Criminal law changes draconian, say lawyers

Lawyers for Liberty executive director Eric Paulsen is urging for the setting up of a bipartisan parliamentary select committee to study the proposed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code. – The Malaysian Insider file pic, May 20, 2015.

Legal rights group Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) is pushing for bipartisan parliamentary select committee to study the proposed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) that will be tabled in the current parliamentary sitting.

It said this was because the changes included draconian provisions that prevented cross-examination of witnesses and limited judicial discretion.

LFL executive director Eric Paulsen today said they were concerned that new sections – 265A, 265B and 265C – which had been withdrawn in December 2013 due to strong opposition were being reintroduced without any clear explanation as to the reasons why.

The provisions related to protected witnesses allowed them to testify in secret without the accused or the accused's counsel present to hear or cross-examine the witness.

"Such secrecy is repugnant to the very basic foundation of our criminal justice system that demands a fair trial, that justice must be done openly and transparently.

"The accused must be afforded an opportunity to challenge the evidence presented. And the guilt against the accused must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt," Paulsen said in a statement today.

LFL is also concerned about amendments to sections 282 and 294 that remove judicial discretion to impose concurrent sentences. This would mean that only consecutive sentences can be imposed.

The proposed changes also want to impose binding over sentences for first offenders charged with a serious offence.

Paulsen said judges were not "automatons" and should not mete out sentences mechanically.

"They must be allowed to decide on the appropriate sentences for each individual case depending on their peculiar facts and circumstances.

"To deprive the judiciary of such discretion and to force them to impose harsh or custodial sentences is an unnecessary fetter on their discretion and interferes with their independence and justice."

Another concern was a new chapter in the law on organised crime that allowed for "extremely wide and arbitrary powers to the authorities to investigate, obtain information, seize immovable and movable property, seize movable property in financial institutions and seize businesses," he said.

Paulsen acknowledged that law enforcement needed to use new methods to tackle organised crime, but said they still had to act in accordance with international law and norms to ensure checks and balances.

The suggested for a bipartisan parliamentary committee to study the CPC amendments was raised by DAP's Ipoh Barat MP M. Kula Segaran in April. His suggestion drew support from both ruling and opposition lawmakers.

MPs from both sides of the political divide had in the last Dewan Rakyat sitting in April said that some provisions were too draconian.

Kinabatangan MP Datuk Bung Mokhtar was one of several Barisan Nasional (BN) lawmakers who had strongly objected to the changes and said he was keen on the idea of a select committee.

- TMI