driver, a 46-year-old victim, regarding the hit incident at a hotel in Kuala Lumpur Sentral on May 28, 2024 (Tuesday).”
“This unfortunate event requires immediate attention and intervention, including by KPWKM, Suhakam, PDRM and other authorities concerned with justice for vulnerable groups.”
Here’s what apparently happened following the alleged assault.
The Deaf man made a report about the incident at the Brickfields police station and was asked to present proof that he was hit in the face. He then showed a video on his phone to the police.
He was then asked to undergo a medical examination.
“While he was undergoing a medical examination, he received a message to return to the police station on the same day, May 28, 2024 (Tuesday). He was instructed to forward the video so that their superior could review it. Upon his arrival at the police station between 5:00PM and 6:00PM, he was escorted to the police officers’ office and left unattended for hours.”
“He was requested to hand over his phone to a police officer in charge. The victim received no explanation for the phone inspection or the prolonged retention of his phone, and was treated as if he were a suspect,” DAWN explained.
When the Deaf man asked for his phone in order for him to contact his wife and a friend who had been assisting him, the police apparently rejected his request.
“On what grounds was the victim’s mobile phone retained for police investigation? His privacy should have been fully respected, as he was the victim in this case. His child had passed away three weeks prior to the incident, and he was still in mourning. This situation arising from the assault incident has profoundly affected him, making it difficult for him to cope,” DAWN added.
The police apparently didn’t use a Malaysian Sign Language (BIM) interpreter when communicating with the Deaf man, which in turn caused there to be a lack of transparency with the case.
“The incident in question is indeed alarming, not merely because the (victim) was assaulted, but more so because his rights were not properly protected and upheld.”
“Regardless of whether it was a misunderstanding, as purported by the media, every citizen, including the victim — whether disabled or not — must be treated equitably, with the inherent right to report incidents to the police for self-protection,” DAWN shared.
It was then revealed that the Deaf man was allegedly given 2 options, to proceed with the case or to drop it.
“He was given two options: the first was to proceed with the case, this meant the case would be brought to court; the second was to drop the case and be compensated. He was informed that if he chose the first option, his phone would be confiscated. The question remains to be answered: how is the phone (a communication means that is essential for a Deaf person) related to the assault incident?”
“Under pressure, the Deaf victim dropped the case and agreed to be compensated. However, after the negotiation, he was asked to read and sign another police report, which he never intended to file. He subsequently received a text message requesting him to collect his identity card, which had not been released to him earlier by the police station. Upon collecting his identity card, he was asked to sign a third police report,” they explained.
DAWN added that he could ascertain that the format was very similar but was unable to discern the difference between the second and the third report.
They went on to call out the police for their lack of professionalism and integrity in handling the case.
“This incident could happen to anyone, and it has heightened the fears within the Deaf community regarding their lack of protection, leaving them increasingly vulnerable. They may experience a further erosion of their right, as the laws in Malaysia do not, in practice, favour the Deaf and OKU community.”
“This event highlights the urgent need for greater vigilance and immediate action to prevent a repetition of further incidents. We can no longer afford to overlook these critical issues,” DAWN wrote.
It was also reported online that, upon dropping the case, the Deaf man was compensated with an amount of RM800.
If this is true, then it is truly heartbreaking to see how unjust our legal system has become. We genuinely hope that the authorities will see through their mistakes and provide the Deaf man with the justice that he deserves.
What do you think about this? Do feel free to share your thoughts in the comment section.
