Lawyer Shailender Bhar said these defendants need to be identified as the next of kin of governance specialist S Puspanathan had filed action for negligence and misfeasance in public office.
“Some of these people were on duty at the Kuala Lumpur air traffic control centre,” he told FMT.
The lawyer said this in response to the Court of Appeal ruling yesterday to strike out the government’s discovery appeal on grounds it was academic as the names were already provided to the plaintiffs.
Last year, Puspanathan’s widow K Sri Devi, her two minor sons and her in-laws G Subramaniam and A Amiratha, filed a suit against Malaysia Airlines (MAS) and eight others.
The family claimed that the defendants had negligently caused his death when the aircraft, its 227 passengers and 12 crew members disappeared during a Beijing-bound flight from Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) on March 8, 2014.
Named as defendants were Malaysian Airline System Bhd, Malaysia Airlines Bhd, the Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) and its director-general Azharuddin Abdul Rahman, the Immigration Department and its then director-general Aloyah Mamat, the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) and its then-chief General Rodzali Daud and the government.
However, in July (2016), the High Court allowed the government’s application to strike out the suit by removing the DCA and Immigration Department as both were government agencies.
Rodzali and RMAF were also deleted as there is no reasonable cause of action against them.
Both parties have now appealed to the Court of Appeal against the High Court decision.
In the statement of claim, Sri Devi claimed that MAS and others had jointly caused the death of Puspanathan.
The family claimed that the national air carrier had breached their duty of care in ensuring Puspanathan reached Beijing safely.
They claimed that the DCA neglected in their duty in failing to provide a safe, efficient and orderly provision of air traffic control service.
The plaintiffs claimed that the Immigration Department compromised the safety of the people on board by recklessly allowing two people with stolen passports to be on board the plane.
They claimed that the RMAF had failed to take adequate steps when the military radar detected an unidentified aircraft turning back and flying over Malaysian air space in the early hours of March 8, 2014.
The plaintiffs said the defendants had only chosen to carry out the search and rescue efforts long after MH370 had crashed into the Southern Indian Ocean.
The plaintiffs are seeking aggravated and exemplary damages as well as for loss of support, bereavement and traumatic psychiatric injury, among others.
The government on Jan 29, 2015 declared that the disappearance of MH370 was an accident with all passengers and crew on board presumed to have lost their lives.
Last month transport ministers for Malaysia, Australia and China decided to suspend the search for the the missing plane in the Indian Ocean.
Appearing with Shailender were Angela Bong Yoke May and Nathasha Bhar while the government was represented by Andi Razalijaya A Dadi and Shaiful Nizam Shahrin.