Press Statement
by DAP Secretary General and MP for Kota Melaka, Kerk Kim Hock
in Petaling Jaya
on Wednesday, October 09, 2002

Summons cancellation: Call on the Home Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to reveal the truth and solve the issue


In view of the fact that two deputy Home Ministers and the Federal Traffic Chief have given contradictory yet inaccurate explanations on the question of the issue of summons issued under Section 115 of the 1987 Road Transport Act, I wish to call on the Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Abdullah Badawi to intervene to reveal the truth and solve the matter.

Parliamentary Standing Order 14(i) allows a Minister to make the necessary clarifications in the Parliament through a Ministerial Statement. As the contradictory yet inaccurate explanations given by the Home Ministry and the Police have tarnished the dignity of the Parliament and the image of the Home Ministry and the Police, Datuk Abdullah must now intervene to reveal the truth in the Parliament via Standing order 14(i ).

The Prime Minister in waiting should, besides making the necessary clarifications, make the following announcements:

1. that the Police's action in issuing the summons under Section 115 of the 1987 Road Transport Act is unlawful,
2. that the cancellation of almost 30,000 of such summons was automatic (that is, the public were not required to go to the police Station to have their summons cancelled) and permanent (unlike claim made by the deputy Home Minister Datuk Chor Chee Heong that the cancellation was only temporary and new summons would be reissued)
3. that in view of the unlawful action of the Police, the government will make the refund to those motorists who have paid the penalty which costs RM 300 eor summon

The whole issue in fact is a very simple and straight forward matter that could have been easily solved by revealing the summons cancellation was automatic and that refund would be made to the motorists who had paid their penalty of RM 300 for each summon.

The more the Home Ministry and the Police try to provide answers, which are contradictory to each other and worst of all accurate, the more damage is going to be done to their image and credibility.

So far we have had the shameful record of the deputy home minister Datuk Chor Chee Heong telling the Parliament on 12.10.2002 that the cancellation was due to a few factors including the inability of the Police to send out the notices to the offenders and that the cancellation was temporary and new summons would be issued.

The federal traffic chef Datuk Ahmad Bahrin then openly contradicted Chor on 24.9.2002 when he openly claimed that the Police never cancelled such summons.

Two days ago, the other deputy Home Minister Datuk Zainal Abidin Zin confirmed in Parliament that there was cancellation but he also contradicted Chor by saying that the cancellation was made because of appeals made by motorists.

Zainal of course did not answer why the absolute majority of such summons had to be cancelled and why all appeals resulted in total cancellations and not as what has always happened in the usual practice of appeals by the public, that is, reduction in the penalty amount.

Neither had Zainal explained why if there was such good news to inform the public in early July, the Police had been refusing to announce the cancellation or confirmed my disclosure?

I have been pursuing this issue as I believe that the unprecedented cancellation was because the police had erred in issuing such summons. As such, the Police should just admit its mistake and the government should just make the necessary refund to the motorists.

I express regret at the irresponsible attitude of Zainal Abidin Zin who chose to run away from answering the following questions in the Parliament yesterday:

1. why had the deputy Home Minister Datuk Chor Chee Heong claimed in the Parliament on 12.9.2002 that summons had to be cancelled because some notices could not be sent to the offenders when the truth is that such summons had been given to the offenders by hand?
2. why did Chor claim that the cancellation was only temporary? When did the government ever made temporary cancellation of any policy or summon?
3. why did the federal traffic chief Datuk Ahamd Bahrin said on 24.9.2002 that the police never cancelled such summons, thereby openly contradicting Chor ?
4. why did Zainal Abidin Zin said that the Attorney General's office had on 6.5.2002 in a statement confirmed that the Police's action in issuing summons under Section 115 of the 1987 Road Transport Act was lawful when the Attorney General's office never made any specific reference to this matter?
5. why is the government not prepared to refund the motorists who have paid the summons?
6. since Chor has said in Parliament on 19.6.2002 that before 2.8.2000, the police had failed to send the POL 170 A traffic offence notices to the motorist by registered mail as required by Section 118 of the 1987 Road Transport Act, why are not these notices decaled as invalid, null and void?