Good Samaritan Law: Satu Tinjauan Keperluan Kewujudannya di Malaysia

Good Samaritan Law: A Look at the Necessity of its Implementation in Malaysia

  • Md Salleh Anis Shuhaiza UUM
  • Yusof Yuhanif

Abstract

Umumnya, tiada sebarang liabiliti atau implikasi perundangan dikenakan sekiranya seseorang enggan membantu individu lain yang berada dalam kesusahan. Namun begitu, atas dasar kemanusiaan dan nilai murni sesama insan beberapa negara telah mewujudkan good samaritan law dalam membantu menghalang seseorang daripada enggan tampil menghulurkan bantuan kepada orang yang cedera atau sakit kerana bimbang dikenakan implikasi perundangan sekiranya berlaku kecederaan yang tidak disengajakan atau kematian yang salah. Walaupun terdapat beberapa kesulitan terutamanya kepada mahkamah untuk menentukan pelaksanaan konsep niat baik, tahap kecemasan atau keperluan bertindak dan tahap munasabah sesuatu tindakan atau keputusan, kewujudan undang-undang seumpama itu memberikan galakan kepada budaya good samaritan (orang yang baik hati). Dalam melaksanakannya, penelitian dan budi bicara mahkamah amat dituntut supaya pihak yang dibantu tidak mendapat “kesakitan, kerosakan atau kecederaan berganda” apabila good samaritan dilindungi daripada sebarang liabiliti perundangan. Oleh itu, tujuan artikel ini adalah untuk mengkaji keperluan kepada kewujudan good samaritan law di Malaysia dengan melihat pengalaman Amerika Syarikat dan Australia. Artikel berbentuk konseptual ini ialah kajian kualitatif yang menggunakan metod kajian perpustakaan.


Kata kunci: Good Samaritan, liabiliti sivil, kecemasan, good faith, implikasi perundangan


Abstract


Generally, there is no liability or legal implication that is applied if one does not help another individual in trouble. However, on humanitarian grounds, several countries have implemented a ‘good Samaritan law’ which is meant to prevent people from refusing to come forward to help an individual who has been hurt or injured for fear of legal action due to unintentional injury or wrongful death. Although there exist numerous difficulties, especially in courts in determining the application of the concepts of good intention, the level of emergency and reasonable action or decision, the implementation of such a law encourages the ‘good Samaritan’ culture.  In implementing this, the court’s detailed study and discretion is very much required so that the party that receives the help does not suffer increased “pain, damage or injury” when the “good Samaritan” is protected from legal liability. Therefore, the aim of this article is to study the necessity of the implementation of a “good Samaritan law” in Malaysia by looking at the experiences of the United States and Australia. This article is based on a qualitative study employing the library research methodology.


Keywords: Good Samaritan, civil liability, emergency, good faith, legal implications


 


RUJUKAN


Alabama Code Title 6. Civil Practice § 6-5-332, 2006.


‘Abdul Rahman, M. (1989). Hadith 40 (Terjemahan dan Syarahannya). Shah Alam: Dewan Pustaka Fajar.


Besser, A., & Kaplan, K. (1993). The Good Samaritan: Jewish and American Legal Perspectives. Journal of Law and Religion, 10(1), 193-219. Akses pada 13 Disember 2018 dari https://www.jstor.org/stable/1051173.


Bishara v  Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Trust ([2007] ALL ER (D) 415 (Mar)).


Brandt, Eric A. Akron Law Review 17(2): 303-333, Fall 1983. Akses pada 10 November 2018 dari https://www.uakron.edu/dotAsset/0b9e2436-8364-488b-98d7-0f3db9e11a0e.pdf.


California Health & Safety Code § 1799.102 (2017), 


Capital and Counties Plc v Hampshire County Council and others ([1997] 2 ALL ER 865).


Civil Laws (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT).


Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW).


Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA),


Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld).


Civil Liability Act 2002(Tas).


Civil Liability Act 2002 (WA).


Civil Liability Regulations 2014.


Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 5-309.


Dagan, Hanoch. (1999). In Defense of the Good Samaritan. Michigan Law Review, 97. Akses pada 20 Disember 2018 daripada https://www.jstor.org/stable/1290282.


Drabek TE. (2000). Pattern differences in disaster-induced employee wvacuations. Internatioanl Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 18(2), 289-315.


Eburn, M. (2010). Volunteers and Good Samaritans.  Akses pada 13 Disember 2018 daripada https://law.anu.edu.au/sites/all/files/users/u4810180/civil_liability_2010.doc


Good Samaritan Law Alaska Statute 09.65.090(a).


Gordon v Athens Convalescent Center, Inc., 146 Ga. App. 134, 245 S. E. 2d 484 (1978).


Guideline 10.5 Legal and Ethical Issues elated to Resuscitation. (2012). Akses 14 Januari 2018 daripada Australian and New Zealand Resusciatations Councils Guideline july-2012.pdf. 


Indiana Good Samaritan Law IC 16-31-6 Chapter 6. Immunity From Liability.


Jackson, E. (2010). Medical law: Text, cases and materials. 2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press.


Laman Sesawang Malaysian Medical Council diakses daripada http://www.mmc.gov.my/


Law Reform Act 1995


Linden, A. M. (1971). Rescuers and Good Samaritans. The Modern Law Review, 34, 241-259. Akses pada 13 Disember 2018 daripada https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1971.tb02325.x.


Mason, J.K. & Laurie, G.T. (2006). Medical ethics. 7nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.


Maryland Law 5-309.


Matt, S.B. (2018). Good Samaritan Laws: Will I be protected if I help? The Nurse Practitioner, 43(1), 52-54.


Mid Density Developments Pty Limited v Rockdale Municipal Council [1993] FCA 408.


Medical Board of Australia v Dekker [2013] WASAT 182.


Muhammad Noor Haji Ibrahim, Abdullah Basmeh, 2010. Tafsir Pimpinan ar-Rahman kepada Pengertian al-Qur’an (30 juzuk). Kuala Lumpur: Darul Fikir.


Oberstein, N. (1963). Torts: California Good Samaritan Legislation: Exemptions from civil liability while rendering emergency medical aid. California Law Review, 51(4), 816-822. Akses pada 10 November 2018 daripada https://www.jstor.org/stable/3478944.


Oklahoma Code Title 76. Torts.


Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act (NT).


R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr.App.R. 8.


R v Instan [1893] 1 QB 453.


Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research. London: Sage.


Smith v  Littlewoods Organisation Ltd [1987] A.C. 241.


Temu bual bersama Dr. Rabi’ah binti Abdul Ghani (UD54), Pusat Perubatan Universiti Utara Malaysia, temu bual bersemuka, 4 April 2019.


Turner, S. E., Mohindra, A. & Peterson, M., (2014). Good Samaritan Laws: A comparative study of laws that protect first responders who assist accident victims. Akses pada 2 April 2014 daripada https://www.trust.org/contentAsset/raw-data/7be34cce-ea0d-4c90-8b39-53427acf4c43/file


Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1987] 1 QB 730.


Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic).


Yakin, A. (2007). Legal research and writing. Kelana Jaya: Malaya Law Journal

Published
2019-07-01
How to Cite
ANIS SHUHAIZA, Md Salleh; YUHANIF, Yusof. Good Samaritan Law: Satu Tinjauan Keperluan Kewujudannya di Malaysia. Kanun: Jurnal Undang-undang Malaysia, [S.l.], v. 31, n. 2, p. 203-218, july 2019. ISSN 2682-8057. Available at: <http://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/Kanun/article/view/4902>. Date accessed: 21 sep. 2019.