Tuesday, August 18, 2020

INKUES UNTUK SEMUA KEMATIAN PEKERJA DI TEMPAT KERJA(50 Groups)

 

Terjemahan Kenyataan Media Asal dalam Bahasa Inggeris – 18/8/2020 - kini 50 kumpulan

INKUES UNTUK SEMUA KEMATIAN PEKERJA DI TEMPAT KERJA

Dakwa untuk kesalahan membunuh dan menyebabkan kecederaan, bukan sekadar ketidakpatuhan obligasi keselamatan dan kesihatan pekerjaan

Kami, 49 kumpulan, organisasi dan kesatuan sekerja yang disenaraikan di bawah ini menuntut agar Inques (Penyiasatan kehakiman untuk kematian) dilakukan untuk semua kematian di tempat kerja, untuk memastikan keadilan, dan memastikan bahawa mereka yang bertanggungjawab menyebabkan kematian pekerja juga didakwa dan dibicarakan juga untuk jenayah membunuh. Hanya mengenakan denda untuk kesalahan tidak mematuhi obligasi perundangan keselamatan dan kesihatan pekerjaan, dan tidak ada pendakwaan dan hukuman terhadap mereka yang melakukan jenayah membunuh atau kematian dan/atau kecederaan pekerja tidak memadai dan tidak adil.

INKUES (Penyiasatan kehakiman mengenai kematian), yang dilakukan oleh seorang Koroner Bebas, di Mahkamah terbuka, adalah untuk menentukan bukan sahaja sebab kematian, tetapi yang lebih penting lagi adalah menentukan samada ada terdapat orang yang bertanggungjawab melakukan jenayah membunuh.

Tanggungjawab jenayah akan menentukan juga sama ada majikan, pemilik, kontraktor dan/atau pegawai mereka harus didakwa untuk jenayah bunuh(murder), homisid(homicide) atau jenayah menyebabkan kematian kerana kecuaian, di mana semua ini adalah kini kesalahan jenayah di bawah Kanun Keseksaan Malaysia. Sekiranya risiko kematian diketahui, dan terdapat kegagalan untuk melakukan apa yang diperlukan untuk menjaga keselamatan pekerja, dan ini menyebabkan kematian pekerja, maka ini boleh menjadi jenayah bunuh atau homicid.

Tanggungjawab jenayah  mereka yang bertanggungjawab atas kematian pekerja di tempat kerja

Pada 8 Ogos, Zaid Berahim, 33, terbunuh  di sebuah kilang di Bayan Lepas, Pulau Pinang (Bernama, 8/8/2020). Pada pertengahan Mac 2020, rakyat Malaysia Azarul Ashraf Nor Akmal Zorkalnain, Che Huzaydy Che Harun, Norfazly Mad Nor, Faidhi Akmal Fadzil dan Hadi Syafiq Jamil dilaporkan terbunuh dalam kemalangan di kilang milik PRefChem, usahasama Petronas dan Saudi Aramco (Star, 17/3/2020).

Sekurang-kurangnya 61 pekerja mati di tempat kerja dari Januari hingga Mac 2020, menurut data Jabatan Keselamatan dan Kesihatan Pekerjaan (JKKP/DOSH), berasaskan bilangan kes yang dilaporkan kepada JKKP. Pada tahun 2017, JKPP(DOSH) telah mencatatkan 711 kematian di tempat kerja (Malay Mail, 9/7/2018), tetapi nampaknya tidak ada sesiapapun yang didakwa atas tuduhan bunuh atau homicid, maupun kesalahan jenayah menyebabkan kematian kerana cuai untuk mana-mana kes kematian di tempat kerja tersebut.

Amalan semasa nampaknya setakat mendenda majikan atau orang lain kerana ketidakpatuhan obligasi tempat kerja dan/atau kewajiban untuk memastikan keselamatan di tempat kerja. Malangnya, kesalahan dalam undang-undang kini menyatakan hukuman yang sama, tanpa mengambilkira sama ada pekerja mati atau cedera akibat kegagalan majikan tersebut, di mana ini nyata dalam banyak perundangan berkenaan tempat kerja termasuk Akta Keselamatan dan Kesihatan Pekerjaan 1994 (OSHA). Secara wajar, apabila kecederaan atau kematian disebabkan akibat pengingkaran undang-undang, harus dikenakan hukuman yang lebih tinggi dan deteren(deterrent).

Nyawa pekerja adalah penting, dan semua kematian ini mesti disiasat secara komprehensif bukan sekadar melihat sama ada terdapat pengingkaran undang-undang pelesenan/permit dan/atau kepatuhan kewajiban keselamatan dan kesihatan pekerjaan sahaja, tetapi juga sama ada sesiapa ada tanggungjawab jenayah yang menyebabkan kematian dan/atau kecederaan pekerja tersebut.

Kematian pekerja di tempat kerja boleh juga merupakan pembunuhan(Murder) atau ‘homicide’.

Perundangan Malaysia kini menyatakan bahawa jika seseorang ada ‘… pengetahuan bahawa dia mungkin melalui tindakan [atau kegagalan] menyebabkan kematian…’, seseorang itu melakukan jenayah culpable homicide(pembunuhan homisid). (Seksyen 299 Kanun Keseksaan)[ ‘…knowledge that he is likely by such act[or omission] to cause death…’, a person commits the offence of culpable homicide.(Section 299 Penal Code)]

Akan menjadi jenayah bunuh yang lebih serius, iaitu murder(bunuh) 'jika orang yang melakukan sesuatu(atau gagal melakukan sesuatu) dengan pengetahuan bahawa ianya sangat berbahaya berkemungkinan boleh menyebabkan kematian, atau kecederaan tubuh yang mungkin menyebabkan kematian, dan melakukan tindakan tersebut tanpa apa-apa alasan mengambil risiko yang boleh  menyebabkan kematian, atau kecederaan seperti yang dinyatakan di atas. '(Seksyen 300 (d) Kanun Keseksaan).[ It would be the more serious crime of murder ‘if the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death, or such injury as aforesaid.’(Section 300(d) of the Penal Code).

Hakikat bahawa seseorang tidak tahu bahawa seseorang tertentu akan dibunuh akibat tindakan/kegagalannya tidak relevan dalam definisi bunuh(murder) ini.

Kes Kemalangan Maut Temerloh mungkin kes Bunuh(Murder) - Kematian yang boleh diramalkan dan dapat dicegah?

Di Temerloh, pada awal Mac 2020, Md Shoriful, 43, dan Julhas Rahman, 27, meninggal dunia kerana dikebumikan hidup-hidup di parit/trench ketika bekerja di tapak pembinaan perumahan. Ini boleh diklasifikasi sebagai kes bunuh(murder).

Standard(Piawaaian) Industri Binaan oleh Lembaga Pembangunan Industri Pembinaan Malaysia (CIDB) CIS 25: 2018, sebagai contoh, mengkategorikan jenis kerja sedemikian sebagai kerja berisiko TINGGI, dengan risiko kematian akibat  dikebumikan hidup-hidup. Oleh yang demikian, ia merupakan jenis kerja 'tersangat bahaya' yang diketahui, yang boleh menyebabkan kematian, dan mana-mana kontraktor atau syarikat yang terlibat dalam kerja pembinaan harus secara wajar mengetahui risiko ini.

Untuk mengelakkan kematian berisiko tinggi ini, ada kewajiban/obligasi undang-undang yang jelas. Sebagai contoh, untuk kerja dalam parit/lubang, CIDB memerlukan shoring(penahan tanah jatuh kembali mengkebumikan pekerja) yang betul, di mana reka bentuk penahan juga mesti diluluskan oleh Jurutera Profesional (PE) dan diperiksa secara berkala. Tanah yang digali juga harus ditempatkan pada jarak tertentu dari tepi lubang/parit, di luar 'zon pengaruh'. Secara munasabah, mesin yang menyebabkan getaran yang boleh menyebabkan tanah yang berlonggok di tepi parit/lubang jatuh kembali menguburkan pekerja hidup-hidup. Justeru, demi keselamatan, tidak boleh beroperasi  berdekatan ketika pekerja sedang bekerja di dalam parit sedemikian.

Lapuran Media mengenai kejadian Temerloh, antara lain, mengatakan, 'Kedua-dua mangsa dan pekerja ketiga dipercayai berada di dalam lubang sedalam enam meter, sementara dua mesin menggali tanah di tanah di atas lubang beroperasi. "Longgokkan tanah di pinggir lubang kemudian mula jatuh semasa kerja-kerja penggalian, menguburkan kedua pekerja itu," kata Ketua Polis Daerah Temerloh Asisten Komisioner Mohd Yusri Othman. "(New Straits Times, 6/3/2020)[‘Both victims and the third worker are believed to have been inside a six metre-deep pit, while two machines were excavating earth on the ground above the pit. “Heaps of soil which had collected at the edge of the pit then began falling during the excavation works, burying the two workers,” said Temerloh district police chief Assistant Commissioner Mohd Yusri Othman.’(New Straits Times, 6/3/2020)]

Dari fakta yang diketahui, keperluan perundangan untuk insiden ini diklasifikasikan sebagai kes bunuh(murder) atau pembunuhan homisid, tercapai. Namun, tidak ada berita selanjutnya yang menyatakan sama ada polis  menjalankan siasatan kes bunuh atau tidak.

Inkues mencegah 'penyembunyian(cover-up)' dan kegagalan - kes Muhammad Adib

Sekalipun pihak berkuasa penegak undang-undang gagal bertindak, pendapatan INKUES pasti dapat mencegah kemungkinan berlakunya 'penyembunyian'(cover-up), amalan rasuah dan apa-apa kegagalan lain. Ini akan memastikan siasatan dan kemungkinan pendakwaan mereka yang bertanggungjawab melakukan jenayah bunuh.

Ini telah berlaku di Malaysia dalam kes kematian seorang anggota bomba yang meninggal dunia pada November 2018, semasa menjalankan kerjanya. "Kematian anggota bomba Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim adalah hasil daripada tindakan jenayah lebih dari dua orang, satu inkues memutuskan sembilan bulan setelah kematiannya." (New Straits Times, 27/9/2019). . [‘The death of fireman Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim was a result of a criminal act by more than two people, an inquest ruled nine months after his death.’(New Straits Times, 27/9/2019).]

Pendapatan inkues ini telah berjaya menghasilkan siasatan polis lebih lanjut, dan baru-baru ini polis Malaysia mendedahkan rancangan tambahan untuk menubuhkan pasukan peninjau untuk menyelidiki semua aspek mengenai kematian tersebut. (Malay Mail, 10/7/2020). Masih banyak tekanan masyarakat umum untuk mendakwa mereka yang bertanggungjawab secara jenayah untuk kematian Adib.

Inkues mengatasi kekurangan undang-undang dan amalan

Inkues oleh Koroner bebas, adalah hak yang diakui di Malaysia untuk semua kematian, dan ianya  BUKAN hanya harus dilakukan untuk mangsa yang mati akibat ditikam, ditembak dan/atau dipukul, tetapi untuk semua orang yang mati termasuk pekerja yang terbunuh di tempat kerja.

Koroner, sebagai pegawai kehakiman biasanya seorang Majistret, adalah orang yang bebas dari pelbagai agensi penguatkuasaan undang-undang, dapat dan akan melakukan penentuan yang akan dapat mengatasi apa-apa kegagalan dan/atau kesilapan pihak yang bertanggungjawab untuk penguatkuasaan undang-undang.

Dalam kematian di tempat kerja, yang kini di bawah banyak undang-undang dan agensi yang berlainan, di mana kebanyakan agensi berkenaan mungkin hanya bertindak berasaskan undang-undang tertentu yang menjadi tanggungjawab mereka. Inkues akan dapat melihat dan menilai setiap aspek termasuk undang-undang dan kewajiban undang-undang, termasuk juga Kanun Keseksaan, dalam penentuan tanggungjawab jenayah mereka mereka yang menyebabkan kematian.

Kami mengulangi bahawa orang yang bertanggungjawab atas kematian di tempat kerja boleh didakwa dan diadili untuk jenayah bunuh(murder) atau pembunuhan homisid, hanya kerana kegagalan melakukan perkara yang diperlukan, untuk mengurangkan risiko atau mencegah kematian, di mana kegagalan mereka tersebut menyebabkan kematian tersebut.

INKUES untuk semua Kematian diperuntukan dalam Perundangan

Kanun Acara Malaysia (KAJ/CPC) dengan jelas memperuntukkan bahawa Majistret harus mengadakan INKUES(siasatan kehakiman untuk  kematian) untuk semua kematian, di mana semasa inkues tersebut, Koroner (biasanya Majistret atau Hakim) akan menentukan bila, di mana, bagaimana kematian itu berlaku, dan juga sama ada sesiapa mempunyai tanggungjawab jenayah untuk sebab kematian tersebut (Seksyen 333 dan 337 KAJ/CPC).[… also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death.(Section 333 and 337 CPC).]

INKUES terbuka kepada umum, diman mana-mana pihak yang berminat (dan/atau peguam mereka), termasuk kesatuan sekerja, boleh mengambil bahagian dalam inkues tersebut, dengan kemampuan juga  memanggil dan memeriksa saksi, dan memberikan bukti tambahan untuk membantu Koroner bebas membuat penentuan penyebab kematian, yang juga merangkumi sama ada mana-mana orang (termasuk syarikat dan pegawai mereka) boleh dipertanggungjawabkan melakukan jenayah menyebabkan kematian tersebut – pembunuhan(murder), membunuhan secara salah(Homicid) atau jenayah menyebabkan kematian kerana kecuaian.

Inkues kematian di tempat kerja mengambilkira semua perundangan dan fakta yang relevan

Untuk Inkues kematian di tempat kerja, Koroner perlu mempertimbangkan semua kewajiban dan obligasi undang-undang majikan, pemilik dan mereka yang mengawal tempat kerja yang berkenaan. Di Malaysia, terdapat kewajiban perundangan jelas, antara lain, syarat berkenaan permit/lesen, kelayakan pekerja dan bahkan standard(piawaian) bahan/peralatan yang harus digunakan. Kegagalan untuk mendapatkan permit relevan, misalnya, untuk penyimpanan bahan berbahaya, boleh mengakibatkan agensi penguatkuasaan yang relevan tidak tahu, justeru gagal memeriksa dan memastikan pematuhan yang sewajarnya.

Pada tahun 2018, kita melihat kes di mana majikan atau pemilik kilang tidak mempunyai permit perlu untuk menyimpan bahan berbahaya, yang mengakibatkan keracunan ammonia yang menyebabkan 2 pekerja mati dan mencederakan 18 yang lain (Sun Daily, 13/8/2018). Kes ini pun mungkin boleh diklasifikasikan sebagai kes bunuh(murder) atau pembunuhan(homisid).

Koroner harus mempertimbangkan sama ada ini ini risiko diketahui, dan sama ada majikan, pemilik dan/atau kontraktor telah melakukan semua yang diperlukan oleh undang-undang untuk mencegah kematian, terutama bagi kerja risiko yang diketahui dan dapat dicegah. Kegagalan boleh mengakibatkan kesalahan jenayah pembunuhan(murder), pembunuhan homisid atau  sekurang-kurangnya jenayah menyebabkan kematian kerana kecuaian/kelalaian.

Untuk kemalangan maut di tapak pembinaan, agensi berkaitan yang seharusnya membantu Koroner semasa Inkues termasuk juga Jabatan Keselamatan dan Kesihatan Pekerjaan (JKKP), Lembaga Pembangunan Industri Pembinaan (CIDB), Kerajaan Tempatan, semua pihak berkuasa yang memberikan kelulusan dan entiti lain yang berkaitan.

Melindungi Nyawa Pekerja Mesti Menjadi Keutamaan Kerajaan

Perundangan dan polisi Malaysia perlukan reformasi, dengan objektif memastikan tempat kerja yang selamat, dan mencegah kematian dan kecederaan pekerja.

Di bawah Akta Keselamatan dan Kesihatan Pekerjaan 1994, masih belum ada kewajiban undang-undang yang jelas untuk menjaga keselamatan pekerja dari Covid-19 atau penyakit pekerjaan lain. Masih belum ada peraturan khusus di tempat kerja, yang dibuat berasaskan kuasa sedia ada dalam Akta ini yang merupakan perundangan utama berkenaaan keselamatan dan kesihatan di tempat kerja, yang meletakan kewajiban perundangan jelas untuk majikan dan/atau pemilik tempat kerja untuk menjaga keselamatan pekerja, termasuk juga Covid-19, di mana apa-apa pengingkaran akan terus menjadi kesalahan dengan hukuman yang jelas. Kini hanya terdapat peraturan berkuasa undang-undang yang diumum yang dikeluarkan oleh Kementerian Kesihatan.

Malaysia juga tidak mempunyai kesalahan pembunuhan industry (industrial manslaughter), yang berkaitan dengan kematian di tempat kerja. Sebagai contoh, di Queensland, Australia, pembunuhan industry(industrial manslaughter) dilakukan apabila seseorang yang menjalankan perniagaan atau usaha (PCBU), atau pegawai mereka, secara tidak sengaja menyebabkan kematian pekerja, di mana hukuman maksimum adalah 20 tahun penjara bagi seseorang individu, atau $10 juta untuk syarikat atau entiti lain.

Maka, kami menuntut

-          Agar Inkues awam (Siasatan kehakiman untuk kematian) dilakukan untuk semua kematian pekerja di tempat kerja oleh Koroner;

-          Bahawa Inkues segera dilakukan untuk kematian Md Shoriful (43) dan Julhas Rahman (27), yang mati setelah dikebumikan hidup-hidup semasa bekerja di parit dalam untuk menentukan juga sama ada mana-mana syarikat atau orang harus didakwa atas tuduhan membunuh(murder) atau homisid;

-          Bahawa kerajaan  membuat undang-undang yang memberikan hukuman yang lebih tinggi, jika akibat ketidakpatuhan undang-undang, kecederaan atau kematian pekerja berlaku; dan

-          Bahwa kerajaan mengutamakan keselamatan dan kesihatan pekerja, dan membuat reformasi perlu perundangan, polisi dan amalan penguatkuasaan.

 

Charles Hector

Apolinar Tolentino

 

Bagi pihak 49 kumpulan dan kesatuan sekerja yang disenaraikan di bawah ini

 

ALIRAN

Building and Wood Workers International (BWI) Asia Pacific Region

Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) South East Asia Coalition

UNI Global Union- Asia and Pacific Regional Organisation (UNI APRO)

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

SUARAM

AMMPO-SENTRO- Association of Filipino Nationalist Workers in Malaysia

Bangladesh Group Netherlands

Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), India 

Cement Industry Employees Union (CIEU)

Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights (CENTRAL), Cambodia

Electronic Industry Employees Union Southern Region Peninsular Malaysia(EIEUSRPM)/Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan, Semenanjung Malaysia (KSIEWSSM)

IMA Research Foundation, Bangladesh

International Black Women for Wages for Housework

Jaringan Solidariti Pekerja (JSP)

Kesatuan Pekerja Atlas Edible Ice Sdn. Bhd.

Labour Behind the Label(LBL), United Kingdom

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malay Forest Officers' Union (MFOU)

MARUAH, Singapore

Marvi Rural Development Organization (MRDO), Pakistan

Migrant Care

NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)

National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (NUFAM)

National Union of Transport Equipment and Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW) West Malaysia

North South Initiative(NSI)

Odhikar, Bangladesh

Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)

Payday Men's Network, UK

Payday Men's Network, US

Penang Stop Human Trafficking Campaign

Persatuan Komuniti Prihatin Selangor & KL (PRIHATIN)

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor (PSWS)

Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)

PKNS Employees Union

Programme Against Custodial Torture and Impunity (PACTI), India

Sabah Timber Industry Employees Union (STIEU)

Safety and Rights Society (SRS), Bangladesh

SAVE (Social Awareness and Voluntary Education), India

Singapore Anti Death Penalty Campaign

Sosialis Alternatif (SA)

Tamkeen for Legal Aid and Human Rights- Jordan

Tenaganita

Timber Employees' Union Peninsular Malaysia (TEUPM)

Timber Industry Employees' Union of Sarawak (TIEUS)

Union of Employees in Construction Industry (UECI)

Union of Forest Department Employees Sarawak (UFES)

Women of Color/Global Women’s Strike

Workers Assistance Center, Inc. Philippines


# Selepas kenyataan dikeluarkan kali pertama, ada tambahan 1menjadikan kini 50 kumpulan

 Association Of Home And Maquila Workers (ATRAHDOM), Guatemala

Original Statement in English -

INQUESTS FOR ALL DEATHS OF WORKERS AT WORKPLACE - Prosecute for offences of killing and causing injury, not merely non-compliance of occupational safety and health requirements

Monday, August 17, 2020

INQUESTS FOR ALL DEATHS OF WORKERS AT WORKPLACE (51 Groups)

 

Inquest is a judicial inquiry into death, and by law, it must be done for all deaths. It will certainly be an independent comprehensive examination of all laws and factors that caused death, especially when now many agencies and Ministries are responsible for workplace safety. Too many employers and/or owners of worksites continue to get away with causing death to workers. Whilst compensation is important, it is wrong for perpetrators to escape criminal liability.

Media Statement – 18/8/2020 (now 51)

INQUESTS FOR ALL DEATHS OF WORKERS AT WORKPLACE

Prosecute for offences of killing and causing injury, not merely non-compliance of occupational safety and health requirements

We, the 51 undersigned groups, organizations and trade unions demand that Inquests (Inquiries into death) be conducted for all deaths at workplace, to ensure that justice be done, and ensure that those responsible for the death of workers are also charged and tried for killing crimes. Mere fines for non-compliance of occupational safety and health legal requirements, and no prosecution and penalizing those responsible for crimes of causing death and/or injury of workers is simply inadequate and unjust.

 

 

INQUESTS (Inquiries into the death), carried out by an Independent Coroner, in open court, to determine not simply the cause of death, but more importantly whether anyone is criminally liable for the death.

Criminal liability will determine also whether employers, owners, contractors and/or their officers ought to be prosecuted for murder, homicide or causing death by negligence, which are all criminal offences under the Malaysian Penal Code. If the risk of death is known, and there is a failure to do what is needed to keep workers safe, which resulted in the death of a worker, then it could be a murder or homicide.

Criminal liability for those responsible for worker’s deaths at workplaces

On 8 August, Zaid Berahim, 33, died in a factory in Bayan Lepas, Penang (Bernama, 8/8/2020). In mid-March 2020, Malaysians Azarul Ashraf Nor Akmal Zorkalnain, Che Huzaydy Che Harun, Norfazly Mad Nor, Faidhi Akmal Fadzil and Hadi Syafiq Jamil were reported killed in an accident at a refinery owned by PRefChem,  a joint venture between Petronas and Saudi Aramco.(Star, 17/3/2020).

At least 61 workers died at the workplace from January to March 2020, according to Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) data of   reported cases. In 2017, DOSH has recorded 711 deaths at the workplace (Malay Mail, 9/7/2018), but no one seems to have been charged for murder or homicide, let alone causing death by negligence for any of these many deaths.

The current practice seems to be simply fining guilty employers or others for non-compliance of workplace requirements and/or obligations to ensure workplace safety. Sadly, offences carry the same sentences, irrespective whether a worker died or was injured, in many workplace legislations including the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994(OSHA). Reasonably, when injury or death is caused by law breakers, there must be a higher deterrent sentence.

Worker’s lives matter, and all these deaths must be comprehensively investigated beyond merely looking at permit/licensing laws and/or occupational safety and health legal obligation compliance, but also whether any person may criminally liable for the crimes of causing death and/or injury.

Death of worker at workplace may be murder or homicide

Malaysian law, as it is now, states if there is ‘…knowledge that he is likely by such act[or omission] to cause death…’, a person commits the offence of culpable homicide.(Section 299 Penal Code)

It would be the more serious crime of murder ‘if the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death, or such injury as aforesaid.’(Section 300(d) of the Penal Code). The fact that one did not know that someone will be killed by their actions/omissions is irrelevant under this particular definition of murder.

Temerloh Fatal Accident Case could be Murder – A predictable and preventable death?

In Temerloh, in early March 2020, Md Shoriful, 43, and Julhas Rahman, 27, died by reason of being buried alive in a trench while working at a housing development construction site. This could be classified as murder.

The Malaysian Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB)’s Construction Industry Standard CIS 25:2018, as an example, categorizes this kind of work as HIGH risk, with the risk of death by being buried alive. As such, it is a known ‘imminently dangerous’ work, which can cause death, and any contractor or corporation involved in construction work ought to know this.  

To prevent such high risk death, there are clear legal obligations. For trenches/pits, for example, CIDB requires proper shoring, where the shoring design must also be approved by a Professional Engineer (PE) and periodically inspected. The dug-out soil is also required to be placed a certain distance away from the edge of the pit/trench, beyond the ‘zone of influence’. Reasonably, machinery that cause vibration that could cause stacked up soil beside a trench/pit falling back burying alive workers, should not be operating nearby when workers are working in such deep trenches.

Media reports about the Temerloh incident, amongst others, said ‘Both victims and the third worker are believed to have been inside a six metre-deep pit, while two machines were excavating earth on the ground above the pit. Heaps of soil which had collected at the edge of the pit then began falling during the excavation works, burying the two workers,” said Temerloh district police chief Assistant Commissioner Mohd Yusri Othman.’(New Straits Times, 6/3/2020)

From just these known facts itself, the legal requirements for it to be classified as a murder or homicide case, would have been fulfilled. However, there has been no subsequent news whatsoever whether the police are even conducting a murder investigation.

Inquest prevents ‘cover ups’ and failings - Muhammad Adib’s case

Even if the law enforcement authorities fail to act, an INQUEST finding certainly can prevent possible ‘cover-ups’, corrupt practices and other failings. It will ensure investigations and possibly prosecutions of those criminally liable for the deaths.

An inquest was carried out in the case of the death of a fireman who died in Malaysia in November 2018, while carrying out his work. ‘The death of fireman Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim was a result of a criminal act by more than two people, an inquest ruled nine months after his death.’(New Straits Times, 27/9/2019).

This inquest finding did result in further police investigations, and recently the Malaysian police disclosed even further plans of setting up a review team to probe into all aspects regarding the death.(Malay Mail, 10/7/2020). There is still much public pressure for the prosecution of those who are criminally liable for Adib’s death.

Inquest overcomes inadequacies of law and practice

An inquest by an independent Coroner, is a recognized right in Malaysia for all deaths, and it should NOT only be done for victims who die by reason of stabbing, shooting and/or beatings, but for all persons that die including workers killed at workplaces.

The Coroner, being  a judicial officer usually a Magistrate, is a person independent from the various law enforcement agencies, can and will do a determination that will overcome failings and/or mistakes, of  responsible for law enforcers.

In workplace deaths, which is usually covered by many different laws and different agencies, where most agencies may act simply in accordance to the particular law that they are responsible for. An Inquest will be able to look at every aspects including law and legal obligations, including also the Penal Code, in their determination of criminal liability.

We reiterate that persons responsible for workplace deaths can be charged and tried for murder or homicide, simply by reason of failure to do the needful, to reduce risk or prevent deaths, when their failings caused death.

INQUEST for all Deaths is provided by Law

Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) clearly provides that a magistrate shall hold an INQUEST (inquiry into death) for all deaths, whereby during such inquest, the Coroner (usually a Magistrate or Judge) shall determine as to when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death.(Section 333 and 337 CPC).

An INQUEST is open to the public, and, as such, any interested party (and/or their lawyers), including trade unions, can be involved in the inquest, with the capacity of even calling and examining witnesses, and tendering additional evidence to assist an independent Coroner make a determination into the cause of death, which includes also whether any person (including corporations and their officers) could be criminally liable for the death – murder, culpable homicide or causing death by negligence.

Inquest for workplace deaths must consider all relevant laws and facts

For Inquests of deaths at workplaces, the Coroner needs to consider all relevant employer, owner and controller of worksites legal obligations. In Malaysia, there are clear obligations, amongst others, requirements about permits/license, qualification of workers and even standard of materials/equipment used. A failure to get a relevant permit, for example, for the storage of dangerous substance, can result in failure of relevant enforcement agencies inspecting and ensuring due compliance.

In 2018, we saw a case where the  employer or factory owner did not having the permit to store hazardous material, which resulted in ammonia poisoning that killed 2 workers died and injured 18 others(Sun Daily, 13/8/2018). This case could be classified as murder or homicide.

The Coroner must consider whether it is a known risk, and whether the employer, owner and contractor did all that was required by law to prevent deaths, especially from predictable and preventable risks. A failure may result in being criminally liable for murder, homicide or even at the very least the crime of causing death by negligence.

For a construction site fatal accident, the relevant agencies that ought to be assisting the Coroner during an Inquest may include also the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB), the Local Government, all approving authorities and other relevant agencies.

Protecting Workers Lives Must Be a Government Priority

Malaysian laws, policies are in serious need of reforms, with the object of ensuring safe working environment, and preventing worker deaths and injuries.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994, there is still no clear legal obligations to even keep workers safe from Covid-19 or other occupational diseases. There is still no specific workplace regulations, made in accordance with this law that is the primary legislation dealing with workplace safety and health, which imposes clear legal obligations on employer or workplace owners to keep workers safe from even Covid-19, where a breach will be an offence with clear penalties. Only regulations by the Ministry of Health of general application currently exist.

Malaysia also still do not have offence of industrial manslaughter, which deals with workplace deaths. For example, in Queensland, Australia, industrial manslaughter is committed when a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU), or a senior officer, to negligently cause the death of a worker, whereby the  maximum penalty is 20 years imprisonment for an individual, or $10M for a body corporate.

Therefore, we call

-          That public Inquest(Inquiries into death) be conducted for all worker deaths at workplaces by the Coroner;

-          That an inquest be forthwith conducted for death of Md Shoriful(43) and Julhas Rahman(27), who died after being buried alive working in a deep trench to determine whether anyone ought to be charged for murder or homicide;

-          That the government enact laws that provide for a higher penalty, if by reason of non-compliance of laws, injury or death of workers happens;

-          That the government prioritizes worker safety and health, and make the needed legal, policy and practice reforms.

Charles Hector

Apolinar Tolentino

 

For and on behalf of the following 51 groups and trade unions

ALIRAN

Building and Wood Workers International (BWI) Asia Pacific Region

Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) South East Asia Coalition

UNI Global Union- Asia and Pacific Regional Organisation (UNI APRO)

WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)

SUARAM

AMMPO-SENTRO- Association of Filipino Nationalist Workers in Malaysia

Bangladesh Group Netherlands

Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), India 

Cement Industry Employees Union (CIEU)

Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights (CENTRAL), Cambodia

Electronic Industry Employees Union Southern Region Peninsular Malaysia(EIEUSRPM)/Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan, Semenanjung Malaysia (KSIEWSSM)

IMA Research Foundation, Bangladesh

International Black Women for Wages for Housework

Jaringan Solidariti Pekerja (JSP)

Kesatuan Pekerja Atlas Edible Ice Sdn. Bhd.

Labour Behind the Label(LBL), United Kingdom

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

Malay Forest Officers' Union (MFOU)

MARUAH, Singapore

Marvi Rural Development Organization (MRDO), Pakistan

Migrant Care

NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)

National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (NUFAM)

National Union of Transport Equipment and Allied Industries Workers (NUTEAIW) West Malaysia

North South Initiative(NSI)

Odhikar, Bangladesh

Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)

Payday Men's Network, UK

Payday Men's Network, US

Penang Stop Human Trafficking Campaign

Persatuan Komuniti Prihatin Selangor & KL (PRIHATIN)

Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor (PSWS)

Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)

PKNS Employees Union

Programme Against Custodial Torture and Impunity (PACTI), India

Sabah Timber Industry Employees Union (STIEU)

Safety and Rights Society (SRS), Bangladesh

SAVE (Social Awareness and Voluntary Education), India

Singapore Anti Death Penalty Campaign

Sosialis Alternatif (SA)

Tamkeen for Legal Aid and Human Rights- Jordan

Tenaganita

Timber Employees' Union Peninsular Malaysia (TEUPM)

Timber Industry Employees' Union of Sarawak (TIEUS)

Union of Employees in Construction Industry (UECI)

Union of Forest Department Employees Sarawak (UFES)

Women of Color/Global Women’s Strike

Workers Assistance Center, Inc. Philippines

Association Of Home And Maquila Workers (ATRAHDOM), Guatemala

Campagna Abiti Puliti, Italy

# After the statement was issued, 1 more groups have endorsed, making it now 51 groups