A shocking legal battle has unfolded in Kota Kinabalu, with an NGO stepping forward to demand the cancellation of the ongoing inquest into the tragic death of 13-year-old Zara Qairina Mahathir. The NGO, Pertubuhan Kebajikan Ekonomi Semangat Bersatu Malaysia (Pembela Malaysia), has raised serious concerns about the conduct of the inquest, claiming it violates Sabah's own laws.
A Fight for Justice and Fairness
Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Jeffry Rosman, president of Pembela Malaysia, has highlighted what he believes is a critical legal error. He argues that the authorities have mistakenly relied on the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), a federal law, instead of Sabah's Inquest Ordinance 1959, which specifically governs inquests in the state.
Jeffry emphasizes that this ordinance includes vital safeguards, such as the option for a coroner to summon a jury with a racial composition that reflects the deceased's background. He believes this provision was overlooked during the inquest, undermining the rights of Zara's family and the public's trust in the legal process.
A Call for Action
"We cannot stand by and watch as this legal error unfolds," Jeffry said in a passionate video statement. "The inquest has dragged on for 41 days, and Zara has been gone for 127 days. Yet, justice for her seems to be slipping further away."
Pembela Malaysia is now seeking a bold move: they want the High Court to quash the current inquest and ensure that any future inquiry into Zara's death is conducted under the Inquest Ordinance 1959, in line with Sabah's constitutional rights under MA63.
But Here's Where It Gets Controversial...
The use of different legal frameworks has sparked a debate. While some may argue that the CPC provides a more comprehensive framework, others, like Jeffry, believe that local laws should take precedence, especially when they offer specific protections.
And This Is the Part Most People Miss...
The inquest into Zara's death began on September 3rd and was convened due to conflicting accounts of the incident and public demands for an independent investigation. Now, with the NGO's intervention, the legal process takes an unexpected turn.
What do you think? Should local laws always take precedence, or is there a case for a more unified legal approach? We'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments!
