Advertisement

Child Custody Fight: Law Gone Blind in Malaysia

3597 Views  ⚫  Asked 8 Years Ago
asked on Sep 14, 2010 at 21:04
by   Need Change ASAP
edited on Jun 2, 2016 at 14:00
 
Friday August 13, 2010

I don't want mummy, says girl in custody fight

By M. MAGESWARI

PUTRAJAYA: It was a heart-wrenching scene at the Court of Appeal here when three appellate judges tried to persuade an 11-year-old girl to give her mother a second chance.

Low Bi-Anne had initially refused to meet her mother Tan Siew Siew, 37, when the custody battle case was called up. The mother has been given custody of the child.
However, Bi-Anne, who was in tears, sat close to her father, real-estate negotiator Low Swee Siong, 40.

Upon hearing submissions by the parties, Court of Appeal judge Justice Sulong Matjeraie, who chaired a three-man panel, asked the girl to give her mother a chance to show her love.

"Your mother came all the way from England to see you," he said.

Justice Mohamed Apandi Ali told her: "Your mother took care of you for nine months. Give it a try."

Upon hearing this, Bi-Anne said: "She took care of me for nine months but my father took care of me for 10 years."

Justice Jefrey Tan Kok Wha told the girl: "I am sure (both your parents) love you equally."

The girl then wept and said: "I don't love her."

Lawyer T. Susamma, who acted for the girl's mother, said her client was heartbroken at not having access to her daughter. Susamma applied to the Bench for the girl's father, Low, to surrender her birth certificate and all school records.

Counsel Chan Kah Ling, who represented Low, requested that the court give them 14 days or a month to comply with the order.

Justice Sulong ordered that the birth certificate be given to Tan within seven days.
The couple married on Aug 2, 1999. When they divorced on June 19, 2006, the custody of the girl was given to the father.

After two years, the mother applied for custody.

On Aug 6, 2008, High Court judge Justice Hinshawati Sharif ordered that custody of the girl be given to the mother and the father be given reasonable access. However, the order could not be executed because Bi-Anne did not want to go to her mother.
On July 27, the father appealed to the Court of Appeal against the lower court ruling but later withdrew it. Yesterday was the execution of the High Court order for the custody of the child to the mother.
Published: Monday September 13, 2010 MYT 4:21:00 PM

Court cites dad for contempt for not handing daughter to wife

By M. MAGESWARI

KUALA LUMPUR: A real-estate negotiator has been cited for contempt of court and sent to Sungai Buloh jail for his failure to hand over his 11-year-old daughter to his former wife in a custody battle for the girl.

Family Court Judicial Commissioner Justice Yeoh Wee Siam also fined Low Swee Siong RM20,000 in default two months' jail.

Justice Yeoh said Low would be fined another RM400 for each day he did not surrender his daughter or her passport.

His former wife, London-based restaurant manager Tan Siew Siew, 37, had won the custody of Low Bi-Anne in a High Court ruling in 2008.

In her judgment on Monday, Justice Yeoh said she was not satisfied with the explanation given by Low, 40.

He knows that he should comply with the court order. I had given him the last opportunity to hand over his daughter to his ex-wife.

In her ruling, Justice Yeoh said Low could have exercised his parental supervision by encouraging his daughter to come to court. "It is his duty to comply with the court order," she said.

Justice Yeoh said Low had ignored court orders thrice and that this was contempt of court.

Upon hearing this, Low who stood near the witness box, gripped both hands on his back and looked down.

The judge also dismissed a stay application by Low's lead counsel Ravi Nekoo over the court ruling.

Questioned by Tan's lead counsel Kiran Kaur Dhaliwal Low said he was only trying respect his daughter's wishes.

"I tried my best to persuade her to attend the court."

He said Bi-Anne was now staying at his home in USJ 19, Subang Jaya with his eldest sister and that he did not have enough time to collect her passport that was kept at his mother's house.

Low also said he asked Bi-Anne to come to court but she was frightened, cried and refused to attend the court proceedings on Monday.

When questioned by Ravi, he said Bi-Anne was under Tan's care between Aug 12 and Sept 4 after the girl was handed over to his ex-wife during the Court of Appeal proceedings.
He said Bi-Anne told him that she had attempted to run away from Tan twice because her mother had disallowed her from keeping in touch with him.

She tried to climb out from the window on one occasion. Asked if he could force Bi-Anne to come to court, he said 'no'.

He said he saw Bi-Anne and Tan at a shop on Sept 4 and that the girl later followed him after she cried and held him tightly.

At the court proceedings earlier Monday, Justice Yeoh revealed that Tan had also succeeded in her bid on Thursday to get an order from the Family Court to take Bi-Anne to the United Kingdom.

At the Court of Appeal on Aug 12, three appellate judges had to persuade Bi-Anne to give her mother a second chance.

The couple married in 1999 and divorced in 2006.

The custody of the girl was given to the father but two years later, Tan applied for custody.

On Aug 6, 2008, High Court judge Justice Hinshawati Sharif ordered that custody of the girl be given to the mother and the father be given reasonable access.

However, the order could not be executed because Bi-Anne did not want to go to her mother.

On July 27, the father appealed to the Court of Appeal against the lower court ruling but later withdrew it.
Tuesday September 14, 2010

Dad to pay for ignoring order

By M. MAGESWARI

KUALA LUMPUR: A real-estate negotiator has been cited for contempt of court for failing to hand over his 11-year-old daughter to his former wife in a custody battle for the girl.

Family Court Judicial Commissioner Justice Yeoh Wee Siam fined Low Swee Siong RM20,000 in default of two months' jail.

Justice Yeoh said Low would be fined another RM400 for each day he did not surrender his daughter or her passport.

His former wife, London-based restaurant manager Tan Siew Siew, 37, had won custody of Low Bi-Anne in a High Court ruling in 2008.

In her judgment yesterday, Justice Yeoh said she was not satisfied with the explanation given by Low, 40.

He knows that he should comply with the court order. I have given him the last opportunity to hand over his daughter to his ex-wife.

In her ruling, Justice Yeoh said Low could have exercised his parental supervision by encouraging his daughter to come to court.

"It is his duty to comply with the court order," she said.

Justice Yeoh said Low had ignored court orders thrice and that this was contempt of court.

The judge also dismissed a stay application by Low's lead counsel Ravi Nekoo over the court ruling.

Upon questioning by Tan's lead counsel Kiran Kaur Dhaliwal yesterday, Low said he was only trying respect his daughter's wishes.

"I have tried my best to persuade her to come to court."

Low said he informed Bi-Anne to come to court but she was frightened, cried and refused to attend the court proceedings yesterday.

Questioned by Ravi, he said Bi-Anne was under Tan's care between Aug 12 and Sept 4 after the girl was handed over to his ex-wife during the Court of Appeal proceedings.
He said Bi-Anne told him that she had attempted to run away from Tan twice because her mother had disallowed her from keeping in touch with him.

"She tried to climb out from the window on one occasion. She also tried to get out through the door but failed in both attempts because the alarm went off," he said.

Asked if he could force Bi-Anne to come to court, he said 'no'.

He said he saw Bi-Anne and Tan at a shop on Sept 4 and that the girl had followed him, crying and holding on to him.

At the court proceedings yesterday, Justice Yeoh said Tan had also succeeded in her bid to get an order from the Family Court to take Bi-Anne to Britain.

At the Court of Appeal on Aug 12, three appellate judges had to persuade Bi-Anne to give her mother a second chance.

The couple married in 1999 and divorced in 2006. The custody of the girl was given to the father but two years later, Tan applied for custody.

On Aug 6, 2008, High Court judge Justice Hinshawati Sharif ordered that custody of the girl be given to the mother and the father be given reasonable access. However, the order could not be executed because Bi-Anne did not want to go to her mother.
Two months ago, Low appealed to the Court of Appeal against the lower court ruling but later withdrew it.
Published: Tuesday September 14, 2010 MYT 2:20:00 PM

Dad pays fine, released from prison

By M. MAGESWARI

KUALA LUMPUR: Real estate negotiator Low Swee Siong, cited for contempt of court for failing to hand over his daughter to his former wife, has been released from Kajang Prison after a close friend paid the RM20,000 fine imposed by the Family Court. Low was released at 1pm Tuesday.

Family Court Judicial Commissioner Justice Yeoh Wee Siam had on Monday fined Low RM20,000 in default of two months' jail.

Justice Yeoh had said Low would be fined another RM400 for each day he did not surrender his daughter or her passport.

His former wife, London-based restaurant manager Tan Siew Siew, 37, had won custody of Low Bi-Anne in a High Court ruling in 2008.

At the Court of Appeal on Aug 12, three appellate judges had to persuade Bi-Anne to give her mother a second chance.

The couple married in 1999 and divorced in 2006. The custody of the girl was given to the father but two years later, Tan applied for custody.

On Aug 6, 2008, High Court judge Justice Hinshawati Sharif ordered that custody of the girl be given to the mother and the father be given reasonable access. However, the order could not be executed because Bi-Anne did not want to go to her mother.

Two months ago, Low appealed to the Court of Appeal against the lower court ruling but later withdrew it.
0 had this question
Me Too
0 favorites
Favorite
[ share ]
123 Answers
« Previous   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   Next »  Last »

answered on Sep 28, 2010 at 15:29
by   gehpochi
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:23
 
Seems like you guys purposely misunderstand my point. Doesn't matter as long as I have voice out my point of view and I believe it has left some marks on this issue. The more you talk the more you show your personality. Whoever drops by this thread will see who is at the bright side.  

This forum is for people to seek for legal advice and I have to respect the founder. After I had pointed out my points, there's no more one side talking, and I think I have done my job.

I respect 'better wife' or 'better life' who has intention to help.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 28, 2010 at 23:04
by   nikk
edited Jun 4, 2016 at 04:51
 
Why is the custody given to the father earlier? There should be a reason. The father insists accusing the wife and cause she loose her custody and she was poor and fortunately manage to get a job in England which save up to come back one day to get back what she deserve? Please go and check out the truth before mention anything by one sided story. Newspaper didn't mention why at first custody goes to father and paper didn't mention she left the baby. Otherwise she won't come back to pay SO MUCH MONEY to get custody. Anyone can get the prove that she admit dumping baby and appologize... I'll shut up.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 28, 2010 at 23:25
by   TransParent
edited Jun 4, 2016 at 05:02
 
The issue has come to this stage because it was allowed to go this far without proper address on the issue proper.

Credibility of the 1st High Court Judge is very much questionable. However, in judgement she mentioned that she cannot force the child to go to her mum if she doesn't want to. But somehow someone with vested interest obviously got this ORDER CHANGED without objection from father's lawyer. How was that done?

Credibility of such lawyers representing the mother is very much questionable. Money which is used to be expended for a trophy.

Winners: Lawyers from both sides
Losers: Both parents
Suffering/Trauma: Poor child

A complete sheer waste of public funds and time... This is what happens in this profession... Glad I became a Nurse.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 29, 2010 at 15:39
by   Mrs Grace
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:26
 
The Star Online, Sunday September 19, 2010

Let Bi-Anne be with parent she loves

I REFER to the letter 'Law is wrong to force girl to leave dad' (The Star, Sept 16th).

The plight of 11-year-old Bi-Anne is indeed heart wrenching. I truly sympathise with her father.

It is very obvious that she loves her father very much and holds him dearly in her heart. He must indeed be a great dad for her to shed tears and not be enticed by the thought of going abroad and possibly having a great life with her mother.

This speaks volumes for the feelings of the child. I fear for her emotional well-being as this is certainly a traumatic experience for her.

The adults in this controversy should be more sensitive and consider the emotional and psychological effects this issue is having or will have on Bi-Anne.

She just wants to be with the parent whom she believes protected her, loved her at first, cared for her and will never let her down.

It is unfair to change the situation for her and hope that she will 'get over it' in time. Love cannot be bought nor can it be created. It simply has to be worked at.

As a mother of an 11-year-old myself, I make a plea to all the adults in the family and the court that all of you will give some thought to Bi-Anne and her emotions because this is an important part of her growing up.

MRS GRACE,

Klang
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 29, 2010 at 15:50
by   JD_Dilly
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:30
 
The Star Online, Tuesday September 21, 2010

For justice to work, any verdict can be appealed

I REFER to the letter 'Laws based on reason more suitable' (The Star, Sept 19), in which the writer says that to question a judge's decision is to undermine the justice system.

I have to disagree with that statement because if we accept this logic, it would mean that the system of appeal that we practise must be abolished.

What is an 'appeal' against a sentence? Isn't it questioning of a judge's verdict?

Why does the law allow an 'appeal'?

Because the law knows that a judge is human and can err, the law knows that there can be a miscarriage of justice and therefore allows redress.

Unfortunately, it costs a lot of money to pursue an appeal in higher courts, and when someone cannot afford to do so, he or she has to live with the injustice.

Now about the Bi-Anne case. The end result is a child gets 'deported' from this country and she has committed no crime.

Normally deportation is only meant for aliens unwanted in the country.

In this case, a child (Malaysian citizen by birth) is being forced to leave her country of birth, leaving behind her loved ones.

Why? To be with a woman who left the same child years ago when she decided to live abroad and who now feels that the child will be better off with her in a foreign land.

And the court agrees.

If the woman is truly a loving mother, then she should at the very least, agree to move back to Malaysia so that she can be with her child and at the same time would not deprive her child of seeing her loving father and friends.

JUSTICE DENIED,

Klang
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 29, 2010 at 16:59
by   Better Wife
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:34
 
'Feeling Pity' and 'Gehpochi' don't seem to get the point of discussion here. The court has awarded custody to the mother and that is the judgment.

However the child now don't want to follow the mother so what should be done? The father is paying a heavy fine for the child decision to want to stay in Malaysia. You 2 are saying the father purposefully don't want to release the child and then bring in the sister and also God into the picture.

'Spiderman' start throwing mud followed by 'X-Man'. You all should have your brains checked.

Bi-Anne has publicly said she doesn't love the mother and doesn't want to follow the mother. Which part of these newspapers report you guys don't seems to understand?

You have yet to answer my question on how to force a child to go to school if she doesn't want to?

JD & Dilly, Haiz, Mrs Grace & 'lagi gehpohchi' are all asking is there another way to solve this problem of the child?

You cannot force the child because it is better and easier to have a ROBOT. Why are you and the judge DEPORTING the child like some criminal? 

Father cannot work in UK as a car re-possessor. Mother can come back and work as a restaurant manager. Both have families here in Malaysia but none have families in UK.

Mother did abandon the child and that is a fact no matter what was the situation was then. Now father doesn't want to abandon the child but he has to pay for it. The child has grown up with the help of an auntie rather than being abandon in some orphanage.
 
Now Mother want to redeem her mistake and this I said again is good but don't make the child suffer again. The child has suffered for 11 years without the mother and now the mother wants to make the child continue to suffer without the father and auntie?

Where is justice for the child? Are there any JUDGES left that can help this suffering child?
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 29, 2010 at 17:53
by   JointP
edited Jun 4, 2016 at 05:07
 
@Nikk

Both parents divorced via Joint Petition. This means mutual agreement to divorce. No argument but just who takes what and who gets what.

This means the wife signed away the custody rights of the child to the father.

Joint Petition is the lowest cost to get a divorce but both parties must agreed to the terms & conditions.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 29, 2010 at 18:54
by   Haiz
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:36
 
I am agreed with 'better wife'.

The girl has suffered 11 years without a mum, why doesn't the mum compromise and let the girl has her as a mum, daddy and auntie together accompany her in the following years.

We are here not a judge or lawyer to defend your client for this family based on whatever information input by the public but to provide a solution or option to resolve this case in peace and minimise the impact on Bi-Anne.

A lawyer in family court role is more like a counselor to the family and provide a better advise to resolve problem instead of encouraging parent to fight in court and fill up their pocket money. Hence I hereby to advise the lawyer represent the father or mother, please act professional because you also one of the factor allow this situation.

From my point of view, this case shouldn't come to this extend if the lawyer doing a good job and provide good solution.

Don't blame the judge because they only make decision based on the facts provided by the lawyer and they need to followed procedures and rule unless we have jury system in Malaysia.

Don't blame the media, they just doing they job and report what they see and heard.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 29, 2010 at 20:29
by   phua chu kang
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:38
 
In the midst of some good Samaritans trying to clear the air with some enlightenment, parties like 'Feeling Pity' is trying very very hard to shut their logical views.

TRUTH WILL PREVAIL... God bless Bi-Anne!
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 30, 2010 at 04:46
by   Kangaroo
edited Jun 9, 2016 at 07:45
 
Great minds think alike... Sad to say there are a lot of bent ones who cannot think on their feet... We also have a Sad state affairs in our Judiciary as well.. We have a bunch of morons talking fighting for injustice to prevail.. Caring Nation my foot - What a shame we put ourselves into... We are actually in a very pathetic and sad state with such idiocity in this country... It ought to stop immediately and will any Kangaroo stop it... Lets see.
0 found this helpful
Helpful


« Previous   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   Next »  Last »

Your Answer





By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy, cookie policy and terms of service.