Senseless Judgement By Magistrate's Court.
The Magistrate's Court here Friday imposed a fine of RM3,000 or a year's jail on a mechanic for failing to present his identity card to the police upon request.
Aliff Azhar Abd Rahman from Segamat, Johore, pleaded guilty for failing to present the card or a temporary receipt to Detective Sergeant Ahmad Fuad Jamaludin under the Jalan Syed Putra bridge area near here at 11am last May 14.
He was charged under Regulation 25 (1)(n) of the National Registration Regulations 1990 which carries a maximum RM20,000 or a minimum RM3,000 penalty or a one to three-year jail term, if found guilty. He failed to pay the fine.
Aliff Azhar, 23, was also jailed for two days after he confessed to taking morphine at the same spot on the same day.
Magistrate Nik Asma Anita Makhtar told him to serve his sentence, effective Friday, and placed him under police supervision for three years.
I should think that the poor guy got thrown into the slammer for the wrong offence! Has the magistrate lost all sense of proportion when she hits the sorry drug addict 3ooo ringgit or a years jail for merely failing to produce his IC but gives him a "naughty, naughty" tap on his knuckles for the much more serious morphine charge? If not then there is something seriously wrong with the sentencing policy and tariff system which results in such a judgement. Perhaps its time to review this.
I must admit that when over the years politico-social commentators expressed their dismay at the quality of the lower rung of the judiciary and implied that these magistrates were rejects who could not get a decent job elsewhere, I always thought that it was a case of sour grapes. Now after an increasing number of dubious judgements, I'm slowly coming round to accepting this as fact and truth and that it also confirms the poor quality of our local law graduates. Perhaps the authorities should be more discerning in their selection of magistrates and ensure that they interpret the law properly, in proportion to the offence and not let their emotions or their personal prejudices, likes and dislikes colour their judgement while at the same time checking if policy stipulations bind them to come out with sometimes absurd judgements, at least in the eye of the layman.
Aliff Azhar Abd Rahman from Segamat, Johore, pleaded guilty for failing to present the card or a temporary receipt to Detective Sergeant Ahmad Fuad Jamaludin under the Jalan Syed Putra bridge area near here at 11am last May 14.
He was charged under Regulation 25 (1)(n) of the National Registration Regulations 1990 which carries a maximum RM20,000 or a minimum RM3,000 penalty or a one to three-year jail term, if found guilty. He failed to pay the fine.
Aliff Azhar, 23, was also jailed for two days after he confessed to taking morphine at the same spot on the same day.
Magistrate Nik Asma Anita Makhtar told him to serve his sentence, effective Friday, and placed him under police supervision for three years.
I should think that the poor guy got thrown into the slammer for the wrong offence! Has the magistrate lost all sense of proportion when she hits the sorry drug addict 3ooo ringgit or a years jail for merely failing to produce his IC but gives him a "naughty, naughty" tap on his knuckles for the much more serious morphine charge? If not then there is something seriously wrong with the sentencing policy and tariff system which results in such a judgement. Perhaps its time to review this.
I must admit that when over the years politico-social commentators expressed their dismay at the quality of the lower rung of the judiciary and implied that these magistrates were rejects who could not get a decent job elsewhere, I always thought that it was a case of sour grapes. Now after an increasing number of dubious judgements, I'm slowly coming round to accepting this as fact and truth and that it also confirms the poor quality of our local law graduates. Perhaps the authorities should be more discerning in their selection of magistrates and ensure that they interpret the law properly, in proportion to the offence and not let their emotions or their personal prejudices, likes and dislikes colour their judgement while at the same time checking if policy stipulations bind them to come out with sometimes absurd judgements, at least in the eye of the layman.
posted by The Malaysian. at 7/15/2006 08:49:00 AM
3 Comments:
I am not a lawyer but here the judge might not have a choice as the penalty is clearly stipulated in the Regulations
You're right. That's why I said that the sentencing policy and the tariff system has to be reviewed.
Greets to the webmaster of this wonderful site. Keep working. Thank you.
»
Post a Comment
<< Home