Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Duress (section 94 penal code)

Legal area

Court

29 Apr 2025

Yen Tai Xiang [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-356-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-356-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The trial judge's findings that appellants possessed and knew the nature of the methamphetamine were supported by deliberate concealment, admissions in recorded statements and surrounding circumstances; Alcontara notices were insufficient and duress was not established, therefore the presumption of trafficking applied and convictions and sentences were upheld.
29 Apr 2025

Mak Kwong Ming [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-361-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-361-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court upheld the trial judge's factual findings that the methodical concealment (packages taped to thighs and hidden in shoe insoles), admissions in statements, and surrounding conduct supported an inference that each appellant had possession and knowledge of methamphetamine; duress and innocent‑carrier defences failed on the evidence and the Alcontara notices were not sufficiently particular to require further investigation by prosecution; thus the s.39B(1)(a) convictions and sentences were affirmed.
29 Apr 2025

Lo Wei Ryh [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-360-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-360-07/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court affirmed the trial judge: physical concealment of methamphetamine on each appellant (taped to thighs and hidden in shoe insoles), admissions in cautioned statements and surrounding circumstances warranted inferences of possession and knowledge; duress and innocent‑carrier defences failed on the balance of probabilities; Alcontara notice was imperfect and did not oblige prosecution to investigate third parties; appellate court will not disturb trial fact‑findings absent compelling reason. Convictions under s.39B(1)(a) DDA and statutory presumption of trafficking stand.
25 Mar 2024

Loh Fung Nian [ ]

Citation

B-05(M)-481-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-481-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court found the prosecution adduced overwhelming direct evidence that the accused had physical possession and the requisite knowledge of the drugs; the accused failed to prove duress as imminent, extreme and persistent and had multiple opportunities to seek help, so his defence failed on balance of probabilities; appellate court will not disturb trial judge's credibility findings; conviction affirmed and death sentence substituted under Act 846 with fixed term and whipping.

Malaysia Case Law

Yen Tai Xiang [ ]

Mak Kwong Ming [ ]

Lo Wei Ryh [ ]

Loh Fung Nian [ ]