Student's suit against school, govt over bullying thrown out for lack of evidence

PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has dismissed a suit brought by a special needs student against his school and the government over bullying due to a lack of evidence.

However, the appellate court issued a firm reminder to schools that bullying should be stopped.

“Bullying has no place in any civil society and is plainly an anathema to a modern education system,” said the presiding bench, led by Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

The court said, while schools carry a clear legal and moral duty to protect their students, especially those with disabilities, the case brought by the student and his adoptive mother lacked the one thing the court could not overlook — solid evidence.

The court found that although the student did suffer from learning disabilities and required special care, the legal claims were riddled with hearsay, unsupported allegations, and missing key witnesses including the student himself.

His adoptive mother had filed the suit in 2017, alleging that her son had suffered multiple instances of physical and verbal abuse at SM Pendidikan Khas Vokasional Shah Alam.

She claimed the school failed to provide him with a safe environment and had also fallen short in delivering the special education programme guaranteed under the Federal Constitution and the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008.

However, after scrutinising the testimony and documents presented, the Court of Appeal held that the claims were not supported by sufficient evidence.

“It is indisputable that under the law, a school owes a duty of care to ensure a safe and secure learning and living environment for its students.

“But the law does not impose strict liability on a teacher for the wrongful acts of a pupil.

“Liability only arises where there is proof that the teacher failed to exercise reasonable care in controlling the pupil and that failure led to the injury suffered by the plaintiff,” Nazlan said in his grounds of judgment dated July 25.

The court also noted that it must have been reasonably foreseeable by the respondents that inadequate supervision could result in harm to the student — but only if those claims were properly proven.

Other members of the bench were Datuk Azmi Ariffin and Datuk Faizah Jamaludin.

The court pointed out that the appellants’ claims could not succeed as the student accused of bullying — referred to only as “H” — was neither named as a party to the suit nor called to testify.

“It cannot be emphasised enough that, importantly, even the first appellant himself, who claimed to be a bullying victim, did not testify in his own case.

“The first appellant never even made himself available in the stand to enable the court to assess his level of competency,” the court said.

The court acknowledged that disagreements and altercations may have occurred, particularly between the first appellant and “H”, but said judicial decisions must rest on evidence and not sympathy or speculation.

“The evidence in this case was not only insufficient, but far from convincing in establishing, on a balance of probabilities, that the incidents amounted to bullying or that the first appellant was indeed the victim.”

© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd

Source link