MUNIAMAH A/P RAMAN v Kerajaan Malaysia

Case Significance

A significant illustration of custodial liability for a death in prison: the court found a breach of statutory and constitutional duty and a non-delegable duty of care, held the Government vicariously liable under the Government Proceedings Act 1956, and drew an adverse inference from missing CCTV footage.

This High Court decision at Ipoh concerns a civil claim arising from the death of a prisoner in custody and the liability of the prison authorities and the Government. The plaintiff, suing as administrator of the deceased's estate and as a dependant, brought the action after the deceased, who had been taken into custody healthy and mobile after pleading guilty to a charge of motor vehicle theft, was found dead when his family came to collect him on his release date. His body bore the marks of untreated infection, with all the toes on his left foot amputated, consistent with untreated necrotising fasciitis. The claim was framed in breach of statutory and constitutional duty, negligence and misfeasance in public office. The court considered whether the prison and medical officers (the first to eleventh defendants) had breached their duties under the Prisons Act 1995, the Prisons Regulations 2000 and the Lock-Up Rules 1953, including the duties of medical examination and timely medical attention, and whether the deceased's constitutional right to life under Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution had been violated. It found the investigating officer's evidence unreliable and drew an adverse inference under section 114(g) of the Evidence Act 1950 from the failure to produce CCTV footage from the prison. The court held that the custodial authorities owed a non-delegable duty of care, that their systemic neglect and omissions materially contributed to the death, and that the Government of Malaysia was vicariously liable for its officers under sections 5 and 6 of the Government Proceedings Act 1956. On damages, the court awarded the estate RM38,400 for loss of dependency, calculated as RM2,400 per year over sixteen years, and went on to consider aggravated damages, mindful of the prohibition on exemplary damages in section 8(2) of the Civil Law Act 1956. The judgment is a significant illustration of custodial liability for deaths in prison and of the non-delegable duty owed by custodial authorities.