THE Malaysian Bar wants the Health Ministry to provide answers as to why Dr Mohd Khairuddin Aman Razali was not served the mandatory quarantine order and how he could have moved about freely on his return from Turkey. 

Its president Salim Bashir said the public is entitled to know the reasons for the plantation industries and commodities minister’s exemption from a quarantine. 

“In times of great uncertainty as a result of the pandemic, leaders of a country should set a good example to its citizens. 

“This is especially true if a minister is aware that a disease such as Covid-19 is life-threatening and highly transmissible, and has a moral obligation to self-quarantine,” he said in a statement today. 

Yesterday, Attorney-General Idrus Harun said there was insufficient evidence to put forth any charges against Khairuddin.

The AG’s Chambers found there was no home surveillance or observation order issued to the minister for him to observe the quarantine, as stipulated under the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988.

Earlier, politicians from DAP and Umno also questioned the AGC for not prosecuting Khairuddin.

They said it looked like the government was not firm about acting against those who flout the law, adding that the attorney-general owed the public an explanation on the decision.

Salim questioned why Khairuddin was not given the mandatory Form 14B (Quarantine Order) as stipulated under section 15(1) of the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988.  

“Under section 15(1) of the Act, it is provided that ‘an authorised officer may order any contact to undergo observation in such place and for such period as he may think fit, or to undergo surveillance until he may be discharged without danger to the public’.” 

“In light of the severity of the pandemic both at home and abroad, an individual does not only become a person under surveillance upon receiving a copy of Form 14B, but even when someone enters Malaysia from abroad.” 

Salim said that if Khairuddin is in fact exempted from a quarantine order, the authorities must be able to demonstrate what this exemption is, the absence of which would create a dangerous precedent that is arbitrary in nature.  

“This is particularly pertinent since the public are required to adhere strictly to standard operating procedure as well as quarantine orders during the pandemic.” 

He said that Section 269 of the Penal Code stipulates that “whoever unlawfully or negligently does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life”, commits an offence. 

“Perhaps the attorney-general could exercise his constitutional prerogative to reconsider his earlier decision based on the above-mentioned offence provided under the Penal Code.” – October 22, 2020.