Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Harmonious construction

Legal area

Court

21 Dec 2021

CHAN KOK POH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation

JB-42(ORS)-3-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ORS
Case number

JB-42(ORS)-3-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeals dismissed. The Sessions Court did not err in declining to transmit the record for reference; the word 'may' in s.30/s.84 CJA confers discretion and referral to the Federal Court is not mandatory where referral would be unnecessary, premature, frivolous or would delay trial. Sections 18 SOACA 2017 and 133A Evidence Act 1950 can be harmoniously construed: s.18 allows conviction on uncorroborated child evidence in prosecutions under the Act but does not absolve the prosecution of its fundamental burden under general evidentiary principles; the impugned provision is not shown to be uncons…
21 Dec 2021

CHAN KOK POH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation

JB-42(ORS)-4-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ORS
Case number

JB-42(ORS)-4-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court's exercise of discretion under s.30 CJA to decline transmission; s.30 and s.84 use permissive 'may' and do not mandate referral in every case; s.18 SOACA 2017 is a specific legislative provision applicable to child victims and must be harmonised with the Evidence Act rather than read down as unconstitutional; s.18 does not absolve the prosecution of its burden to prove guilt and questions concerning corroboration under s.133A and burden of proof are jurisprudential and procedural matters properly addressed in trial; the defence failed to discharge the…
21 Dec 2021

CHAN KOK POH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation

JB-42(ORS)-2-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

ORS
Case number

JB-42(ORS)-2-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court has discretion under s.30 and s.84 Courts of Judicature Act to decline transmission of constitutional questions; s.18 Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 is a specific provision applicable to child victims and does not, on proper harmonious construction, render the Evidence Act or constitutional protections inapplicable or relieve the prosecution of its burden; absent clear constitutional violation the presumption of constitutionality applies and s.18 is not struck down. The appeals are dismissed and the trial is remitted to the Sessions Court.
27 Sept 2021

PENDAKWARAYA Mohamad Bukhari bin Abdul Aziz

Citation

BA-43-36-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-43-36-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Section 12 FIPA, insofar as it operates as a complete prohibition removing the court's power to consider bail, is ultra vires Article 121 because it effects a total ouster of judicial power; absent s.12 the court may exercise its discretion under s.388 KTJ to grant bail and the Sessions Court did not err in granting RM10,000 bail with conditions, so its order is upheld.
11 Aug 2021

PENDAKWARAYA SYAMSUL ZAMAN BIN SUKRI

Citation

DJ-62JSK-36-08/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

DJ-62JSK-36-08/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The session court lawfully conducted the charge mention via remote communication (Zoom) by applying Sections 101(1) and 101B of the Subordinate Courts Act 1948 read with Section 3 KAJ and relevant principles of statutory interpretation; the public health circumstances (accused COVID-19 positive and pandemic risks) constituted 'other sufficient reason' to depart from physical open-court presence at the charge mention stage, and no prejudice to the accused was found for that stage.

Malaysia Case Law

CHAN KOK POH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

CHAN KOK POH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

CHAN KOK POH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

PENDAKWARAYA Mohamad Bukhari bin Abdul Aziz

PENDAKWARAYA SYAMSUL ZAMAN BIN SUKRI