Absent Teacher Case Federal Counsel Questions Former Student S Grades

---

A federal counsel today questioned in court whether a former student suing her teacher for allegedly missing classes was actually serious about her studies.
Senior federal counsel Mohd Hafizi Abdul Halim expressed this when questioning why Siti Nafirah Siman, 23 took two months before before complaining to the school principal about the absence of English teacher Mohd Jainal Jamrin.
Hafizi: I would like to state that you were not interested in studying, hence were late to report (this matter).
Siti Nafirah: Disagree
Hafizi: So why did it take two months to report to the principal about Mr JJ (Jainal)?
Siti Nafirah: Because I have complained (about the matter) to other teachers in hopes that there would be a solution. Because we were waiting, without any decision, only in that period did we dare to meet the principal.
The federal counsel then pressed Siti Nafirah (above) about her less-than-stellar examination results.
The plaintiff told the High Court in Kota Kinabalu that she had gotten a C for Malay language studies and the written examination, a D in History, D in Commerce, D in Malay literature, C+ for Islamic studies, C+ for Science, and a B for Visual Arts.
As for English, Siti Nafirah was awarded a C in her written examination and a D in the oral exam.
Siti Nafirah also failed in her Malay oral examination and Mathematics.
Hafizi then questioned whether the results obtained for the other subjects were due to other teachers failing to carry out their duties or because they rarely came to class to teach.
Siti Nafirah denied the matter and stated that she had gotten a D in other subjects because the topics she had studied for did not come out in the SPM examination.
The lawyer then questioned whether the former student also sued other teachers for the subjects she had failed in.
He also asked Siti Nafirah if her lawsuit against her former English teacher was funded by an individual named Ibrahim Jaidol and the Fullbright English Teaching Assistant programme, which was named in the witness statement. 
“No, he is just a middleperson and this claim is not funded by anyone,” explained Siti Nafirah.
However, the plaintiff admitted that the appointment with the psychiatrist was fully funded by Ibrahim.
Earlier, psychologist Dr Noor Aishah Rosli told the court that she had conducted two tests on Siti Nafirah in 2019 to determine the plaintiff’s cognitive and emotional levels.
Noor Aishah concluded from the test results that the plaintiff had a “low average” IQ of 87, but this is not far off from the lower end of the “average” range that starts at 90.
She added that the plaintiff was in “good condition” but suffered from emotional distress and some trauma due to falling behind in her studies.
Siti Nafirah is represented by lawyer Shireen Sikayun, while senior federal counsel Hafizi appeared for the defendants with assistance from federal counsel Fazriel Fardiansyah Abdul Kadir.
The trial before high court judge Ismail Brahim will continue on Aug 16. - Mkini

---