Monday, September 16, 2019

Inquest for all Police Shot Dead Victims To Ensure Also No Breach of Law by Police Extrajudicial Killing Must Be Criminalized in Malaysia


Media Statement – 17/9/2019

Inquest for all Police Shot Dead Victims To Ensure Also
No Breach of Law by Police 

Extrajudicial Killing Must Be Criminalized in Malaysia

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) calls for inquests for all deaths caused by police shootings to determine that it was in compliance with law, and that there was no person who is ‘criminally concerned in the cause of the death.’ The law is clear about the powers of the police, and there is a need to establish that the police did not break the laws – and certainly did not murder anyone.

Of late, we have come across two media reports of police shooting in resulted in deaths of all the alleged suspects.

In a Star 15/9/2019 report, it stated that the police after a 7km chase fired 6 shots and killed 3 suspects, and the police later found 2 pistols and a machete were discovered. In this case, the police was reported saying, “We are now trying to identify the suspects but we believe they might have been responsible for a high number of house break-ins,…”

On 27/8/2019, Malay Mail reported that police shot dead 3 persons after they allegedly shot twice at the police, whereby in this case, there was only one gun found. The police was reported saying that the suspects were yet to be identified, but that they are believed to be remnants of a gang ‘…responsible for 15 factories break-ins and robbery cases involving about RM620,000…’.

Shooting someone shooting at you with a gun may be justified, but shooting dead persons without a gun raises questions. Police duty is to arrest and not shoot a person dead.

Media may report some but not all incidents, and as such one wonders about the number of people shot dead by the Malaysian police, as these are also extrajudicial killings. Were there any inquests conducted for all these deaths by reason of police shooting?

When the police shoot dead alleged suspects, media reports the police version of what happened, and it is often noted that the police are quick to make suggestions that link the dead to other past crimes. This, itself, raises concerns about the killings. There is a need for an independent inquiry into these shootings and death.

If they were ‘suspects’, why were they not previously arrested and investigated? Were there even arrest warrants out for their arrests?

Unfortunately, we also do not have follow-up media reports that tell people that the police have positively identified the dead, and has secured evidence linking them to the alleged past crimes, if at all.

Other questions that arises, is whether the police even followed the arrest procedures – did they even try to arrest? Or did they merely shoot to kill?

The police may be telling us the truth but this really is not enough. We need independent inquiries into these death by the Magistrate/Judge and this procedure is provided by our law.

In our Criminal Procedure Code, section 337 states that “A Magistrate holding an inquiry shall inquire when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death.’

As such, the Magistrate can inquire and make a finding whether the death was caused by the police acting in accordance to law. Was there no possibility of arrest?

Remember that our law gives the police the power to arrest and not to kill. Force could be used in certain cases but the object must always be ‘…to effect the arrest…’

Section 15(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code about arrest states, ‘(2) If such person forcibly resist the endeavor to arrest him or attempt to evade the arrest such officer or other person may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.’. This section also states in subsection (3), Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life.

Clearly many, if not all, of these persons who have been shot dead by the police are at most merely ‘suspects’, and are not yet ‘accused’ for they only become the ‘accused’ after they have been charged in court.

Hence, those shot to dead can only be unavoidable ‘accidents’, at best, when the police tried to effect the arrest of the said persons/suspects. It would also be good for the police if the findings of the inquest comes to a similar conclusion.

Inquests, after all, must be conducted in all cases, except in the limited exceptions provided for in law.

Section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code states, ’(1) If the Magistrate shall be satisfied as to the cause of death without holding an inquiry under this Chapter, he shall report to the Public Prosecutor the cause of death as ascertained to his satisfaction with his reasons for being so satisfied and shall at the same time transmit to the Public Prosecutor all reports and documents in his possession connected with the matter. (2) In all other cases the Magistrate shall proceed as soon as may be to hold an inquiry under this Chapter.’

It must be pointed out that the word "cause of death" in the law is defined to ‘… include not only the apparent cause of death as ascertainable by inspection or post-mortem examination of the body of the deceased, but also all matters necessary to enable an opinion to be formed as to the manner in which the deceased came by his death and as to whether his death resulted in any way from, or was accelerated by, any unlawful act or omission on the part of any other person…’

The only other situation where a Magistrate need not hold an inquiry is when ‘… if any criminal proceedings have been instituted against any person in respect of any act connected with the death of the deceased or such hurt as caused the death….’

Therefore, save for cases of clear death by natural causes like old age and sickness, there is a need for the Magistrate to conducts inquiry into the deaths, and that certainly should include deaths caused by police shootings and death in police custody.

The Criminal Procedure Code provides specific provisions covering Inquiry into cause of death of a person in custody of police or in any asylum (Section 334).

However, the then ‘…Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Siti Norma Yaakob said yesterday the law governing deaths of persons in police custody was clearly set out in Section 334 of the Criminal Procedure Code. “From my reading of it, it is mandatory to hold inquests to ascertain the cause of death. “And if that is the law, how is it possible that in 22 death cases, officers of the court have seen it fit to make decisions that no inquests were necessary?” Siti Norma asked…’(Star, 2/4/2006)

It is important that the Malaysian government now reassures us that inquests are today being carried out in all death in custody cases.

It is also important that the government informs that inquests are being conducted in all cases where death occurred by alleged reason of being shot dead by police and/or some other enforcement officers.

In 2014, the then government announced the creation of the permanent Coroners Court, which was to begin operations from 15/4/2014. The then Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Nancy Shukri also announced that ‘…the appointment of a senior judge acting as a coroner, Nancy hoped this would improve the public's perception over the handling of such cases…’(New Straits Times, 3/4/2014).

It is time to review these Coroner’s court, with a realistic objective of increasing the number of such Coroner’s courts. There is also a need to consider again whether we need to enact a Coroner’s Act like what they have in many jurisdictions like the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 in UK. The UK Act also says that inquest into a death must be held with a jury especially in cases where the death was caused by police, or in cases of death in custody.

Therefore, MADPET

Calls for inquests into all cases of death by reason of police shootings;

Calls for the findings of all inquest including deaths by police by shootings be made public;

Calls for the investigation of cases of police shooting to be conducted by an independent unit, not the police, who will then also assist the Magistrate in the inquest;

Call for the criminalization of extrajudicial killings in Malaysia;

Call on the government to disclose statistics and information about deaths by reason of police shootings, and the steps taken to confirm that these were not extrajudicial killings;

Calls for the Malaysian police to stop ‘defaming’ the dead, by making known their unverified beliefs that the dead, many a time yet to be identified, may have been responsible for past crimes;

Call on Malaysia to consider enacting a Coroners and Justice Act, with possibility of the involvement of a civilian jury, especially in cases where the police are involved in the death, be it by way of police shooting, or death in police custody.

Charles Hector
For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)

 

Three armed robbers shot dead in Gombak by cops
Nation

Sunday, 15 Sep 2019
By FARIK ZOLKEPLI


Comm Noor Azam (middle) showing the pistols seized while Gombak deputy OCPD Supt Arsad Kamaruddin (right) and Gombak CID chief DSP Zainuddin Zakaria looked on during the press conference.

GOMBAK: A gang of three robbers was killed after a 7km high-speed chase and shoot-out with police.

A team of police personnel was patrolling near Bandar Country Homes when they stumbled upon the three men, who were in a red Volkswagen Polo, at about 5am yesterday.

When they were instructed to pull over for inspection, the robbers instead sped off. They even tried to graze their car against the police patrol car in an effort to flee.

However, after 7km, police personnel managed to corner them near Batu Arang town.
Selangor police chief Comm Datuk Noor Azam Jamaludin said with nowhere to run, the robbers fired three shots, forcing the police to return fire.

“The police personnel fired six shots at the three men. The suspects were killed,” he told a press conference at the Gombak police district headquarters yesterday.

Two pistols, a machete, three ski masks and gloves were among the items seized from the suspects, he added.

“A check on the vehicle used by the suspects revealed that it was reported stolen in a house break-in in Rawang on Aug 5.

“The car belonged to the victim, who had alleged that police were late in responding to the 999 call reporting the house break-in,” he said.

In a recent Facebook post, the victim, Thivyah Veelurajan, said police did not arrive at her home in time after three masked men had broken in at 2.30am on Aug 5.

She said she had called the 999 emergency hotline for help and was told she should have called the Police “Bilik Gerakan” (Operations Room) instead.

The case is being looked into by the Selangor Integrity and Standard Compliance Department (JIPS).

Comm Noor Azam said police believed the three suspects were responsible for a string of house break-ins.

“We believe they were in the midst of searching for targets when we stumbled upon them.

“We are now trying to identify the suspects but we believe they might have been responsible for a high number of house break-ins,” he said.

In Selangor, 60 cases of house break-ins have been reported between May and September, Comm Noor Azam added.

“Some 80% of the cases were carried out between 3am and 6am.

“Their modus operandi would be to break into houses in a team of three or more, wearing ski masks and armed with weapons.

“They were highly dangerous,” he said. - Star, 14/9/2019


Three foreigners killed in shootout after high-speed chase in Penang

(From left) deputy CPO Datuk Roslee Chik, Penang CPO Datuk T. Narenasagaran and chief of Commercial Crime and Investigation Datuk Zainol Samah during a press conference in George Town August 27, 2019. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin
(From left) deputy CPO Datuk Roslee Chik, Penang CPO Datuk T. Narenasagaran and chief of Commercial Crime and Investigation Datuk Zainol Samah during a press conference in George Town August 27, 2019. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin
GEORGE TOWN, Aug 27 — Three foreigners believed to be part of a gang specialising in factory burglaries died in an early morning shootout after leading police on a high-speed car chase here.

In the 2am incident at the Permatang Tinggi Industrial area in Bukit Mertajam, the three men sped off in a red Toyota Camry when approached by a police team while parked by the roadside.

Penang police chief Datuk T. Narenasagaran said this triggered a high-speed chase after which the driver of the Toyota lost control and veered into a ditch.

“They immediately got out of the car and fired two shots at the police,” he said, adding that one of the three came out with a machete. 

He said the police team returned fire and killed all three on the spot.

Narenasagaran said the suspects, believed to be aged between 20 and 30, had fired off a .38 Colt revolver.
“We are still trying to identify the suspects, their nationality and whether there are other members in their gang,” he said in a press conference at the Penang police headquarters today. 
A revolver and other items seized during a shootout incident this morning are seen at the Penang police headquarters in George Town August 27, 2019. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin
A revolver and other items seized during a shootout incident this morning are seen at the Penang police headquarters in George Town August 27, 2019. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin
The police believe there are remnants of the gang that is thought to have operated since last year and was known for targeting isolated factories.

He said there has been a slew of break-ins in the area, with the most recent being about 50m from the site of the incident.

“We have been monitoring and patrolling the area last night as there was a tip-off that the suspects would be acting soon,” he said.

He said the gang would usually enter from the rear of the factory before overwhelming the guard on duty.

“They will then enter the office and force open the safe there and empty it,” he said.

The gang is believed to be responsible for 15 factories break-ins and robbery cases involving about RM620,000.

The gang members are also believed to be experts in cracking open safes.

After the shootout this morning, the police seized the car, a revolver, four bullets, two spent casings, two steel cutters, angle grinders, one machete and other tools commonly used to break into factories and safes. - Malay Mail, 27/8/2019

Wednesday, September 11, 2019

‘Special Committee’ Another Excuse For Delay in Abolition of Mandatory Penalty? Delay Prejudices Many Accused Persons Whose Trial Commenced Before Abolition becomes Law


Media Statement -11/9/2019


‘Special Committee’  Another Excuse For Delay in Abolition of Mandatory Penalty?


Delay Prejudices Many Accused Persons Whose Trial Commenced Before Abolition becomes Law


MADPET Malaysians against Death Penalty and Torture) is tickled by the announcement now of the Malaysian Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law) Datuk Liew Vui Keong that a special committee to look for alternatives to the mandatory death sentence will be set up (Malay Mail, 6/9/2019). Such a committee could have been established earlier in March, but to do so now a few weeks before the commencement of the October Parliamentary Session when the Bill/s to abolish mandatory death penalty was to be tabled is really disconcerting.


MADPET is also concerned whether it is just another attempt to further delay the decision to abolish the mandatory death penalty. Last October, the Cabinet decided to abolish death penalty, then in March this year, they changed their mind.


U-Turns - From Abolishing Death Penalty in 33 Offences to Abolishing Mandatory Death Penalty in 11 Offences


It was announced on October 10 2018 (being also the World Day Against the Death Penalty), that the Malaysian Cabinet had reached a consensus (a collective decision) that the death penalty for 33 offences as provided for under eight Acts of law would be abolished, and this was again reiterated several times(Straits Times, 13/11/2018).


Then on 13/3/2019, the Malaysian government made a "shocking" U-turn and said that only the mandatory death penalty would be axed. Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Mohamed Hanipa Maidin said the mandatory death penalty was for nine offences under the Penal Code and two under the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971.( New Straits Times, 13/3/2019)


MANDATORY PENALTIES OUSTS JUDICIAL POWERS IN SENTENCING


A mandatory death penalty deprives judge’s sentencing discretion – the ability to order an appropriate just sentence, when a person is found guilty and convicted of the crime.


When there is a mandatory sentence, judges will have no choice but impose that one mandatory sentence provided by law. If there were no mandatory sentence, then when it comes to sentencing will consider all aggravating factors, mitigating factors and all the circumstances of the case, and give a just sentence to those found guilty.


Parliament should justly impose no mandatory sentence, though they may stipulate maximum or even minimum sentences that would be imposed on a person is found guilty of a particular crime. The sentenced to be imposed on every person found should always be in the hands of judges.


4 persons convicted of murder. Should not a higher sentenced be given for the person who killed, and maybe a lower sentence for a young man who came along but did not actually kill anyone? Should not a higher sentence be given for a repeat offender and a lesser sentence be given for a first time offender?



REPLACEMENT FOR MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY


When the mandatory death penalty is abolished, it is best that it is not replaced simply with just another mandatory sentence be it imprisonment for life or imprisonment for natural life (being in prison until one dies), This also would be wrong and unjust.


When the mandatory death penalty is abolished, the law would still provide that the sentence for the crime could be death, imprisonment for natural life, life imprisonment and/or imprisonment for a term not less than 10-15 years. Then, it will be up to the judge to impose a just and appropriate sentence, based on the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Remember, that if one is unhappy with the sentence, one can always appeal the sentence to the Court or Appeal, and even the Federal Court.


As such, there is really no reasonable or justifiable reason to set up any ‘special committee to look for alternatives to the mandatory death sentence’. We know the options, and the government, the Members of Parliament and Senators can decide.


MADPET hopes that this Malaysian government, who previously decided to abolish the death penalty, who then did a U-turn to now only abolish the mandatory death penalty will no more procrastinate BUT will speedily table the relevant Bills in Parliament in this upcoming October Parliamentary session.


DELAY IN ABOLITION OF MANDATORY DEATH PENALTY PREJUDICES ACCUSED WHOSE TRIAL HAVE STARTED.


It must be remembered that the delay of the previous Barisan National government in putting in force the Dangerous Drugs Amendment Act 2017, which abolished the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking, by several months resulted in great injustice to at least 10 persons who were sentenced to death as judges still could not use the new law until it was in force.


Now, the Pakatan Harapan-led government’s delay in the abolition of the mandatory death penalty also greatly prejudices accused persons charged with mandatory death penalty offences, whose trial are starting, proceeding and/or will end before the amendment becomes law. Now, the prosecution and the defense are preparing and presenting their evidence and submissions in these trials on the basis that conviction results in the mandatory death penalty. If there is no mandatory death penalty, evidence tendered will also be evidence that would assist the Judge later in imposing a sentence other than the death sentence.


If mandatory death penalty is now abolished, justice would only be done for those sentenced to the mandatory death penalty may be by a re-trial, where all court records of the trial before are expunged and cannot be relied upon. Alternatively, a less just option, for trials yet to have ended, provisions be given for prosecution and defense to adduce new relevant evidence, including the recalling of witnesses, which will have a bearing on the sentence to be imposed if found guilty.


As such, the abolition of the mandatory death penalty should be not be delayed.


Other amendments to deal with cases where trials have already commenced or have ended by the time the abolition of mandatory death penalty had come into force can always be dealt with later, maybe in subsequent amendments tabled in Parliamentary sessions in 2020.


DEATH ROW PRISONERS – PARDON CAN COMMUTE DEATH SENTENCES


For those currently on death row, who are now more than 1,200 persons, the only way now is through the commutation of the death sentence to imprisonment, which can be done by Pardon by the King and the State Rulers.


In 1983, Datuk Mokhtar Hashim, then Culture, Youth and Sports Minister received the death penalty for the murder of Datuk Taha Talib, the state assemblyman for Tampin, In 1984 he received a ‘royal pardon’ when his death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and thereafter in 1991 another ‘royal pardon’ set him free from prison.


The power of pardon is exercisable by the King and/or the Ruler or Yang di- Pertua Negeri of a State (Article 42 Federal Constitution), and this how those on death row could be dealt with. The problem now is not just the frequency of Pardon Board meetings, but the lack of procedural and guidelines that these Pardon Boards need follow.


MADPET is of the opinion that all those currently on death law be pardoned and their sentences commuted to life imprisonment.


Besides royal pardon, the commutation of death sentence could also possibly be achieved through an enactment of a new law.


Alternatively, the right of death row inmates to apply to court for a review of their guilt and sentence could be clearly provided for in our laws. This should also include the ability to easily adduce new evidence, which may not have been adduced for whatever reason by their lawyers and/or prosecution. Why should the convicted be prejudiced for failings of even his/her own lawyer, as today the law makes it very difficult for the adducing of new evidence that already existed then but was not adduced and brought to attention of the court during trial? There are also many cases where prosecution and/or police, despite having relevant evidence, simply chose not bring it to the attention of the courts.




LAWS AND AMENDMENTS


The government can immediately amend the law to abolish the mandatory death penalty. Now, it could impose a natural life prison sentence.


Later, it can always again amend the law to even give greater discretion to judges maybe imprisonment not less than 15 years to natural life sentences, which it could do after this ‘special committee’ submits its conclusions maybe 3 – 6 months down the road.


The abolition of the mandatory death penalty must not be delayed simply because we are waiting for this ‘special committee’ to submit its final report.


The law could also later be amended to deal with persons whose trial has commenced and completed before the law abolishing mandatory death penalty comes into force.


It is sad that the government has been using all kinds of excuses to delay bringing about necessary repeal or amendment of draconian laws in Malaysian. For example, in June 19, it was reported The government will wait for the Federal Court to decide on a suit challenging the constitutionality of the death penalty for trafficking before it tables an amendments ( Malay Mail, 17/6/2019). Parliament makes laws and there is no need to wait to be told by Court whether a law is constitutional or bad.


The worry now is that in the near future, the Minister will come out and say that the mandatory death penalty will not be abolished until it receives the final report from this ‘special committee’ it set up weeks before the Bill to abolish death penalty is to be tabled.



THERFORE, MADPET 


-          Calls on the Malaysian government to no longer delay the abolition of the mandatory death penalty, which ought to be done in the upcoming Parliamentary session beginning October 
2019;


-          Call on the new Malaysian government, who have been power for more than 16 months, to no longer procrastinate in the abolition of other draconian laws like the Sedition Act, the Detention Without Trial laws and other draconian laws; and 


-          Reiterates the call for the abolition of the death penalty, and the commutation of all death sentences of persons on death row.

Charles Hector
For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)



Minister: Special committee to study alternative to mandatory death sentence


Liew said in a statement today that the decision on the special committee was made by the Cabinet on August 29. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon
Liew said in a statement today that the decision on the special committee was made by the Cabinet on August 29. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon
PUTRAJAYA, Sept 6 — The government has agreed to set up a special committee to look for alternatives to the mandatory death sentence.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law) Datuk Liew Vui Keong said in a statement today that the decision on the special committee was made by the Cabinet on August 29.

He said the special committee will be chaired by a former Chief Justice of Malaysia.

Its members will comprise former Federal Court judges, former Attorney General Chambers officers, former senior officers of the Prisons Department as well as representatives of the Bar Council, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam), academics, criminologists, and civil society organisations.

“The government is taking a pro-active and cautious step by setting up this special committee to ensure that an alternative sentence which is commensurate with the criminal offence is imposed, taking into account the implications on and welfare of the victim,” Liew said.

He said the repeal of the mandatory death sentence will give the judge discretion to impose a death sentence or an alternative sentence, based on the facts of the case.

Liew said the proposal to repeal the mandatory death sentence was in line with the 27 pledges in the Pakatan Harapan manifesto. — Bernama - Malay Mail, 6/9/2019
Abolishing of death penalty is collective decision by Cabinet, says Liew

Nation
Wednesday, 14 Nov 2018 9:58 AM MYT

By RASHVINJEET S. BEDI

Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2018/11/14/liew-death-penalty-abolition-was-a-collection-cabinet-decision#S3aaU5bGx0x8bTZo.99

Malaysia's Cabinet decides to end death penalty for 33 offences


KUALA LUMPUR (BERNAMA) - Malaysia's Cabinet has reached a consensus that the death penalty for 33 offences as provided for under eight Acts of law should be abolished,  including Section 302 of the Penal Code, which pertains to murder, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Liew Vui Keong said on Tuesday (Nov 13).

He said the decision, which was reached collectively, also encompassed the Firearms (Heavier Penalties) Act, 1971; Firearms Act, 1960; Kidnapping Act, 1961; and Armed Forces Act, 1972.

Death penalties also provided for under the Water Services Industries Act, 2006; Strategic Trade Act, 2010; and Dangerous Drugs Act, 1952, are also to be abolished.

"Following the Cabinet decision,  a Cabinet memorandum has been circulated to the relevant ministries for their comments and to get public feedback on it," Datuk Liew said during a question-and-answer session in the Dewan Rakyat.

He was replying to a question from  Dr Kelvin Yii Lee Wuen, the Pakatan Harapan MP from Bandar Kuching, who wanted to know the government's position on abolishing the death penalty, in particular with respect to whether there will be exceptions for extremely cruel crimes,

Mr Liew also told the House that the Bill on the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) was expected to be tabled at the next sitting of Parliament after all issues and policies were finalised.

He said follow-up meetings on the setting up of the commission had agreed that it should be truly independent, effective and have the power to tackle problems involving  the police force.

"The framework takes into consideration powers that are more holistic and in line with existing laws and are currently in force," he said in reply to a question from Ms Maria Chin Abdullah, the Pakatan Harapan MP representing Petaling Jaya.

Mr Liew said the police's rights would also be assured as enshrined in Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.

In September 2018, the government announced the setting up of the IPCMC to replace the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission. - Straits Times, 13/11/2018

Mandatory death penalty to be repealed for 11 criminal offences


(Stock image for illustration purposes) “We have made a decision. The government will only repeal the mandatory death penalty. We will make the amendments. This is in keeping with the 27th pledge in the Pakatan Harapan (election) manifesto.”
KUALA LUMPUR: The mandatory death penalty for 11 criminal offences are to be repealed and substituted with death penalty imposed at the discretion of the court, the Dewan Rakyat was told.

Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Mohamed Hanipa Maidin said the mandatory death penalty was for nine offences under the Penal Code and two under the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971.

“We have made a decision. The government will only repeal the mandatory death penalty. We will make the amendments. This is in keeping with the 27th pledge in the Pakatan Harapan (election) manifesto,” he said when replying to a question from Datuk Che Abdullah Mat Nawi (Pas-Tumpat) during Question Time.

Replying to a supplementary question from Che Abdullah on whether the government intends to set up a parliamentary select committee to discuss the repeal of the death penalty before tabling the amendment bill, Hanipa said he would forward the suggestion to the government.

The cabinet, at a meeting in October 2018, decided to repeal the mandatory death penalty for 33 offences under eight acts. – Bernama - New Straits Times, 13/3/2019