by Dr K Annadurai
Aliran Monthly, Vol 24 (2004): Issue 9

---

Please support our work by buying a copy of our print publication, Aliran Monthly, from your nearest news-stand. Better still take out a subscription now. If you prefer to read our web-based edition, please support our work and make a donation.

---

	If they could do this to a professional, just imagine the plight of the layman at their hands! Doesn�t the rot in the system stink to high heaven? Dr K Annadurai

My former employer, a Medical Centre, was sued in Magistrate's Court 8 (Criminal) in February 2002 by the EPF for under contributing my EPF dues. The Medical Centre pleaded guilty and duly paid up the arrears and dividends as ordered by the Court.

In January 2003, I was notified by the EPF about the matter, but I noticed what I thought to be a shortfall of RM1,285 in the amount credited into my account. I wrote to the EPF seeking a clarification.

When the EPF failed to give a plausible explanation, I requested a copy of the Court Order to verify the facts as ordered by the court. Initially the EPF agreed to accede to my request, but subsequently, I was told verbally, that Court Orders were private and confidential and as such could not be revealed to the public. I was, however, advised to write to the Court for the copy.

As advised, I wrote to the Registrar of Subordinate Courts on 12 August 2003 followed by a reminder three weeks later. Instead of giving a written reply to a written request, a court interpreter from Magistrate Court 8 phoned and told me that the Court as a rule does not extend copies of Court Orders to complainants!

Unconvinced, I went to do a file search on 26 February 2004 in the same Court. While there, I noticed a female EPF Prosecuting Officer engaged in some work. Soon after, the very court interpreter who had phoned me earlier, called the EPF officer into a room adjacent to the Magistrate�s chambers, and a little later, when I was ushered into the chambers, I was surprised to find the EPF officer sitting there with the Magistrate.

What transpired subsequently is briefly as follows: The Magistrate showed me the draft copy of the Court Order, but the EPF officer interfered and told Yang Arif that I did not even have the right to see the document. Yang Arif then �corrected� her that as per Section 433 of the Criminal Procedure Code I had the right to see it but I could not be allowed to have a copy of it. The Magistrate, however, told me that I could have copies of the notes of the court proceedings if I wanted after submitting an application.

Annoyed with the EPF officer�s conduct, I wrote to her, demanding to know what her locus standi was, in her unwarranted interference in my file search. Her sectional head replied on her behalf after a reminder. He completely ignored the question raised and wrote: Pihak tuan bolehlah memohon kepada pihak Makhamah untuk mendapatkan dokumen-dokumen yang tuan perlukan � Jabatan ini tiada halangan terhadap permohonan tuan. (You may apply to the Court to obtain the documents you need ... Our department has no objections to your application.)

Meanwhile, I found out, explicitly stated in Section 433 of the CPC 1990 that, I had the right, as claimant, to a copy of the Court Order.

I wrote to the Magistrate who had earlier told me that I could not have a copy of the Court Order for an explanation, followed by a reminder on 20 May 2004. To date Yang Arif has not replied.

I then complained to the Chief Justice on 6 July 2004 that I had not received any response from the Magistrate, followed by a reminder on 4 August 2004. To date, I have not received any reply from the CJ either.

I then saw Datuk Michael Chong of the MCA fame on 16 August 2004. After having heard me out, he told me, without giving any reason, that he normally did not handle such cases and suggested that I write to the Biro Pengaduan Awam instead. When I apprised him that I had already done that, he asked me to see his legal adviser before he could make a decision on the case.

Meeting his legal adviser was an utter waste of my time. He was not sure if non-payment of employees� EPF dues by employers was a criminal offence. He was also not sure whether a claimant in a court case had the right to a copy of the Court Order. It was I who had to enlighten him on the points of law by showing the relevant section in the CPC. Anyway, at the end, he told me that he would discuss the matter with Datuk Michael Chong and that I would know the outcome through his secretary.

I really wonder what advice the legal adviser could have given when he was not even sure of the relevant facts of the law pertaining to my case.

Despite my misgivings, I called the secretary when I did not hear from her for almost a week. She then told me, as I had expected, that Michael Chong would not be able to take up my case, and when I asked her why she could not explain.

The EPF denied me a copy of the Court Order on what might appear to be specious grounds and the Court too, by a strange coincidence, seems to have done the same for reasons best known to it, even though the CPC is explicit about my right to the document. And my complaints to the relevant authorities including the CJ seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Is this how our civil servants heed the clarion call of our PM to improve the public service delivery system?

If they could do this to a professional, just imagine the plight of the layman at their hands! Doesn�t the rot in the system stink to high heaven?

I sincerely hope the PM himself will look into the matter.

NB: A shorter version of this letter was sent to both the NST and The Star but it was not published.

Now e-mail us and tell us what you think. Your comments might be published in the Letters section of our print magazine, Aliran Monthly.