logo
Why no legal action in Batu Puteh's case? — Hafiz Hassan

Why no legal action in Batu Puteh's case? — Hafiz Hassan

Malay Mail2 days ago
JULY 24 — All decisions made by the Public Prosecutor (PP) aka Attorney General (AG) on whether to prosecute or not to prosecute should promote consistency in decision making.
This is where a prosecution policy would be useful.
The policy should outline the relevant factors and considerations which should be taken into account when prosecutors exercise their discretion to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence.
The policy should also serve to inform the public and lawyers of the principles which guide the decisions made by the prosecutors.
In Australia, the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth provides a two-stage test that must be satisfied before a prosecution is commenced.
First, there must be sufficient evidence to prosecute the case. Second, it must be evident from the facts of the case, and all the surrounding circumstances, that the prosecution would be in the public interest.
In December 2024, a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) recommended a criminal investigation against Dr Mahathir under Section 415(b) and Section 418 of the Penal Code. — Picture from X/ahmadmaslan
In determining whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute a case the prosecutors must be satisfied that there is prima facie evidence of the elements of the offence and a reasonable prospect of obtaining a conviction. The existence of a prima facie case is not sufficient.
In making this decision, the prosecutors must evaluate how strong the case is likely to be when presented in court.
They must take into account matters such as the availability, competence and credibility of witnesses, their likely effect on the arbiter of fact, and the admissibility of any alleged confession or other evidence.
The prosecutors should also have regard to any lines of defence open to the alleged offender and any other factors that could affect the likelihood or otherwise of a conviction.
The possibility that any evidence might be excluded by a court should be taken into account and, if that evidence is crucial to the case, this may substantially affect the decision whether or not to institute or proceed with a prosecution.
The prosecutors must look beneath the surface of the evidence in a matter, particularly in borderline cases.
Having been satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation or continuation of a prosecution, the prosecutors must then consider whether the public interest requires a prosecution to be pursued.
In this regard, the prosecutors must consider all of the provable facts and all of the surrounding circumstances.
The public interest factors to be considered inevitably vary from case to case, but the following may be considered:
whether the offence is serious or trivial;
any mitigating or aggravating circumstances;
the youth, age, intelligence, physical health, mental health or special vulnerability of the alleged offender, witness or victim;
the alleged offender's antecedents and background;
the passage of time since the alleged offence;
the availability and efficacy of any alternatives to prosecution;
the prevalence of the alleged offence and the need for general and personal deterrence;
the attitude of the victim;
the need to give effect to regulatory or punitive imperatives; and
the likely outcome in the event of a finding of guilt.
The above are not the only factors, but generally the more serious the alleged offence is, the more likely it will be that the public interest will require that a prosecution be pursued.
The decision to prosecute must be made impartially and must not be influenced by any inappropriate reference to race, religion, sex, national origin or political association.
The decision to prosecute must not also be influenced by any political advantage or disadvantage to the government.
If age is just a factor and not the only factor to prosecute a case, why the decision not to pursue legal action against former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad over Malaysia's withdrawal of its claim to Pulau Batu Puteh?
In December 2024, a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) recommended a criminal investigation against Dr Mahathir under Section 415(b) and Section 418 of the Penal Code.
Dr Mahathir said then that he was prepared to face any investigation and emphasised his integrity during his time as prime minister.
Let there be an investigation. It is not even a prosecution, not yet.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

[Watch] Debt Collectors Go Too Far, Man Stuffed Into Lorry Container In Broad Daylight Abduction
[Watch] Debt Collectors Go Too Far, Man Stuffed Into Lorry Container In Broad Daylight Abduction

Rakyat Post

time6 hours ago

  • Rakyat Post

[Watch] Debt Collectors Go Too Far, Man Stuffed Into Lorry Container In Broad Daylight Abduction

Subscribe to our FREE A man was forcibly pushed into a lorry container during a street altercation in Puchong on Tuesday evening (22 July), leading to a police investigation that has resulted in four arrests. The abduction occurred along Jalan Persiaran Puchong Permai during a fight in the middle of the road. Police received reports of the incident at 6:38 pm the same day, with four individuals suspected of being involved in forcibly taking the victim using a lorry. The victim was found around 10:20 pm the same day along the SS19 road in Subang Jaya with minor injuries. Swift Arrests and Evidence Recovery Police immediately arrested a 32-year-old local man at the scene who had tattoos and was suspected of being a gang member. Background checks revealed he has two previous criminal records. Subang Jaya district police chief Assistant Commissioner Wan Azlan Wan Mamat said three additional suspects, aged 18 and 19, were detained on Thursday night (24 July) around 10pm in operations conducted in Ulu Selangor and Puchong areas. During the arrests, police recovered the victim's clothing and mobile phone. All suspects have been remanded to assist with the investigation. The initial suspect was held from 23 to 26 July, and court applications have been made to extend the remand for the others. Charges Filed and Manhunt Continues Police believe the incident stems from a dispute over debt. The case is being investigated under Section 365 of the Penal Code (wrongful confinement), Section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), and Section 43 of the Societies Act 1966. Authorities are actively tracking down any remaining accomplices connected to the case. Anyone with information is urged to contact Investigating Officer Inspector G. Dinesh at 011-33094457, or the Subang Jaya District Police Headquarters Operations Room at 03-78627222 or 03-78627100. Share your thoughts with us via TRP's . Get more stories like this to your inbox by signing up for our newsletter.

Admin assistant pleads not guilty to insulting intern's modesty
Admin assistant pleads not guilty to insulting intern's modesty

The Sun

time11 hours ago

  • The Sun

Admin assistant pleads not guilty to insulting intern's modesty

KUALA LUMPUR: A 37-year-old administrative assistant at a government department pleaded not guilty in court today to insulting the modesty of a 23-year-old female intern. The alleged incident occurred on April 4 at a government office. Mohamad Aznee Osman was charged under Section 509 of the Penal Code, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in jail, a fine, or both. Magistrate Farah Nabihah Muhamad Dan granted him bail at RM2,500 with one surety and ordered him not to harass the victim. The accused, who appeared without legal representation, requested a lower bail amount, citing financial difficulties. 'I earn RM2,000 monthly and support three children, including one with disabilities. My wife is unemployed,' he said. The case has been scheduled for mention on Sept 3. Prosecuting officer Insp M. Alli Nangai handled the proceedings. - Bernama

Six fined RM3,500 each for Jln Stephen Yong cable theft after viral video
Six fined RM3,500 each for Jln Stephen Yong cable theft after viral video

Borneo Post

time11 hours ago

  • Borneo Post

Six fined RM3,500 each for Jln Stephen Yong cable theft after viral video

The offence took place at Taman Regal, Jalan Stephen Yong, on July 17, 2025. – Stock photo KUCHING (July 25): Six men were each fined RM3,500, in default six months' jail, by the Magistrates' Court here today for stealing telecommunication cables in an incident that came to light after a video went viral on social media. Magistrate Syarifah Fatimah Azura Wan Ali imposed the sentence on Reynold Rey, Mackey Lennon Kassim, Sinaider Terro, Ozzy Allister Chin, Claint Douglas Jerebi, and Tulvin Stephen after they pleaded guilty to a charge under Section 379 of the Penal Code, read together with Section 34 for common intention. The charge carries a penalty of up to seven years' imprisonment, a fine, or both upon conviction. The offence took place at Taman Regal, Jalan Stephen Yong, on July 17, 2025. According to the facts of the case, a police officer came across a video on Facebook showing three cars with fake licence plates pulling telecommunication cables at the scene. Following investigations, police arrested all six suspects on July 18 at different locations and times. During the arrests, authorities also seized three vehicles and several tools believed to have been used in the theft, including cutters, machetes, towing cables, and a manhole opener. ASP Arman Ibrahim prosecuted the case. All six accused were unrepresented. cable theft fine Jalan Stephen Yong viral video

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store