1D：RELA成员（Angkatan Relawan Rakyat Malaysia）
3D：吉隆坡Jabatan Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan总裁（JAWI）
- 针对2D，3D和4D（234D），A向上诉法院提出上诉。 1D没有上诉。
- 1D在现场是以官方身份进行的。除了作为RELA成员，也是马来西亚政府的一名雇员，他还是专门协助JAWI进行行动。 1D是负责由15名JAWI和5名RELA官员组成的小组。
- The appellant (A) had filed an action against the first defendant (1D), second defendant (2D), third defendant (3D) and fourth defendant (4D).
1D: a member of the RELA (Angkatan Relawan Rakyat Malaysia)
2D: the Director General of RELA
3D: the Director of the Jabatan Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan, Kuala Lumpur (JAWI)
4D: the Government of Malaysia.
- At about 11.30 p.m, A was arrested at a club in a joint operation by officers of 2D and 3D. A together with other people arrested, were put into a truck.
- A had requested from officers of 2D and 3D permission to use the toilet but was disallowed. She was scolded and told to urinate in the truck.
- She asked her friends to circle her with a shawl so that she could pee. When A was urinating, 1D opened the door of the truck, rushed in, pulled down the shawl and took numerous photos of A in a squatting position urinating. A was humiliated when everyone looked at her.
- 1D was charged under Section 509, Penal Code for invasion of privacy and pleaded guilty. He was convicted and sentenced to four months imprisonment.
- A claimed that her privacy had been invaded, resulting in her humiliation, trauma and serious mental anguish. She claimed general, aggravated and exemplary damages of RM5,000,000 from 1D, 2D, 3D and 4D.
- A’s claim for general, aggravated and exemplary damages was awarded in the sum of RM100,000.00 against 1D only. 2D, 3D and 4D is held not liable.
- A appealed to Court of Appeal against 2D, 3D and 4D (234D). 1D didn’t appeal.
- In this appeal the question is whether the use of the camera by the 1D was “so closely connected with the acts that he was authorised to that, for the purposes of liability of the Government as his employer, his wrongful use may fairly and properly be regarded as made by him while acting in the ordinary course of employment”. If the wrongful act is not so connected then the employer is not responsible.
- 1D’s presence on the scene was on an official capacity. Apart from being a RELA member, and thus an employee of the Government of Malaysia, he was also there to specifically assist JAWI carry out its operation. 1D was incharge of a group of fifteen JAWI and five RELA officers.
- Therefore, 1D was not there on his own volition but on instruction.
- He not only was under the direct supervision and direction of RELA, with his duties of ensuring the security of those who participated in the exercise, and to keeping an eye over those arrested.
- As he took the unauthorized photographs, whilst in the course of the work or employment for which he was instructed to carry out, at a time when the operation was in progress, his act of snapping the photographs was so closely connected to his duties.
- 2D, 3D and 4D is vicariously liable. Thus, liable jointly and severally with 1D.
- The evidence of snapping the photographs being so closely connected to his duties not only was overwhelming.
Source: Maslinda bt Ishak v Mohd Tahir bin Osman & Ors  MLJU 778
*加入 我们的“法律与你同行”FB 群组: http://bit.ly/fblawnjustice
*Like 我们的“法律与你同行” FB Page: http://bit.ly/lawnjusticefbpage
*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan. Klang Lawyer. 巴生(吧生)律师楼。
*Wilson Kuek是“法律与你同行 Law & Justice”面子书群组的创办人。“法律与你同行”是马来西亚最大的法律平台。我们为无数的平民百姓免费解除了各类的法律困扰。