Tragedy struck early on January 29, the first day of Chinese New Year, 2025.

After the family reunion meal the night before, the morning should have heralded in a day of celebration, and as is the custom in Malaysia, Ho Sue Lynn would have been with her family to welcome visitors to their open house on CNY.

At 6.20 am at km 7.2 along the road heading towards Donggongon town, Ho was mown down by a drunk driver in a Honda City.

She was only 45 years old, a dedicated marathon runner and single mother.

She never stood a chance. The impact of being hit from behind caused severe head injuries, and she was pronounced dead at the scene, by paramedics.

Ho’s mother described her daughter as someone whose passion was to run, who would train for upcoming marathons by observing a rigorous daily regime of being in bed by 7.00 pm and rising early, at 3.00 am, to run. Her dream was to compete in international marathons.

Friends and family portrayed her as a kind, gentle spirit whose lives touched everyone who met her.

She was also a devoted daughter, who paid daily visits every morning to her father who was warded in the Intensive Care Unit at Queen Elizabeth Hospital. 

At the time of the accident, the driver, a 21-year-old man, was alleged to have been drunk. He was charged under Section 44(1) of the Road Transport Act for drunken driving causing death. The first case mention was on July 11 this year.

Ho’s family subsequently found out that the driver would instead be charged under Section 45A, which is drunken driving without causing harm or death.

Their lawyers wrote to the prosecution before the hearing, pleading for the correct charge to be reinstated. Their voices were ignored. Why?

At the second case mention on August 21, the Ho family was delivered a further blow when the driver pleaded guilty and received just a RM10,000 fine and a 2-year driving suspension.

Is Ho Sue Lynn’s life worth only RM10,000? A son has lost his mother, the parents a loving daughter, and Sabah, has lost an athlete and promising marathon runner.

Justice was not served to Ho and her family. This was not just a legal failure, but it is also a moral dereliction.

A reckless, dangerous and irresponsible road user was not suitably punished.

The driver had been drunk but he had a choice. He could have called a taxi to return home after drinking; but he made the irresponsible decision to drive despite being intoxicated.

His choice led to disastrous consequences because under the influence of drink, he effectively turned his car into a weapon. He took a life.

The driver killed an innocent person, but managed to walk free after paying a fine.

This is an insult not just to Ho and her family, but also to every responsible road user.

The punishment also devalued Ho’s life. More importantly, it sets a dangerous precedent for the rakyat.

Sue Lynn’s life mattered. Her family’s pain matters. The law must matter, or we may live in a lawless society.

Important questions remain unanswered:

Despite eyewitness reports and recommendations by the investigating officer, why was the lighter charge pursued?

Despite being initially charged under Section 44(1), how was it possible for the drunk driver to downgrade the charge? Was this because of an abuse of power or a perversion of justice?

Despite the appeals of the grieving family and their team of lawyers, why were they ignored?

Despite the presence of existing laws, why were they not properly applied? More families will suffer when similar accidents happen to their loved ones.

This case is bigger than just the tragedy suffered by the Ho family. The verdict says a lot about the type of society we live in, when laws are not properly enforced.

It sends mixed messages to the rakyat, whereby it is permissible to drive when drunk, because it is considered a minor offence, with a fine and driving suspension as punishment.

It exhibits two standards of justice, when the law can be inexplicably downgraded.

Why weaken protection for the public and also erode public trust and confidence in the law? Section 44(1) was to hold drunk drivers accountable when their irresponsible actions destroy lives.

Every day, when we say goodbye to our family members when they leave the house to go to school, to work, to shop or take a walk, we do expect them to return safely.

The law is there to protect all road users, to deter crime and to punish wrong doers.

In the end, the law failed to protect Ho, and her life was worth less than a business class ticket to London.

What happened to her, could so easily happen to you or your loved ones.

Sue Lynn’s life mattered. Her family’s pain matters. The law must matter, otherwise, we may as well live in a lawless society.

Justice for Sue Lynn is justice for every victim of drunk driving.

The public should stand firmly behind Sue Lynn’s family to demand accountability and justice, to review the verdict and reopen the case.

No one should think that the life of their loved one can be treated as expendable.

(Mariam Mokhtar is a Freelance Writer.)