Believing that she didnt do anything wrong she began her crusade fighting what most of us thought would be a fight she would eventually lose. The david against goliath scenario was not however exactly the case as this David had a good powerful sidekick in the name of NHRC. Thankfully in this country, a National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) which is empowered by law to investigate any alleged human rights abuses has long been established. She filed her complaint with the Commission, and then it took up her case to court on her behalf which after 2 weeks of hearing ruled in the student's favour by saying that the board should have first investigated whose fault it was on the missing photograph. The decision to disqualify her was upheld by the court to be unreasonable.
In a country governed by a rule of law, every entity or person is subjected to the same law. He or it will be made legally accountable for his or its exercise of powers. No single exercise of power by man or any entity is above the law. Accountability and transparent decision making process is normally required by law. Exercise of discretion is never absolute and arbitrary powers are often checked by the same sets of laws that govern these powers. Any person aggrieved by a decision of another person will have recourse to the law if only you are willing to spend the time and energy to fight for your right. In this case this 18 year old's dream of becoming a doctor could not simply be wiped off on a silliest of decisions. It was just too bad for the other 41 disqualified students who failed to submit the 5 required photographs that didnt have the courage and wherewithal like this 18 year old. They would probably have won the same.
But here is another story. Not too long ago. an iban man got bitten by a crocodile and survived to tell the tale. He got hospitalised for the bite and thankfully was not that serious. He happily related his story to the newspaper. However strangely a few days later the man died not because of the bite but because he was allergic to the penicilin that was prescribed on him by the hospital. Unfortunately for him and his family this was just another tragic story that made to the newspaper headline for the next day. Tne day after, his story was all but forgotten. No action could be made against the hospital because the hospital could not be sued as it was a Government hospital and the Government could not be sued.
In my final year doing law, I took up medical law as one of my options. We studied real cases which we used as caselaw. Surprisingly even at the best equipped with the highest standards of practice known of the UK hospitals, there were still cases of gross negligence committed by surgeons and doctors. There were instances of cotton swabs or operating utensils such as a pair of scissors being left inside the bodies of patients after surgeries. The difference of course the hospitals in UK would have to pay compensations or even punitive financial damages once they were found to be negligent by the courts. They were simply subjected to the rule of law like everyone else. Because of this possibility of getting sued and pay hefty compensations, UK hospitals have to continue to maintain the strong best possible standards of practice and service. In essence the rule of law does improve effeciencies and the standards of services because of the prospect of potential huge legal liabilities should they not.
In a country with a strong rule of law, the option for the public to have legal recourse is always available and is an indespensible tool to check abuse of public power. silence is never an option when things are ill done...
Sent from my iPad
