Zara Qairina, a Form One student at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Agama (SMKA) Tun Datu Mustapha Limauan in Papar, was believed to have fallen from the third floor and was found unconscious in a drain near the hostel at 4am on July 16. The 13-year-old student was later confirmed dead after receiving treatment at Queen Elizabeth I Hospital in Kota Kinabalu.
It has been alleged by some that amongst the suspects are kids of VIPs...politicians?? Has this 'affected' investigations, and prosecutions? Has the upcoming Sabah elections anything to do with the delay?
“Regardless of whether they are Datuk Seri or Tan Sri, we will investigate if there is proof … Do not throw baseless accusations just because they are the child of a minister or a relative of a deputy prime minister or deputy chief minister,” he[PM Anwar Ibrahim] added during his speech at the closing ceremony of the National Farmers, Breeders and Fishermen Day 2025 in Sabah, as quoted by Malay Mail. - CNA, 4/8/2025
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said a total of 41 out of 60 investigation papers on criminal cases involving politicians opened between 2020 and July this year have been classified as no further action (NFA) - Malay Mail, 4/9/2025.
The crime that left the child dead happened on about 16 July - have the police still have not found the perpetrator or possible perpetrators that led to the death of this student? The police may have identified the suspects - but to date may not have sufficient evidence to charge and/or try any accused, or something else may be happening. Is the DELAY in prosecution have anything to do with upcoming Sabah elections, or protecting the 'Unity' government from crumbling? With no FACTS provided, speculations will rise...
If only, we had CCTV in schools and all public buildings(better all buildings), the crime may have been solved fast. Or do we have to wait for years like the case of Teoh Beng Hock - and seeing no one being charged?
Should we ask the government to INSTALL Security CCTV to deter crime and easily catch perpetrators in all places - not just buildings but also roads and residential/commercial areas...[Sadly, I have not seen law enforcement reach out to the public asking witnesses of crimes to step up too...]
The police could have already investigated, identified suspects, obtained evidence, charged them and prosecuted them in Court on their own... they do not have to wait for the Coroner or INQUEST.
The police do not need a Coroner's Inquest for them to investigate the 'murder or killing' of Zara Qarina, or possible SUICIDE. Some are suggesting SUICIDE - but unlikely, since after dropping from the 3rd floor - it was moved to be found near a drain.
In fact, rightfully the police would have ALL the evidence that have come out or will come out during the inquest - did the police fail in their investigations or was it some other reason...
Speedily 5 were charged for a minor offence of bullying - BE CAREFUL as these 5 may not have been involved in the death - just the crime of bullying? Surely no one should die when perpetrators are caught and charged for Bullying...under 507C(1) which carries the sentence of imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both. Is it JUST considering the victim DIED?
The five children accused of bullying are charged under Section 507C(1) of the Penal Code. The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) stressed that the Section 507C(1) charge only refers to the acts of bullying and not linked to Zara Qairina’s death.
Was it only 5 - or were there others? Are the alleged VIP's children also charged? Beware of selective non-prosecution...
NOW focus shifted on the Coroner's INQUEST, which may last for some time. The coroner decides on the cause of death - including whether any person is criminally liable - they may NOT identify the perpetrators..
And, even with a Coroner's finding - there may be NOTHING that happens after that..no perps charged and tried????
Coroner Rasyihah Ghazali said, on the balance of probabilities, S Mahendran, G Thavaselvan and his brother-in-law J Vijayaratnam, a Sri Lankan national, died of gunshot wounds on their heads and chests. “The shots were not fired in self-defence. There was abuse of power and (actions in the nature of) criminal elements by police in the death of the men,” she said this evening at the end of an inquest. - - FMT, 31/5/2022 , With Body-Cams, Police Shooting That Resulted In 3 Deaths Can Now Be More Easily Investigated To Determine Criminal Liability Of Police In The Killings...IPCMC? Defamation of the dead?
I do not recall any police offficers being charged for the LIES, and/or for the Killing, do you?
13th Death in Police Custody only..Bar Resolution on the Coroner and Inquests - Coroner tell us how he/she died?
BULLYING OFFENSE
If you BULLY, torment or do something that results in the victim taking his/her own life - should that not be a CRIME, and it is now because of Section 507D(2) Penal Code - '... and if the person so provoked attempts to commit suicide or commits suicide as a result of such provocation, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years or with fine or with both....'
507C Causing harassment, distress, fear or alarm to a person likely to feel harassed, distressed, fear or alarmed
(1) Whoever, in any manner or by any means, uses or makes any threatening, abusive or insulting words or communication, or engages in any threatening, abusive or insulting act, and such words, communication or act are heard, seen or otherwise perceived by a person who is likely to feel harassed, distressed, fear or alarmed by such words, communication or act, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.
(2) It shall be a defence to a charge against a person under this section if it is proved that he had no reasonable grounds to believe that the words or communication used or made by him, or his act, would be heard, seen or otherwise perceived by a person who was likely to feel harassed, distressed, fear or alarmed by such words, communication or act.
507D Causing a person to believe that harm will be caused
(1) Whoever, in any manner or by any means, uses or makes any threatening, abusive or insulting words or communication against any person, or engages in any threatening, abusive or insulting act towards any person, with intent to cause, or knowing or ought to know that the words, communication or act will cause the person to believe that harm will be caused to himself or to any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.
(2) Whoever, in any manner or by any means, uses or makes any threatening, abusive or insulting words or communication against any person, or engages in any threatening, abusive or insulting act towards any person, with intent to provoke the person to cause harm to himself or to any other person, or knowing or ought to know that the words, communication or act are likely to provoke the person to cause harm to himself or to any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both; and if the person so provoked attempts to commit suicide or commits suicide as a result of such provocation, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years or with fine or with both.
Should not the maximum sentences be HIGHER - and leave it to the Court to order a JUST sentence depending on the circumstances of the case..
Is the INQUEST a distraction? Is it to temporarily appease the Public? As mentioned earlier, police/prosecution do not have to wait for the Inquest to be over to charge perpetrators in Court...
The Magistrate must inquire into deaths after the police submitted the report to the Magistrate(Coroner)
Section 333 Criminal Procedure Code - Duty of Magistrate on receipt of report
(1) If the Magistrate shall be satisfied as to the cause of death without holding an inquiry under this Chapter, he shall report to the Public Prosecutor the cause of death as ascertained to his satisfaction with his reasons for being so satisfied and shall at the same time transmit to the Public Prosecutor all reports and documents in his possession connected with the matter.
(2) In all other cases the Magistrate shall proceed as soon as may be to hold an inquiry under this Chapter.
(3) It shall not be necessary for the Magistrate to hold any inquiry under this Chapter or to make any report under subsection (1) if any criminal proceedings have been instituted against any person in respect of any act connected with the death of the deceased or such hurt as caused the death.
So, the police would have reported the death to the Coroner(Magistrate) soon after 16/7/2025 - so, what did the Coroner do? Did the Coroner decide not to hold an inquest? What was his/her reason? Did the Public Prosecutor ask for further investigation/inquiry?
NOTE - whether an INQUEST or inquiry held is not up to the Public Prosecutor, the Coroner does the inquiry(or not) on his/own - So, it is WRONG to assume that there will be no INQUEST unless Public Prosecutor ORDERS. The law also gives the Public Prosecutor power to ask the Coroner to an INQUIRY - but the question that must be asked is WHY the Coroner did not decide to do an INQUIRY before the Public Prosecutor 'ordered'? Was there some 'hanky panky' here?
The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) on Wednesday ordered an inquest into the death of 13-year-old Zara Qairina Mahathir, following a review of the investigation report submitted by the Royal Malaysian Police. - Edge, 13/8/2025
Section 339 Power of Public Prosecutor to require inquiry to be held
(1) The Public Prosecutor may at any time direct a Magistrate to hold an inquiry under this Chapter into the cause of, and the circumstances connected with, any death such as is referred to in sections 329 and 334, and the Magistrate to whom such direction is given shall then proceed to hold an inquiry and shall record his finding as to the cause of death and also as to any of the circumstances connected with it with regard to which the Public Prosecutor may have directed him to make inquiry.
(2) When the proceedings at any inquiry under this Chapter have been closed and it appears to the Public Prosecutor that further investigation is necessary, the Public Prosecutor may direct the Magistrate to reopen the inquiry and to make further investigation, and thereupon the Magistrate shall have full power to reopen the inquiry and make further investigation and thereafter to proceed in the same manner as if the proceedings at the inquiry had not been closed:
Provided that this subsection shall not apply to any inquiry at which a finding of murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder has been returned against any person.
(3) When giving any direction under this section the Public Prosecutor may also direct whether the body shall or shall not be exhumed.
(4) All directions given under this section shall be complied with by the Magistrate to whom they are addressed without unnecessary delay.
TRANSPARENCY demands that there is OPEN DATA revealing who is the CORONER responsible for any deaths. This will also give others(including the public) to be able to inform the Coroner facts/evidence of suspicion of the cause of the death, etc... after all, we want the truth...CORONER's findings should also be made available for all deaths, whether after an INQUEST or when Coroner decides not to hold an inquest. Is the Coroner doing the Zara's INQUEST the same as the Coroner who was responsible for inquiry into Zara's death? A Coroner usually comes into the picture soon after the death on 16/7/2025 - if there was no Coroner, then it is a PROBLEM - someone must be held accountable. Did the CORONER change?
Who is the BOSS of Coroners? The Head of the Judiciary, AG/PP Dusuki, etc? I believe the BOSS should be the Judiciary...not the Public Prosecutor/Attorney General, Minister or police...
Someone DIES - the police investigate, and the CORONER investigates.
The Coroner is a Magistrate/Sessions Court Judge. Leaving it just up to the police to determine the cause of death, including there was anyone criminally liable for the death is DANGEROUS. That is why we have the CORONER, who will independently decide on the 'cause of death'
"cause of death" include not only the apparent cause of death as ascertainable by inspection or post-mortem examination of the body of the deceased, but also all matters necessary to enable an opinion to be formed as to the manner in which the deceased came by his death and as to whether his death resulted in any way from, or was accelerated by, any unlawful act or omission on the part of any other person.
When does the Coroner come into the picture? As soon as the police,etc reports the DEATH - not after the police has completed the investigation - The REPORT is fast,,, This is clear from the law, as the
Section 329(5) CPC - The officer in charge of the police district shall immediately forward that report to the Magistrate within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the body of the deceased was found.
The CORONER(Magistrate) may view the body of the deceased(Section 336), and even order a post-mortem. YES, the Coroner comes in very fast - The Coroner (and maybe even the police) really should have the power the preserve the BODY and evidence - that means the power to delay BURIAL and more importantly CREMATION. Once a body is cremated, all the evidence is DESTROYED - before even the cause of death be established >> did the person die because he was poisoned? Remember, many in Malaysia CREMATE the deceased...Even if buried, embalming can destroy evidence too???
A Coroner has a LOT of work and responsibilities -and that is why he/she best be freed from duties as a Magistrate or Sessions Court Judge so he/she can focus on duties of his/her responsibilities a CORONER...
REFORMS after cases
When I started as a lawyer, I represented the daughter of a family, who was suing the teacher, school and the government. The teacher punished students asking them to stand on the table, and this girl after some time fainted, and fell on the window panes, the glass broke and pierced her body. An once active and athletic girl was transformed into someone who could no more participate in sports,...We won, and the Magistrate was unhappy that she did not have the power to order a higher damage/compensation because the case was filed in a Magistrate Court, who then had the power to order RM25k maximum - I had taken over the case from another, and it was too late to ask the case be transferred to higher Courts. After that case, the government ensured that there was protective grill, that prevented a similar accident - no more will children falling against window panes will have a high risk of the glass breaking and piercing their bodies..
For Zara Qairina's case - one REFORM could be the installation of CCTVs in schools - which would have provided needed evidence to find out what happened that led to this child's death... Make TORTURE a crime. Failure of teachers/school to take action when aware should also be a CRIME. ...ect.
As mentioned earlier, there are QUESTIONS surrounding this case:-
# The failure of the police/prosecutors to speedily investigate, identify perpetrator/s, charge them in court...
# The missing CORONER - he should have come into the picture as soon as Zara died
# The question of whether there is any 'selective non-prosecution' because some children of important people may be parents/relatives of the suspects..
# The charging of 5 for bullying - was it to maybe 'distract' us from other perpetrators?
# Has this case anything to do with politics - the upcoming Sabah elections, or even the support of MPs for Anwar Ibrahim to remain Prime Minister... [It is said, sometimes politicians hold other politicians, etc 'hostage' by having 'dirt' on them, which could be evidence/information that could lead them to be investigated or prosecuted for crimes,etc ... which is used to ensure support of these politicians. The 'wrongdoers' for the silence and/or non-disclosure gives 'LOYALTY" and/or obedience in return...Could the promise of 'non-prosecution' of a child or relative also be used as bargaining chip to ensure such loyalty and/or support?
In my opinion, there are many questions about the Zara Qairina's case - I hope that those perpetrators do not get off scot free...
Justice In Motion: 5 Teens Charged In Zara Qairina’s Bullying Case – A Quick Recap
Here’s a roundup of what has taken place in the case of five teenagers accused of bullying the late Zara Qairina Mahathir.
Lawyers on both sides are working on a pro bono basis
Lawyers representing Noraidah Lamat, mother of the late Zara Qairina, (pic) have dismissed viral claims that she was seeking donations for herself to cover legal fees.
The legal team confirmed that a bank account number was circulated online for public contributions following Zara’s death, but the collection was halted shortly after.
She’s currently not collecting any donations for herself or to pay legal fees.
However, Noraidah will only accept contributions directly in person or via authorised representatives from non-governmental organisations.
Her lawyers also clarified that they’re representing her on a pro bono basis aka free of charge.
Datuk Ram Singh, the lawyer representing one of the five teenagers charged, also explained the defence team is working on a pro bono basis. The same goes for the other lawyers representing the other four teenagers accused of bullying the late Zara Qairina.
A gag order has been issued
The Children’s Court has issued a gag order on 20 August to protect the identities and dignities of children under Section 15 of the Child Act 2001.
The gag order is not about covering up the matter but to protect the children following the law. Section 15 of the Child Act 2001 prohibits the media from publishing images or reporting on children involved in legal proceedings, under protection, or deemed beyond control.
Following the gag order, the lawyers representing the five teenagers accused of bullying reassured the public that all five children are not children of VVIPs but minors who have the right to legal representation.
Additionally, children who commit a crime will still be punished under the same law as adults. Under Section 12, the Court For Children is conducted privately instead of an open court. The court has a different entrance from other courts in the same building to allow privacy when children are brought in and out.
Section 12 also limits who can be in the Court For Children to only officers of the court, the children involved in the court case, their parents, guardians, lawyers, and witnesses. Other persons directly involved in the case and other responsible persons decided by the court are allowed in as well.
The five kids not charged with causing death
The five children accused of bullying are charged under Section 507C(1) of the Penal Code.
The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) stressed that the Section 507C(1) charge only refers to the acts of bullying and not linked to Zara Qairina’s death. This decision by the AGC was made after a thorough review of the investigation papers.
The lawyer representing Noraidah requested the postponement of the prosecution process and proposed the teens to be charged under Section 507D(2), which has a heavier penalty.
The AGC dismissed the double jeopardy speculations that if the teens plead guilty to a lesser charge, they could not be charged later under Section 507D(2) or a more serious offence.
An inquest would still proceed to determine the actual cause of Zara Qairina’s death.
The court set the trial for 8 to 12 December, 15-19 December, while 25 September and 16 October were fixed for further mention and pre-trial case management. - Rakyat Post, 21/8/2025
No comments:
Post a Comment