Working for the US Embassy is DANGEROUS because even when they do not pay you or practice human trafficking(including exploitation of workers), the Malaysian courts have no jurisdiction because US has IMMUNITY. Well, this is what the High Court said recently...
The High Court has allowed a judicial review application brought by the US government and quashed an Industrial Court award for RM66,000 made in favour of a former US embassy security guard for his dismissal from employment 15 years ago.In a decision handed down via email to the parties, Justice Amarjeet Singh issued a declaration that the Industrial Court did not have jurisdiction of the US government.Amerjeet also held that L Subramaniam’s termination from employment for misconduct was an internal matter, and ordered Subramaniam to pay the US government RM8,000 in costs....
In earlier proceedings, the High Court on Jan 8, 2020 ruled that the US government and its embassy were protected by immunity and prohibited the Industrial Court from adjudicating on the lawfulness of Subramaniam’s dismissal from employment. However, in 2021, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court decision and ordered that the Industrial Court proceed to hear the dispute. An appeal by the US government to the Federal Court from the Court of Appeal’s decision was rejected.
If the US Embassy did not pay its electricity bills, then TNB will also be able to do nothing - they cannot go to court for a remedy. No remedy through Malaysian Courts - because US has immunity.
Likewise other contracts with the US Embassy like construction contracts, food contracts, etc - cannot go to Court because US has immunity?
Poor Security Guard - not only has he to pay back the RM60,000 but an additional RM8,000 in COSTS...
Should the US Embassy and other embassies and consulates in Malaysia enjoy such an IMMUNITY?
Something is REALLY WRONG - and the government must do something to protect workers, those who entered into contracts with the US Embassy in Malaysia, etc..
REMOVE THIS IMMUNITY - with regard to employment agreements, service and other contracts with businesses in Malaysia,....and maybe also CRIME committed in the country by any staff of embassies, maybe even the ambassadors... We do not want a situation where an Ambassador and a staff of an embassy MURDERS or RAPES in Malaysia will get away SCOT FREE because of IMMUNITY
# Curious that the Court says the Court has no jurisdiction by reason of the Immunity enjoyed, but then why did the Court order the worker to pay the US Embassy cost of RM,8000? So, is OK to get money from others, but others cannot get monies owing through courts because of Immunity? Does this IMMUNITY also mean that Embassies have no right to go to Malaysian courts when their rights are violated by workers, contractors,...in Malaysia?
This is Malaysia - so rights violated by any victim in Malaysia by even foreign embassies or entities that enjoy IMMUNITY must still be guaranteed access to courts and just remedies according to the law - this is what I feel.
If not, then the HR Ministry, SOCSO/PERKESO, EPF/KWSP and all relevant Malaysian Ministries and Departments will not have any right to enforce the laws when the violator of the laws are foreign embassies and entities because of IMMUNITY?
Can be now say that the US Embassy is a human trafficker (as Malaysia defines human trafficking to include
"trafficking in persons" means all actions of recruiting, conveying, transferring, acquiring, maintaining, harbouring, providing or receiving, a person, for the purpose of exploitation, by the following...
"exploitation" includes all forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude, any illegal activity or the removal of human organs;
Violation of worker rights including wrongful dismissal, non-payment of wages/overtime, denial of access to justice,... would fall under "trafficking in persons'. The IMMUNITY granted to foreign states and their embassies should never deny victims of human rights and/or injustice their access to justice in the Malaysian courts...Now, because of this IMMUNITY, it looks like US Embassy who violated worker rights(noting that the Industrial Court had already determined that the said worker had been wrongfully dismissed and ordered the employer to pay RM60,000) will be able to get away SCOT FREE??
Some will say, the worker can go to the US Courts and get justice - sadly, this is almost impossible for poor workers and even poor contractors..? If at all, this is possible..
US govt wins judicial review on security guard’s sacking
The Kuala Lumpur High Court orders L Subramaniam to pay the US government RM8,000 in costs.
KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has allowed a judicial review application brought by the US government and quashed an Industrial Court award for RM66,000 made in favour of a former US embassy security guard for his dismissal from employment 15 years ago.
In a decision handed down via email to the parties, Justice Amarjeet Singh issued a declaration that the Industrial Court did not have jurisdiction of the US government.
Amerjeet also held that L Subramaniam’s termination from employment for misconduct was an internal matter, and ordered Subramaniam to pay the US government RM8,000 in costs.
Lawyers Lim Heng Seng and Summer Chong represented the US government and Ragunath Kesavan appeared for Subramaniam, while senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin acted as amicus curiae.
In an award handed down on April 27 last year, the Industrial Court found that Subramaniam had been unlawfully dismissed from his employment. The court ordered the US embassy to pay him RM66,000 in compensation and back wages.
Today’s decision was in respect of an application filed by the US government on Aug 9 seeking to annul that award. The application named the Industrial Court and Subramaniam as the first and second respondents.
It sought a declaration by the High Court that Subramaniam’s dismissal for disciplinary misconduct was an internal matter and that the country and its embassy had immunity and were not subject to the jurisdiction conferred on the Industrial Court by Section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967.
In earlier proceedings, the High Court on Jan 8, 2020 ruled that the US government and its embassy were protected by immunity and prohibited the Industrial Court from adjudicating on the lawfulness of Subramaniam’s dismissal from employment.
However, in 2021, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court decision and ordered that the Industrial Court proceed to hear the dispute.
An appeal by the US government to the Federal Court from the Court of Appeal’s decision was rejected.
Subramaniam served the embassy as a security guard for more than 10 years prior to his dismissal in 2008. - FMT, 1/4/2024
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment