A mother is considering civil action against a daycare centre in Iskandar Puteri, Johor, after her two-year-old was found with bruises on her back in January.
Nur Syaza Syamimi, 28, said she has been waiting for the outcome of the police investigation into the incident on Jan 17, but was recently informed that the case had been classified as requiring no further action (NFA).
She is now seeking legal advice and plans to take civil action.
“I don’t want my child or other children to be in danger again. If criminal law fails to help, I will seek justice through other channels,” she told FMT.
Syaza claimed the centre failed to hand over CCTV recordings from its premises with the excuse that the CCTVs had been damaged following a thunderstorm.
“Strangely enough, recordings from before the day of the incident are still available. Only recordings from the day of the incident are unavailable,” she said.
She previously took to Facebook to express dismay over the police’s decision to classify the case as NFA, sharing pictures of the bruise marks on her daughter’s back.
She said she noticed the bruises when bathing her daughter, and sought treatment at two healthcare facilities, including Hospital Sultanah Aminah in Johor Bahru.
The hospital confirmed the injuries were not caused by allergies or skin disease but were consistent with being hit or falling on an object.
“I lodged a police report, informed the social welfare department (JKM), and submitted a full medical report. But, in the end, I was told the case was closed due to insufficient evidence and lack of witnesses,” she said.
Syaza and her husband, Mohamad Syazwin, 29, were dissatisfied with how the case was handled, especially in how they had to pester the police for updates.
“I had to WhatsApp the investigating officer almost every day just to get the letter on my daughter’s case decision,” she said, adding that she only learned the case had been classified as NFA after asking the officer for updates.
In a statement, Iskandar Puteri police chief M Kumarasan confirmed that the case was investigated under Section 31(1)(a) of the Child Act 2001 for child abuse, ill-treatment, abandonment or neglect.
He said the investigation paper was opened after a police report was filed on Jan 19, and was referred to the deputy public prosecutor, resulting in the NFA because of insufficient evidence.
