Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Security offences (sosma) section 13

Legal area

Court

22 Jan 2024

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] MOHD FAIZ BIN ISMAIL

Citation

WA-45SOM-2-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45SOM-2-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court granted bail because s388 CPC permits release in non-bailable cases and the Federal Court authority in Koh Chin Wah supports bail for s26A offences; no cogent evidence of flight risk or witness tampering (migrants deported and depositions recorded); bail of RM20,000 with two sureties per accused and conditions (surrender travel documents, monthly police reporting) is just, reasonable, proportionate and not excessive given seriousness of offence; SOSMA objection noted but conflicting apex authority and fundamental liberty led to adopting the interpretation favouring bail.
5 Oct 2022

Samat Bin Yamin

Citation

07-8-06/2022(B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

B
Case number

07-8-06/2022(B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Section 13(2) of SOSMA is constitutionally valid: the gender/age/infirmity classification is an intelligible differentia with a rational nexus to SOSMA's objective of preventing threats to public order and is proportionate; sections 26A and 26D ATIPSOM properly constitute security offences within SOSMA; Federal Court had jurisdiction to hear the bail application; therefore the applicant's Notice of Motion for bail was dismissed.
26 Oct 2021

1. ) ENTIRAN A/L DURASAMY [NO KP: 930826085719] 2. ) GANESAN A/L DURASAMY [NO K/P: 901106085363] 3. ) VELMURUGAN A/L PANIRESILVAM [NO K/P: 830525087165] 4. ) GANESAN A/L KUPPUSAMY [NO K/P: 700217085293] 5. ) VINODH A/L SIVAKUMAR [NO KP: 920

Citation

AA-44-19-04/2021, AA-44-20-04/2021, AA-44-21-04/2021, AA-44-22-04/2021, AA-44-28-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-44-19-04/2021, AA-44-20-04/2021, AA-44-21-04/2021, AA-44-22-04/2021, AA-44-28-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Section 13 SOSMA remains valid under Article 149 but must be read consistently with the equality guarantee in Article 8; the Court interprets the gendered term in Section 13(2)(b) so men are entitled to be considered for bail on a case-by-case basis; prior bail decisions did not resolve the equality issue (jurisdictional omission) and changed circumstances permit rehearing; accordingly the Court granted bail to each applicant with conditions including RM30,000 bond and mandatory Electronic Monitoring Device and other restrictions.

Malaysia Case Law

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] MOHD FAIZ BIN ISMAIL

Samat Bin Yamin

1. ) ENTIRAN A/L DURASAMY [NO KP: 930826085719] 2. ) GANESAN A/L DURASAMY [NO K/P: 901106085363] 3. ) VELMURUGAN A/L PANIRESILVAM [NO K/P: 830525087165] 4. ) GANESAN A/L KUPPUSAMY [NO K/P: 700217085293] 5. ) VINODH A/L SIVAKUMAR [NO KP: 920