Disability group questions anonymity of policeman charged with assaulting deaf driver, wants case revisited

A prominent support group for the deaf community has expressed disappointment over the outcome of the case involving a police officer who assaulted deaf e-hailing driver Ong Ing Keong, and called on authorities to revisit the case as the transparency required by a court is in question.

The Deaf Advocacy and Well-being National Organisation, or DAWN, one of many groups that had been part of a campaign to pressure authorities to charge the attacker, said Ong was never directly notified on the identity of Taufik Ismail, a 32-year-old police officer named as the accused in the charge sheet.

It said the anonymity afforded to the man, who was shielded from the press by several officers throughout his presence at the Kuala Lumpur court complex yesterday, raised serious questions about the integrity of the trial.

"Why was the assailant’s identity protected? Why was the case resolved with such haste? This absence of transparency fuels concerns that some individuals or groups may be shielded from accountability due to their positions," the group said.

"Is Taufik Ismail indeed the individual shown in the CCTV footage from the incident at Hotel St Regis?"

DAWN said without confirmation from Ong or his lawyers, it could not be verified that the right individual had been charged.

"If the authorities are confident in this identification, why was Ong not notified directly?"

"Justice must be seen to be done, and we call for more robust accountability, genuine protection, and fair treatment of all citizens, especially those within vulnerable communities," it added.

Yesterday, Taufik, a police officer who is part of Johor regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim's (TMJ) royal entourage, escaped jail after pleading guilty to assaulting Ong on May 28, in a case that has sparked public debate over the rule of law in the country.

Instead, the Kuala Lumpur Magistrate's Court sentenced him to a fine of RM1,000, a decision criticised by Ong's lawyer Zaid Malek, who compared it to the imprisonment of Abdul Rahim Noor in 2000, after the former inspector-general of police pleaded guilty to assaulting Anwar Ibrahim in 1998.

Zaid had quoted the Court of Appeal's reasoning for imprisoning Rahim despite his guilty plea, in which it stated that it wanted to send a message to the public that the law does not condone police officers assaulting members of the public and that "there should be nothing short of a custodial sentence, even for a first offender, would suffice".

DAWN said the "extraordinarily light punishment" sends the message that violence is tolerated even by those charged with protecting the public.

"For five months, Ong and the deaf community waited, hoping the system would deliver a fair and balanced judgment. However, the outcome has left many feeling overlooked, disrespected, and unsupported by those meant to uphold justice.

It said Ong had suffered psychological distress during the five months that the authorities did not charge the attacker despite video evidence.

"The court’s decision fails to consider the long-term impact on him and the resilience shown by the deaf, the disabled, and broader communities that have stood by Ong.

"This leniency implies that harm done to the public by those in authority may be easily dismissed, setting a dangerous precedent enabling further abuses without meaningful consequence."

Taufik was accused of assaulting Ong at the lobby of the St Regis Hotel in Kuala Lumpur on May 28, an incident that was recorded by Ong's dashcam.

The video showed Ong waiting for passengers when a man shouted at him to move his car to make way for TMJ's entourage.

Ong then rolled down his car window to speak to the man before he suddenly attacked him with a hard punch on the face.

He was later treated at Kuala Lumpur Hospital for a soft tissue injury.

Public outrage increased when it was revealed that a "palace representative" had asked Ong to withdraw his complaint lodged with the Brickfields police station.

Ong rejected a claim by city police chief, Rusdi Mohd Isa, that he had withdrawn his police report as it was a "misunderstanding".

Instead, Ong disclosed that an officer had given him the choice of either accepting a sum of money from the palace representative or having his phone confiscated if the case went to court.

The delay in taking action was also criticised by the government's Human Rights Commission (Suhakam), which questioned Attorney-General Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh over his silence.