1. ) [05-76-04/2017 (J)] LETITIA BOSMAN 2. ) [05-179-08/2017 (B)] JORGE CRESPO GOMEZ 3. ) [05-214-09/2017 (K)] BENJAMIN WILLIAM HAWKES 4. ) [05(M)-118-05/2018 (B)] PUBALAN S/O PEREMAL

1. ) [05-76-04/2017 (J)] LETITIA BOSMAN 2. ) [05-179-08/2017 (B)] JORGE CRESPO GOMEZ 3. ) [05-214-09/2017 (K)] BENJAMIN WILLIAM HAWKES 4. ) [05(M)-118-05/2018 (B)] PUBALAN S/O PEREMAL

Section 51A(1)(b) does not require disclosure of the CCTV footage because the footage was not tendered or relied upon as part of the prosecution's case and was unclear; the word 'shall' in s51A is to be read as directory in context of the CPC's procedural scheme; non-disclosure did not amount to suppression, caused no shown prejudice and did not deny the appellant a fair trial; conviction and sentence under s39B DDA are therefore affirmed.

Citation
05-76-04/2017 (J); 05-179-08/2017 (B); 05-214-09/2017 (K); 05(M)-118-05/2018 (B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Parties
Appellant / Accused: Benjamin William Hawkes; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya
Court
J
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
13 August 2020
Case Number
05-76-04/2017 (J); 05-179-08/2017 (B); 05-214-09/2017 (K); 05(M)-118-05/2018 (B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (drug Trafficking) / Final Appeal to Federal Court (judgment on Disclosure Issue)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Disclosure Obligations, CCTV Evidence, Right to Fair Trial, Interpretation of Statutory 'shall', Adverse Inference Under Evidence Act
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Constitutional Law Criminal Procedure Drug Trafficking Disclosure Obligations CCTV Evidence Right to Fair Trial +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin William Hawkes

Appellant / Accused

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (drug Trafficking) / Final Appeal to Federal Court (judgment on Disclosure Issue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution breached s51A(1)(b) CPC by failing to disclose CCTV footage
  2. 2 Whether non-disclosure of CCTV footage denied appellant's right to a fair trial under Art 5 and Art 8 FC
  3. 3 Whether the word 'shall' in s51A CPC is mandatory or directory

Ratio Decidendi

Section 51A(1)(b) does not require disclosure of the CCTV footage because the footage was not tendered or relied upon as part of the prosecution's case and was unclear; the word 'shall' in s51A is to be read as directory in context of the CPC's procedural scheme; non-disclosure did not amount to suppression, caused no shown prejudice and did not deny the appellant a fair trial; conviction and sentence under s39B DDA are therefore affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Conviction and sentence under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 affirmed