Pakatan Harapan women’s chief Zuraida Kamaruddin has slammed the Federal Court’s decision yesterday to raise the damages awarded to a temporary teacher whose job offer was revoked because of her pregnancy, saying that the quantum is still not enough.

She said the RM40,000 award is not consummate to the discrimination and humiliation Noorfadilla Ahmad Saikin suffered in 2011, and vowed to press for the Gender Equality Bill to be tabled in Parliament.

“As a Pakatan Harapan MP and also the Wanita Pakatan Harapan chief, I will continue to press for the tabling of the Gender Equality Bill in Parliament to meet the timeframe to change patriarchal norms and gender stereotyping in the country.

“I empathise with Noorfadilla and other women who have been subjected to gender discrimination in the workplace. I urge employers to be more gender-sensitive and inclusive when deciding on policies which affect their women employees.

“On the government level, we will continue to implement women-friendly policies to further empower women,” said the Ampang MP.

She said dismissing a woman for being pregnant amounts to gender discrimination and should not be allowed, and promised that there will be “real changes” once a new cabinet has been formed.

Noorfadila had filed her suit against Hulu Langat district education officers Chayed Basirun and Ismail Musa, Selangor Education Department director Zahri Aziz, the Education Ministry director-general, education minister and the government in 2010.

She claimed that she was offered a position as an untrained relief teacher on a month-to-month basis starting in mid-January 2009, but the offer was withdrawn when she informed the Hulu Langat district education officer that she was then three months’ pregnant with her second child.

At the Federal Court yesterday, the court refused to answer three constitutional questions raised pertaining the case, namely:

  • In assessing general damages for breach of a constitutional right under Article 8(2) of the Federal Constitution for gender discrimination, do damages need to be specifically proven?
  • Whether, in assessing the general damages for breach of the constitutional right under Article 8(2), should the quantum of damages to be awarded reflect the sense of public outrage? 
  • Whether, in assessing the general damages for breach of the constitutional right for gender discrimination, should the quantum of damages to be awarded ought to have a deterrent factor against those breaches?

Instead, the five-member bench headed by Chief Judge of Malaya Ahmad Ma’arop allowed the government’s appeal to strike out the RM10,000 previously awarded to Noorfadila for her pain and suffering.

At the same time, the court raised the award for damages for breach of constitutional protection from RM30,000 to RM40,000.