[2014] Of between justice, welfare of children and Indonesia

I blew up this morning when I read a legal counsel of a person who grievously harmed another person requested for the judge to show leniency. The lawyer reasoned that the perpetrator is a single mother, implying that the welfare of her two children is at risk if the system punishes her too harshly. The audacity shown by the lawyer is deplorable.

KUALA LUMPUR: A former real estate agent has claimed trial in the Sessions Court to hurting her Indonesian maid Siti Hajar Sadli with hot water, a hammer and scissors.

[…]

Counsel M. Manoharan, however, asked the court to consider his client’s status as a single mother and that she has two young children, including an autistic son, to take care of. [Real estate agent claims trial to charges of abuse and failing to get work permit. M. Mageswari. The Star. June 19 2009]

I want to make it clear that I would like the law to apply the greatest of weight against the single mother for the physical harm she inflicted on her maid, a fellow human being. This however does not mean the welfare of her children should not be factored in any judgment.

It is utterly unfair to punish innocent children indirectly for a crime committed by others. Yet, this is a regrettable negative externality the children and our society have to suffer.

The role of the society here is not to eliminate that negative externality — assuming the single mother is a good mother; an assumption I take only with heavy heart — but to try to limit it. Elimination of that negative externality means letting the criminal that she is off the hook. That will offer bad example to others who are  or plan to show no respect for another human being’s safety. Strong, forceful signal has to be sent by the system so that others will think twice about hurting another human being, specifically against foreign maids within our context.

By limiting, I mean to suggest that the State has to find a way to ensure the welfare of the children are taken care of. One way, which I most prefer, is to a find relative of the mother who is willing to take the children in and take for them. If that fails, the State may find family or individuals with good record and financial standing who wants to explore the option of adoption. If all else fails, the State simply, unfortunately, have to take care of the children. This perhaps stresses on the importance of a care system for children but that is a huge issue that deserves an essay of its own that I will not discuss further here.

Finally, I want to digress but yet make an important point. Any decision of the court gives signal not only to Malaysian society and particularly to employers who treat their maids subhumanly. It will also give signal to Indonesia. Malaysia already has a bad reputation in Indonesia for, among others, this kind of crime committed on their citizenship who come to Malaysia in search of better life. Already, nationalistic Indonesians are clamoring for proverbial Malaysians blood. Any leniency will unnecessarily fuel that nationalistic sentiment. But of course, the court should not consider populism as a factor in deciding a case.

And that is okay. Justice simply will have to be served and the mother punished.