Education officers declined to meet plaintiff — Witness
KOTA KINABALU: A witness in the teacher absenteeism trial told the High Court here on Tuesday that three officers from the District Education Centre, State Education Department and Malaysian Education Ministry declined to meet the plaintiff during their visit to her secondary school in Kota Belud.
The star witness, who was testifying before Justice Datuk Ismail Brahim, said that the plaintiff, Siti Nafirah Siman, 23, was informed about the visit and she was ready to meet these three officers.
However, the witness claimed that these three officers had declined to see her.
Siti Nafirah was one of the school’s students who was aware about the teacher absenteeism issue and a witness. Previously she had testified that Siti Nafirah had asked for an English Language teacher to tutor her and her friends for their upcoming exam since their current teacher allegedly did not enter class.
Under examination-in-chief by counsel Shireen Sikayun, the witness further explained that she believed that what prompted the visit by the three officers on August 17, 2015 were reports prepared by the English Teaching Assistant (ETA) regarding no action taken by the school for the teacher absenteeism issue.
The witness testified that she did meet these three officers during their visit and they all met at the school’s principal room.
“Apart from discussing teachers’ roles, ETA programs and co-teaching procedures, I felt blur at that time because the blame was put on me. I thought there will be discussion about the first defendant, Mohd Jainal Jamran.
“The issue was twisted and the blame was on me because I did not inform about this issue much earlier to the principal,” explained the witness.
To a question, the witness said that she then went upstairs with these officers who headed to the school library to meet ETA teacher Ibrahim Khan Jardoon.
Ibrahim was one of the subpoenaed witnesses in this trial and had already testified in court.
She explained that during the meeting at the library, two issues were addressed and one of them was the teacher absenteeism issue.
“As far as I can recall, one of the officers said that they could not resolve the issue of teacher not entering classes and said that there was no such term of “hire and fire” for this type of teacher,” she testified.
When asked what was shared by these officers during the visit, whether it resolved the problem of the teacher absenteeism, the witness answered “Not at all” and she claimed that “They saved the principal’s face by scapegoating me”.
Siti Nafirah had named Mohd Jainal, Hj Suid Hj Hanapi (sued in his capacity as school’s principal), Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Taun Gusi, District Education Officer of Kota Belud, Director of Education Sabah, Director General of Education Malaysia, Minister of Education Malaysia and Government of Malaysia as first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth defendants respectively.
The plaintiff had filed the suit against the first defendant for his alleged failure to teach the English Language subject to her and her classmates during his assigned periods or timetable for the academic year of 2015.
Siti Nafirah, who was represented by Shireen, also sued the other defendants for their alleged failure to take action against the first defendant for allegedly failing to teach her and her classmates.
Senior Federal Counsel Jesseca Daimis and Federal Counsel Mohd Fazriel Fardiansyah Abdul Kadir acted for the defendants.
Meanwhile, counsel Datin Mary Florence Gomez (Sabah Law Society’s Women and Children’s Rights Sub-Committee chairperson) and Yannik Mohd Annuar held a watching brief for the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam). The trial will resume on March 7-8.