How the organisers of a marathon got away without being charged for not getting a permit.

Every year, sports junkies across our country would participate in crazy tough activities like a full marathon or the Viper Challenge. Well, some may even say that they might’ve been working out all year prepping for these events. The Klang City International Marathon is one such event. With people all around the country and even the world partaking in several categories such

Intro: 3 people were hit by a reckless driver while running in the Klang International Marathon. 2 of them sustained minor injuries while the other, Evelyn Ang, actually passed away from brain heamorrhage that she suffered. This became an outrageous case propelled by the media when they discovered that the marathon was technically… illegal. 

Body: 

1. The organisers claimed that they got the permit for the marathon

• However, what was eventually discovered was that they had applied for it but their application was not approved. 

• Under Section 36 of the SDA 1997, a commercial company isn’t allowed to organise an event without getting the license from the Sports Commissioner. 

• It was all fine and dandy when the organisers of the event was charged under Section 36 and 39 of the SDA 1997. 

2. But… the problem was within the provision itself. 

• When the police read out Section 36 along with Section 39, it kinda exposed a loophole within the law. Mind you, ANY loopholes within any provision could be the meteor to destroy whatever standing that you have against a person. 

• And that’s exactly what happened, the court held that Section 36 had to be read on its own instead of it being read with the General Offences part of the Act ( which is in Section 39). 

• The Attorney General’s Chambers decided that Section 36 wasn’t a chargeable offence and the case was closed. The death of Evelyn Ang prompted an immediate need for a reform in the Sports Development Act 1997 as this marathon wasn’t the only one that was illegally organised. 

3. Hence, the birth of the 3 new subsections within Section 36 of the SDA 1997 

• These 3 new provisions are known as the Evelyn Ang provisions. The new additions makes Section 36 a chargeable offence. 

• That wasn’t the only amendments made to the SDA 1997, there were many more that ensure for proper standard of procedure when it came to organising events. 

Conclusion: It was a tragic accident but what came out of it was the proper amendments that we now have today. Commercial companies do not take the PSOP for granted and ensure that all measures are taken for public safety.