Our children need better protection under laws

GLOBAL Ikhwan Service and Business Holding (GISBH) on Saturday exposed that earlier there had actually been cases of sodomy in the organisation.

In a video published on the business’s social networks account, business CEO Nasiruddin Ali stated the cases were attended to internally as GISBH acknowledged them as legal offenses.

It is mind boggling that the cases were attended to internally when they are offenses under the law.

Failure to make a cops report about sexual criminal activities being devoted versus kids is an offense under Section 19 of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act (SOACA) 2017.

The penalty for the offense makes it a non-seizable offense. In layperson’s terms, a non-seizable offense is a less major offense.

The Criminal Procedure Code categorises offenses, to name a few, into seizable and non-seizable offenses. This categorisation matters for the functions of examinations. Particularly for non-seizable offenses, there need to be an order to examine (OTI) from the general public district attorney or his deputy.

The law on an examination of non-seizable offenses has actually been well described in a number of cases in the High Court. In Chan Ah Moi v Phang Wai Ann [1995] 3 MLJ 130then-High Court Judge Abdul Malik Ishak stated: “The authorities should initially identify the nature of the offense before selecting the next strategy. If the offense is non-seizable in nature, the cops will perform an examination upon invoice of an order to examine from the deputy public district attorney. An examination of a non-seizable offense without an order to examine from the deputy public district attorney would render whatever proof gathered prohibited.”

In a later case of PP v Cha Chor Kian [1998] 1 MLJ 167then-High Court Judge Suriyadi Halim stated: “For functions of non-seizable offenses, no examination might be performed unless ‘an order to examine’ clearance is gotten initially from the general public district attorney.”

Regarding which celebration had the power to examine, the found out judge stated: “For non-seizable offenses, no examination might be performed by the prosecution as it is carried out entirely by the authorities or other legal enforcement companies. It is routine law that it is the cops and not the prosecution who are offered the powers to detain, apprehend or to take homes in an authorised way.

“The cops whilst in the procedure of any examination or performing of their tasks will be bound by all the arrangements in the Police Act 1967, Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and the Federal Constitution, e.g. art 5( 3 ).”

An OTI can be stated to be a pre-condition for examining a non-seizable offense. The cops can not work out the unique powers of an examination supplied by the CPC unless and till an OTI is provided.

The reasoning for an OTI to examine a non-seizable offense is the mainly unimportant nature of such offenses.

The offenses under SOACA remain in no other way insignificant. They are seizable offenses– more major offenses that enable arrest without warrant and examination without OTI. All offenses under SOACA need to be made seizable offenses, consisting of the offense under Section 19.

Failure to make a cops report about sexual criminal activities being dedicated versus kids need to not be insignificant in nature. It must not be a less major offense when the info associates with the commission of major offenses.

A fine not going beyond RM5,000 can be simply a slap on wrist for some transgressors. The SOACA requires to be modified for the much better defense of our kids.– September 16, 2024.

* Hafiz Hassan checks out The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the viewpoint of the author or publication and does not always represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Short article might be modified for brevity and clearness.