The defendants Mohd Jainal (fourth right, standing) and Suid (third right, seated) outside the courtroom with Mohd Hafizi (right) and Mohd Fazriel (second right) discussing something. Also seen is Norhana (left, seated), who is the witness for the defendants.
KOTA KINABALU (Jan 11): The former principal of a secondary school in Kota Belud, who is also the second defendant in ‘Tiada Guru’ trial agreed that any teacher’s absenteeism is a serious offence, however he was not sure whether the three former students are honest and eager to study.
Suid Hanapi testified before Justice Leonard David Shim that he was informed by the students about the first defendant’s absenteeism only at the end of the year, November 2017.
The first defendant in this civil suit is Mohd Jainal Jamran, the former English language teacher for the three former students of Form Four Sports Science (4SS) namely Rusiah Sabdarin, Nur Natasha Allisya Hamali and Calvina Angayung (plaintiffs).
“I feel that their action of complaining is pointless because it is already the end of the year.
“If they complain about this since the beginning of the year, then I can take appropriate action.
“If they are sincerely want to learn, this matter would have been communicated from the beginning,” Suid said, under cross examination by counsel Sherzali Herza Asli who represented the three plaintiffs.
Suid also agreed that as a principal it is his job to be fully aware of all rules and regulations and ensure that it is followed, and must take action against any serious violations committed by the teachers.
Following the complaint, Suid said he had instructed another teacher to replace Mohd Jainal from January 2018 until December 2018.
Earlier, the first defendant Mohd Jainal when cross examined by Sherzali, agreed with the official record from JPNS (State Education Department) that he was absent on 6th of July 2017, 17th of July 2017, 20th of July 2017, the whole of August 2017 and September 2017.
Previously, Mohd Jainal also testified that he did not enter the said class on March 30, 2017, based on documents certified by the Integrity Sector of State Education Department.
Mohd Jainal explained that he did not enter class on March 30, 2017 because he did not come to school even though in the class attendance record book for teachers or Buku Kawalan it showed that he was scheduled to enter the class.
Sherzali: Please refer to the Buku Kawalan for the month of April 2017, you did not sign your attendance in these documents, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Yes.
Sherzali: In fact, the State Education Department had also officially confirmed that you were not entering the said class nine times in the month of April 2017, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: That would mean that you were absent nine times for the month of April 2017 in respect of 4SS’s English language classes, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: Please refer to the Buku Kawalan for the month of May 2017, you did not sign your attendance on May 4, 2017, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: The State Education Department had also officially confirmed that you were absent on May 4, 2017 in respect of English language subject for the said class, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: That would mean that you were not present at the said class for English language lesson on May 4, 2017, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: Please refer to the Buku Kawalan for the month of June 2017, you did not sign your attendance in these documents, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: The State Education Department had also officially confirmed that you were absent six times in the month of June 2017 in respect of the said English language classes for form four Sports Science class, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Five times.
Sherzali: You mean you were not entering the said class for five times in June, 2017?
Mohd Jainal: There was one time I did not come to school.
Sherzali: This is a document that you have tendered at this trial. It stated that you were not entering class for six times and it was certified by the State Education Department, correct?
Mohd Jainal: From what I saw on the document, it was four times and another one occasion, I did not come to school.
Sherzali: In the column for “tidak masuk kelas (not entering class)”, it showed very clearly here that you were not entering the said class for five times in the month of June, 2017, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Yes.
Sherzali: Please refer to the Buku Kawalan for the month of July 2017, you did not sign your attendance in these documents, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: That would mean that you were absent on July 6 and 17, 2017 in respect of form four Sports Science’s English language classes, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: The State Education Department had also officially confirmed that you were absent on July 6, 17 and 20, 2017 in respect of the said English language classes, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: The defendants did not tender the Buku Kawalan for the months of July, August and September 2017, correct?
Mohd Jainal: According to the documents, yes.
Sherzali: That would mean that you do not have any evidence to show that you were indeed present during the months of July, August and September 2017 for form four Sports Science’s English language classes, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Correct.
Sherzali: I put it to you, you were therefore, wholly absent during the months July, August and September 2017 for form four Sports Science’s English language classes.
Mohd Jainal: I disagree.
Sherzali: Why did you disagree? You mentioned earlier that you do not have any evidence to prove that you were present during the months July, August and September 2017?
Mohd Jainal: Because I could not remember.
Sherzali: Why do you not remember?
Mohd Jainal: Because it was long time ago.
Sherzali: I put it to you, you are not telling the truth because you provided the Buku Kawalan for the months of January to July 2017 but not July to September 2017.
Mohd Jainal: I disagree. It was not my jurisdiction to have the Buku Kawalan.
Sherzali: You are not telling the truth because you and the other defendants had allegedly intentionally failed to produce the Buku Kawalan for the months of July to September 2017. This is so because the State Education Department had confirmed that you did not attend a single class in the said three months, correct?
Mohd Jainal: I am not sure.
Sherzali: What are you not sure?
Mohd Jainal: I did not remember.
Sherzali: What did you not remember
Mohd Jainal: July, August and September 2017.
Sherzali: The State Education Department had confirmed that you were absent from class throughout the months of August and September 2017, correct?
Mohd Jainal: I am not sure.
Sherzali: The State Education Department had officially confirmed that you were absent 11 times for the month of August 2017 in respect of form four Sports Science’s English language classes, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Yes and there was one I did not attend school.
Sherzali: So, you were absent 11 times then for the month of August 2017?
Mohd Jainal: According to the documents, yes.
Sherzali: The State Education Department had also officially confirmed that you were absent 11 times for the month of September 2017 in respect of form four Sports Science’s English language classes, correct?
Mohd Jainal: Yes and there was one time I did not attend school.
Sherzali: So, you were absent 11 times then for the month of September 2017?
Mohd Jainal: According to the documents, yes.
During the cross examination, the defendant also called the former Ketua Bidang (Mohd Jainal’s superior at that time) of the school, Norhana Idek as their witness.
Norhana, who is currently attached to the district Education Department said if the students (plaintiffs) are really serious about their complaint, it should be made earlier.
“When complaints are made at the end of the year, no action can be taken. In addition, this complaint was reported to the principal before it was made to me.
“Therefore, the authority that can take action is the principal. I do not have the executive powers to take actions, and that is why I stated that the complaint was made too late,” she said.
However, she also agreed that she was very much aware of Mohd Jainal’s absenteeism not just in 2017 but even years before.
Apart from Mohd Jainal and Suid, the three plaintiffs, all aged 21, also named the Director-general of Education Malaysia, Minister of Education Malaysia and Government of Malaysia as the third, fourth and fifth defendants respectively.
The three plaintiffs sought reliefs against the defendants namely a declaration that the first, second, third, fourth and fifth defendants are allegedly in breach of their statutory duty under the Education Act 1996 by allegedly failing to ensure that the three plaintiffs were taught the English language during the period of March 2017 to October 2017.
They also sought a declaration that the first, second, third, fourth and fifth defendants are allegedly in breach of their statutory duty under the Education Act 1996 by allegedly failing to prepare the three plaintiffs for examinations as prescribed under the Education Act.
Apart from that the plaintiffs also wanted declarations that the second defendant is allegedly in breach of his duties under Regulation 3C, 25, 26 Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations 1993 and the alleged acts of the first and second defendants complained of amounts to misfeasance in public office.
Lastly, they sought a declaration that the first, second, third, fourth and fifth defendants have allegedly violated the three plaintiffs’ constitutional right to access to education guaranteed to the plaintiffs under Article 5 read together with Article 12 of the Federal Constitution.
Senior Federal Counsel Mohd Hafizi Abd Halim and Federal Counsel Fazriel Fardiansyah Abdul Kadir acted for the defendants.
They had called three witnesses including Mohd Jainal and Suid.
The court ordered parties to file their submissions by March 27, 2023 and clarification of submission fixed on April 12 , 2023 via Zoom.