MMEA detains passenger boat near Kemena estuary for maritime offence
Photo shows the boat and crew detained for further action.
BINTULU (May 12): The Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) Bintulu Maritime Zone detained a passenger boat on Sunday for failing to notify authorities of a change of captain, an offence under Malaysian maritime law.
Bintulu Maritime Zone director Capt Muhammad Suffian Eldine Abdullah said the vessel was intercepted around one nautical mile northwest of the Kemena River estuary during a routine patrol.
An initial inspection found the boat was operated by two Malaysian crew members, aged 50 and 24.
'The vessel is believed to have violated Section 477(2) of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance (MSO) 1952, which requires any change of captain to be officially reported to the port officer.
'Non-compliance is subject to fines or compound action,' he explained in a statement.
The vessel and its crew were subsequently detained and escorted to the Bintulu Maritime Zone Vessel Detention Centre, where they were handed over to investigators for further investigation.
Muhammad Suffian reminded all maritime operators to comply with maritime laws and always follow sea safety protocols to help prevent unwanted incidents.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
13 hours ago
- The Sun
Appeals Court set Aug 19 for decision in activist's appeal over challenge to online speech law
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has fixed August 19 to deliver its decision in an appeal brought by an activist over the dismissal of her lawsuit that had challenged the validity of parts of a provision in the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 that criminalises offensive online comments. A three-man bench consisting of Federal Court judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Court of Appeal judges Datuk Hashim Hamzah and Datuk Azman Abdullah set the decision date after parties completed their submissions earlier today. Heidy Quah Gaik Li, the founder of Refuge for Refugees is claiming the use of the words 'offensive' and annoy' in Section 233 of the Act are invalid as it goes against two fundamental human rights protected by the Federal Constitution. Section 233(1)(a) states that it is an offence for a person to make, create or solicit, and initiate the transmission of any online comment which is 'obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive' with 'intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person. In Sept 2023, the Shah Alam High Court dismissed Quah's lawsuit, leading her to file an appeal in the Court of Appeal. The hearing today was a continuation of proceedings that had begun earlier. Justice Lee was serving as a Court of Appeal judge before being elevated to the Federal Court in May this year. During today's hearing, senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin representing the Malaysian government submitted that speech involving expletives, profanity, crude references, hate speech or incitement to violence are not expressions protected under Article 10 (1) (a) of the Federal Constitution. He argued that the right to free speech should be used to disseminate truth, respect for human dignity and perform essential informing function. On the other hand, lawyer Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, representing Quah argued the words 'offensive' or annoy contained in Section 233 is inconsistent with Article 10 and Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, namely the right to equality and freedom of speech. He argued that the two words in Section 233 are not a 'permissible restriction' under public order as prescribed in the Federal Constitution. In July 2021, Quah, 31, was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court for allegedly making 'offensive' online comments in a Facebook post. In April the following year, the Sessions Court granted her a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) due to the charge under section 233(1)(a) being defective.
The Sun
13 hours ago
- The Sun
Court to rule Aug 19 on activist's challenge to CMA provision
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has fixed August 19 to deliver its decision in an appeal brought by an activist over the dismissal of her lawsuit that had challenged the validity of parts of a provision in the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 that criminalises offensive online comments. A three-man bench consisting of Federal Court judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Court of Appeal judges Datuk Hashim Hamzah and Datuk Azman Abdullah set the decision date after parties completed their submissions earlier today. Heidy Quah Gaik Li, the founder of Refuge for Refugees is claiming the use of the words 'offensive' and annoy' in Section 233 of the Act are invalid as it goes against two fundamental human rights protected by the Federal Constitution. Section 233(1)(a) states that it is an offence for a person to make, create or solicit, and initiate the transmission of any online comment which is 'obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive' with 'intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person. In Sept 2023, the Shah Alam High Court dismissed Quah's lawsuit, leading her to file an appeal in the Court of Appeal. The hearing today was a continuation of proceedings that had begun earlier. Justice Lee was serving as a Court of Appeal judge before being elevated to the Federal Court in May this year. During today's hearing, senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin representing the Malaysian government submitted that speech involving expletives, profanity, crude references, hate speech or incitement to violence are not expressions protected under Article 10 (1) (a) of the Federal Constitution. He argued that the right to free speech should be used to disseminate truth, respect for human dignity and perform essential informing function. On the other hand, lawyer Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, representing Quah argued the words 'offensive' or annoy contained in Section 233 is inconsistent with Article 10 and Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, namely the right to equality and freedom of speech. He argued that the two words in Section 233 are not a 'permissible restriction' under public order as prescribed in the Federal Constitution. In July 2021, Quah, 31, was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court for allegedly making 'offensive' online comments in a Facebook post. In April the following year, the Sessions Court granted her a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) due to the charge under section 233(1)(a) being defective.
New Straits Times
14 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Three foreign men rescued from wrongful confinement in Penang
GEORGE TOWN: Three foreign men were rescued from wrongful confinement during a police raid on an apartment here yesterday. The operation followed a report lodged by a 47-year-old foreign national, who claimed that his friends were being held against their will. Northeast district deputy police chief Superintendent Lee Swee Sake said the raid was conducted about 2pm. "Police successfully freed the three victims, aged between 28 and 52, all of whom were in good health," he said in a statement today. "During the same operation, three Malaysian men, aged 40 to 56, and a 40-year-old foreign woman were arrested. They are believed to have been guarding the victims in the apartment." The case is being investigated under Section 344 of the Penal Code for wrongful confinement. Lee said police had obtained a four-day remand order against the suspects from today until Saturday to facilitate further investigations. "We urge the public to refrain from speculating about the case to avoid jeopardising the ongoing investigation." Police are investigating when and why the victims were confined. The men have valid passports, though some have expired.
