Back to Top


CLJ Logo CLJ Bulletin, Issue 2014, Vol 18
2 May 2014

Print this page
Introduction:

To get the most out of this law bulletin join CLJ Law Online now - http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=subscription

Feel free to forward this to your colleagues. Get this bulletin as email by going to http://www.cljlaw.com/?page=bulletinsubscribe


New This Week

1. Cases(s) Of The Week

a) ADISWARAN THARUMAPUTRINTAR v. PP & OTHER APPEALS

b) PP lwn. MANSOR MOHAMAD [2014] 1 SMC 33

c) JUDICIAL QUOTES

2. Latest Cases

a) Legal Network Series

b) CLJ 2014 Volume 3 (Part 7)

3. Articles

a) Legal Network Series Article(s)

4. Legislation Highlights

a) Principal Acts

b) Amending Acts

c) PU(A)

d) PU(B)


CASES(S) OF THE WEEK

ADISWARAN THARUMAPUTRINTAR v. PP & OTHER APPEALS
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
RICHARD MALANJUM CJ (SABAH & SARAWAK), ABDULL HAMID EMBONG FCJ, AHMAD MAAROP FCJ, HASAN LAH FCJ, ZALEHA ZAHARI FCJ
[CRIMINAL APPEALS NO: 05-314-11-2011(B), 05-315-11-2011(B), 05-316-11-2011(B) & 05-317-11-2011(B)]
5 FEBRUARY 2014

CRIMINAL LAW: Penal Code - Sections 34, 302 - Murder - Common intention to commit murder - Proof - Whether ingredients of murder proved against accused persons - Whether evidence only pointed to guilt of first accused - Whether no evidence that other accused present at scene as confederates of first accused

CRIMINAL LAW: Penal Code - Sections 34, 302 - Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Whether conclusively pointing towards guilt of accused persons - Common intention - Whether sufficiently proved by prosecution - Whether conclusively showed that death was caused only by first accused - Whether prima facie case proved against other accused persons

EVIDENCE: Adverse inference - Murder - Failure to call important witness - Whether fatal to prosecution's case - Whether sufficient effort made to trace witness - Whether adverse inference ought to be invoked - Penal Code s. 34, 302 - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g)

PP lwn. MANSOR MOHAMAD [2014] 1 SMC 33
MAHKAMAH SESYEN, JOHOR BAHRU
MOHAMAD HALDAR ABDUL AZIZ HS
[KES TANGKAP NO: 61-26-2011, 61-27-2011 & 61-28-2011]
15 MAC 2012

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Rasuah - Kesalahan meminta dan menerima wang suapan - Sama ada elemen-elemen kesalahan berjaya dibuktikan - Akta Pencegahan Rasuah 1997, ss. 10(a)(bb) & 11 - Sama ada anggapan statutori di bawah s. 42(1) berjaya dipatahkan

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pembelaan - Keterangan - Sama ada bersifat `afterthought' - Sama ada tertuduh memberi keterangan yang kredibel dan boleh dipercayai - Sama ada memberi faedah keraguan - Sama ada tertuduh menimbulkan keraguan munasabah terhadap kes pendakwaan

JUDICIAL QUOTES

PP v. ZHAO JINGENG & ORS [2010] 7 CLJ 516

[2] Issue: Whether the Magistrate, having agreed with the Investigating Officer (‘IO’) of the Immigration Department that the foreign nationals thus arrested by the Department were “trafficked persons”, and the IO having then applied for Interim Protection Order (‘IPO’) under s. 52 of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act 2007 (‘the Act’), could rightfully and properly invoke s. 51(3)(b)(ii) of the Act and order for the trafficked persons to be released to an Immigration officer for necessary actions under the Immigration Act 1959/ 63.

“Section 51(3)(b)(ii) of the Act should not have been relied upon by the Magistrate if he agreed with the IO’s conclusion that the 26 respondents are foreign nationals and trafficked persons. It is erroneous for the Magistrate to decide on the one hand that he agreed with the IO’s conclusions and, on the other hand, act in a contrary manner under s. 51(3)(b)(ii) of the Act and conclude that the 26 respondents are not trafficked persons and order their release. Due to this error by the Magistrate, the 26 respondents were purportedly released. This hampered the work of the IO in proceeding to take further action under s. 52 of the Act for an application to be made to the Magistrate’s Court for the recording of evidence of the trafficked persons under s. 52 of the Act.”

“Going by the report of the IO, I am satisfied that the 26 respondents are trafficked persons and the order by the Magistrate should be made under s. 51(3)(a)(ii) and not s. 51(3)(b)(ii) of the Act. I held that the Magistrate had erred in fact and in law and his decision to release the 26 respondents under s. 51(3)(b)(ii) of the Act is incorrect and improper. In exercise of my powers of revision under Chapter XXXI of the CPC, I allowed the application of the Public Prosecutor. I set aside the order of the Magistrate made under s. 51(3)(b)(ii) of the Act and substituted it with an order under s. 51(3)(a)(ii) of the same Act. I ordered that the 26 respondents be placed in a place of refuge for a period not exceeding three months from 17 August 2009, ie, the date of expiry of the IPO, to enable the enforcement officer to make the necessary application under s. 52 of the Act for the recording of their deposition or evidence before a Magistrate” – Per Yeoh Wee Siam JC in PP v. Zhao Jingeng & Ors [2010] 7 CLJ 516.

For more Judicial Quotes, please login and view under "References" or subscribe to CLJLaw.

LATEST CASES

Legal Network Series

[2013] 1 LNS 88 MOHD KUSAINI MAHMUD v. PP CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Prosecution's case - Prima facie case - Whether a reasonable inference could be drawn that accused had knowledge of the drugs from the place where the drugs were found - Whether accused was in possession of the drugs found in the room - Whether any break in chain in evidence of how drugs were handled marked and stored - Whether drugs produced in court were the same drugs seized by police from accused's room - Whether prosecution proved a prima facie case against accused
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial - Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 - Defence's story - Accused purportedly shared room with friend named "Aizat" - Whether failure of accused to give further details of friend showed that friend either did not exist and even if existed had nothing to do with drugs in his room - Whether failure to call this friend raised an adverse inference against accused - Whether accused failed to raise any reasonable doubt - Whether accused also failed to rebut presumption of trafficking - Whether prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt
[2013] 1 LNS 90 KRISHNAVENI MUNUSAMY & ANOR v. BAWANESWARY R CHINNIAH & ORS CIVIL PROCEDURE: Locus standi - Capacity – 1st plaintiff and deceased divorced - Whether 1st plaintiff had locus standi to bring action since she was not the lawful widow of deceased - Issue whether 1st nomination was still valid or whether 2nd nomination superseded 1st nomination - Whether 1st plaintiff was bringing the action in her capacity as a nominee under the 1st nomination and not in her capacity as the lawful widow of deceased – 1st plaintiff's capacity to bring the action as a next friend of the two children - Whether 1st plaintiff had locus standi to maintain this action as an alleged nominee under the 1st nomination - Whether 1st plaintiff had the locus standi to bring this action for and on behalf of the two children
PROVIDENT FUND: Beneficiary - Nomination - Whether 1st nomination or 2nd nomination of deceased valid - Whether 1st nomination revoked or cancelled by deceased and superseded by 2nd nomination - Whether 1st nomination ceased to have effect under regulation 7(1)(b) of the EPF Regulations 2001 when deceased made second or subsequent nomination under rule 34(2) of the EPF Rules 1991 - Whether deceased acted under regulation 7(1)(c) of the EPF Regulations 2001 and this sufficed to meet requirements of that regulation for 1st nomination to cease to have effect - Whether 1st plaintiff had legal claim to amount standing to deceased's credit in the EPF - Whether she was no longer a nominee of deceased when deceased made 2nd nomination which revoked 1st nomination - Whether two children had legal claim to deceased's EPF money since they had not been nominated as deceased's nominees for such money
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: Construction of statutes - Conjunctive or disjunctive - Whether regulation 7(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the EPF Regulations 2001 should be read disjunctively in view of the connecting word "or" that appears between paragraphs (b) and (c) of regulation 7- Whether would be totally illogical to read regulation 7(1)(a), (b) and (c) conjunctively, and even fatal to plaintiff if regulation 7(1) (a) had to be read together with regulation 7(1) (b) and (c) - Whether such interpretation would mean that 1st plaintiff's claim would be defeated - Whether such interpretation as contended by 1st plaintiff would mean nominee or 1st plaintiff had to pass away first before her ex-husband/deceased could make 2nd nomination
[2013] 1 LNS 113 SPENCER LU KHEE KIUN v. UNIMEKAR METALS SDN BHD CONTRACT: Employment contract - Variation - Plaintiff present at the 2010 meeting and participated in the discussion on revision of retirement age - Plaintiff continued to work for defendant without any protest - Whether revision of retirement age from 60 to 55 years old was valid in law - Whether plaintiff was aware and accepted new term of employment - Whether plaintiff was bound by the 2010 revision - Whether plaintiff had knowledge of the 'modus operandi' of defendant in respect of retirement age policy
[2013] 1 LNS 114 WISTANA CONSTRUCTION (LANGKAWI SDN BHD v. RAFIDI ABDULLAH & ORS CIVIL PROCEDURE: Pleadings - Further and better particulars - Defendants' attempt to impose 'conditions' on payments made towards settlement despite being notified that would not be acceptable - Whether an attempt to unreasonably claim further advantage which defendants were not entitled to do - Failure to furnish further and better particulars ordered by the court in the proper format despite the courts further direction and indulgences - Whether amounted to a deliberate and calculated affront on the integrity of the court's directions and orders - Whether Statement of Defence should be struck out and Judgment entered for plaintiff
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Trial - Case Management - Orders that Statement of Defence be struck out and Judgment be entered in favour of plaintiff made during pretrial case management - Whether the court was vested with wide powers during pre-trial case management process to make appropriate orders and directions to secure the just, expeditious and economical disposal of the action or proceedings - Whether orders made were well within Court's powers
[2013] 1 LNS 115 PUAH KIM YEN & ORS v. MAJU STEEL SDN BHD CIVIL PROCEDURE: Res judicata - Judgment - Earlier action - Whether res judicata applied such that having failed to introduce fresh evidence in the motion before the Court of Appeal, plaintiffs were precluded from commencing a fresh tort action to impeach the judgment of Court in a 2004 suit - Whether the court may decline to apply res judicata where to do so would lead to an unjust result - Prima facie evidence which could not be retrieved during trial in a 2004 suit now found and forthcoming - Whether proper procedure was a fresh action to impeach the original judgment
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Striking out - Writ and Statement of claim - Application for - Questions raised on the nature and quality of evidence retrieved which was not previously forthcoming - Whether Court should allow that complaint to be heard in a fresh cause of action to impeach the judgment of the Court in a 2004 suit

CLJ 2014 Volume 3 (Part 7)

COURT

FEDERAL COURT

Adiswaran Tharumaputrintar v. PP & Other Appeals
Richard Malanjum CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Abdull Hamid Embong, Ahmad Maarop, Hasan Lah, Zaleha Zahari FCJJ
(Criminal Law; Evidence - Penal Code - Common intention to commit murder - Whether ingredients of murder proved against accused persons) [2014] 3 CLJ 813 [FC]

COURT OF APPEAL

Yang Dipertua Majlis Daerah Gua Musang v. Pedik Busu & Ors
Abdul Wahab Patail, David Wong Dak Wah, Tengku Maimun JJCA
(Local Government - Church building demolished by local authority for non-compliance with demolition order - Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974, s. 72(4), (5)) [2014] 3 CLJ 847 [CA]

HIGH COURT

Kasai Reiko v. Annie Lor Lee Fong & Ors; Public Bank Bhd (Intervener)
Lee Swee Seng JC
(Trusts; Land Law - Constructive trust - Property - Registered proprietors of apartments held properties on trust for actual buyer - False representation) [2014] 3 CLJ 869 [HC]

Low Poh Kim v. Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Negeri Selangor & Ors
Prasad Sandosham Abraham J
(Land Law - Transfer - Fraud - Whether void and insufficient instruments used to dispossess original registered owner of land - Whether transfers defeasible) [2014] 3 CLJ 897 [HC]

Measat Broadcast Network Systems Sdn Bhd v. AV Asia Sdn Bhd
Nallini Pathmanathan J
(Civil Procedure - Security - Interim measure in pending arbitration proceedings - Jurisdiction - Whether High Court had power to grant remedy) [2014] 3 CLJ 915 [HC]

SUBJECT INDEX

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Security - Security for plaintiff's costs - Interim measure in pending arbitration proceedings - Jurisdiction - Whether High Court had power to grant remedy - Whether application for security flawed - Whether defendant in financial position to pay plaintiff's costs - Whether there was real possibility that plaintiff would be deprived of any order of costs made in its favour - Whether application ought to be granted - Quantum - Assessment of
Measat Broadcast Network Systems Sdn Bhd v. AV Asia Sdn Bhd
(Nallini Pathmanathan J) [2014] 3 CLJ 915 [HC]

CRIMNAL LAW

Penal Code - Sections 34, 302 - Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Whether conclusively pointing towards guilt of accused persons - Common intention - Whether sufficiently proved by prosecution - Whether conclusively showed that death was caused only by first accused - Whether prima facie case proved against other accused persons
Adiswaran Tharumaputrintar v. PP & Other Appeals
(Richard Malanjum CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Abdull Hamid Embong, Ahmad Maarop, Hasan Lah, Zaleha Zahari FCJJ) [2014] 3 CLJ 813 [FC]

Penal Code - Sections 34, 302 - Murder - Common intention to commit murder - Proof - Whether ingredients of murder proved against accused persons - Whether evidence only pointed to guilt of first accused - Whether no evidence that other accused present at scene as confederates of first accused
Adiswaran Tharumaputrintar v. PP & Other Appeals
(Richard Malanjum CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Abdull Hamid Embong, Ahmad Maarop, Hasan Lah, Zaleha Zahari FCJJ) [2014] 3 CLJ 813 [FC]

EVIDENCE

Adverse inference - Murder - Failure to call important witness - Whether fatal to prosecution's case - Whether sufficient effort made to trace witness - Whether adverse inference ought to be invoked - Penal Code s. 34, 302 - Evidence Act 1950, s. 114(g)
Adiswaran Tharumaputrintar v. PP & Other Appeals
(Richard Malanjum CJ (Sabah & Sarawak), Abdull Hamid Embong, Ahmad Maarop, Hasan Lah, Zaleha Zahari FCJJ) [2014] 3 CLJ 813 [FC]

LAND LAW

Sale and purchase - Transfer purchase of properties in Malaysia by foreigner - False representation that properties could only be registered in name of Malaysian - Whether transfer to Malaysian tainted with fraud - Whether Malaysian held properties on constructive trust
Kasai Reiko v. Annie Lor Lee Fong & Ors; Public Bank Bhd (Intervener)
(Lee Swee Seng JC) [2014] 3 CLJ 869 [HC]

Transfer - Fraud - Whether void and insufficient instruments used to dispossess original registered owner of land - Whether transfers defeasible - Whether inefficiency of land title registering authorities facilitated commission of fraud - Whether proper procedures for issue of computerised land title to replace old document of title not followed - National Land Code, s. 5(A) and 14th Schedule
Low Poh Kim v. Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Negeri Selangor & Ors
(Prasad Sandosham Abraham J) [2014] 3 CLJ 897 [HC]

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Buildings - Demolition order - Local authority serving demolition order on church building - Church building demolished by local authority for non-compliance with demolition order - Church building not located within jurisdiction of local authority - Failure of local authority to give 30 days' notice before demolition - Whether demolition lawful - Whether local authority liable to pay damages - Whether local authority liable to pay exemplary damages - Street, Drainage & Building Act 1974, s. 72(4), (5)
Yang Dipertua Majlis Daerah Gua Musang v. Pedik Busu & Ors
(Abdul Wahab Patail, David Wong Dak Wah, Tengku Maimun JJCA) [2014] 3 CLJ 847 [CA]

TRUSTS

Constructive trust - Property - Registered proprietors of apartments held properties on trust for actual buyer - False representation - Whether transfers of properties fraudulent and should be set aside - Whether interest of chargee bank not privy to fraud protected under s. 340 of National Land Code - Whether chargee bank bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration and had acquired indefeasible interest
Kasai Reiko v. Annie Lor Lee Fong & Ors; Public Bank Bhd (Intervener)
(Lee Swee Seng JC) [2014] 3 CLJ 869 [HC]

ARTICLE

Legal Network Series Article(s)

1. THE DEVELOPMENT OF ISLAMIC BANKING LAWS IN MALAYSIA: AN OVERVIEW* [Read excerpt]
    by: RUZIAN MARKOM**, NORILAWATI ISMAIL*** [2014] 1 LNS(A) xxviii

2. KEPENTINGAN TEMPAT KEJADIAN JENAYAH (CRIME SCENE)DAN KETERANGAN FIZIKAL
    (PHYSICAL EVIDENCE) DALAM PENYIASATAN KES-KES JENAYAH
[Read excerpt]
    by: RAMALINGGAM RAJAMANICKAM* [2014] 1 LNS(A) xxix

3. CABARAN PENGUATKUASAAN DAN PELAKSANAAN PERINTAH NAFKAH DI
    MAHKAMAH SYARIAH NEGERI SELANGOR DARI PERSPEKTIF PEGUAM SYAR'IE*
[Read excerpt]
    (Challenges to the Enforcement and Implementation of Maintenance
    Order in the Selangor Syariah Court from the Syar'ie Lawyer's Perspective)

    oleh: ZAINI NASOHAH** [2014] 1 LNS(A) xxx

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS

Principal Acts

Number Title Date coming into force Repealing
ACT 761 Finance Act 2014 See s 3 for the Income Tax Act; s 33 for the Stamp Act; s 36 for the Petroleum (Income Tax) Act; s 44 for the Real Property Gains Tax Act and s 50 for the Labuan Business Activity Tax Act -Nil-
ACT 760 Fees (Department Of Museums Malaysia) (Validation) Act 2014 1 January 1991 to 11 June 2012 -Nil-
ACT 759 Islamic Financial Services Act 2013 30 June 2013 [PU(B) 277/2013] - except para(s) 1 to 10 of Schedule 9 and para(s) 13 to 19 of Schedule 9 -Nil-
ACT 758 Financial Services Act 2013 30 June 2013 [PU(B) 276/2013] - except s 129 and Schedule 9 -Nil-
ACT 757 Strata Management Act 2013 Not Yet In Force -Nil-

Amending Acts

Number Title Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
ACT A1460 Prison (Amendment) Act 2014 3 April 2014 ACT 537
ACT A1459 Prevention Of Crime (Amendment And Extension) Act 2014 2 April 2014 ACT 297
ACT A1457 Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act 2014 15 February 2014 ACT 234
ACT A1458 Supply Act 2014 1 January 2014
ACT A1456 Legal Profession (Amendment) Act 2013 Not Yet In Force ACT 166

PU(A)

Number Title Date of Publication Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
PU(A) 109/2014 Registration Of Businesses (Waiver Of Fee) Rules 2014 21 April 2014 30 December 2013 ACT 197; ACT 388
PU(A) 108/2014 Wildlife Conservation (Amendment Of Schedule) Order 2014 17 April 2014 18 April 2014 ACT 716
PU(A) 107/2014 Malaysia Deposit Insurance Corporation (Differential Premium Systems In Respect Of Deposit-Taking Members) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 16 April 2014 Assessment year of 2014 PU(A) 34/2011
PU(A) 106/2014 Road Transport (Prohibition Of Use Of Road) (City Of Kuala Lumpur) (No. 2) Order 2014 16 April 2014 20 April 2014 ACT 333
PU(A) 105/2014 Federal Roads (West Malaysia) (Amendment) (No. 5) Order 2014 14 April 2014 15 April 2014 PU(A) 401/1989

PU(B)

Number Title Date of Publication Date coming into force Principal/Amending Act No
PU(B) 135/2014 Notification Under Section 10 21 April 2014 22 April 2014 ACT 283
PU(B) 134/2014 Appointment Of Authorized Officers 18 April 2014 18 April 2014 ACT 308
PU(B) 133/2014 Appointment Of Authorized Officers 18 April 2014 18 April 2014 ACT 506
PU(B) 132/2014 Appointment Of Place Of Safety 18 April 2014 18 April 2014 ACT 611
PU(B) 131/2014 Appointment Of Probation Officers 18 April 2014 18 April 2014 ACT 611
[2014] 1 LNS(A) xxviii MALAYSIA

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ISLAMIC BANKING LAWS IN MALAYSIA: AN OVERVIEW*

by

RUZIAN MARKOM**
NORILAWATI ISMAIL***


ABSTRACT

Malaysia is well regarded by the international community as one of the leading Islamic financial centers. This was evidenced by the launching of an initiative by the Malaysian Government known as the Malaysian International Islamic Financial Centre (MIFC) on 14 August 2006. Behind this successful achievement, the emergence of Islamic banking in Malaysia stemmed from the establishment of the first full-fledged Islamic bank offering Islamic products and services in 1983 known as Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad (BIMB) under the Islamic Bank Act 1983. This article examines the development of Islamic banking and financial laws in Malaysia. Firstly, the background of Islamic banking and finance is addressed. Secondly, the development of the industry is described from its infancy until its recent achievement to become an Islamic financial hub. The next section dwells upon the issues relating to the current legislative jurisdiction and Shariah supervision on the matters. Finally, while the study illustrates that the finance industry is evolving progressively, further efforts and reformation are needed for the country to sustain as a'Malaysia International Islamic Financial Centre'.

Keywords: Islamic banking and financial laws; Islamic product; Shariah supervision; current legislative jurisdiction; Islamic Financial Centre.


. . .

* [Editor's Note: This paper discusses the development of Islamic Banking Laws in Malaysia prior to the repeal of the Central Bank Of Malaysia Act 1958 by s. 99 of the Central Bank of Malaysia Act 2009.] Journal of Law and Society. Published with kind permission of the Publication Committee of the Law Faculty, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

** Ruzian Markom. Senior Lecturer Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor. ruzian@ukm.my

*** Norilawati Ismail. LLM Student Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor.


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
[2014] 1 LNS(A) xxix MALAYSIA

KEPENTINGAN TEMPAT KEJADIAN JENAYAH (CRIME SCENE) DAN KETERANGAN FIZIKAL (PHYSICAL EVIDENCE) DALAM PENYIASATAN KES-KES JENAYAH

by

RAMALINGGAM RAJAMANICKAM*


1.0 PENGENALAN

Bidang forensik mula diperkenalkan pada awal 1900, apabila seorang penyelidik Perancis Edmund Locard membangunkan sebuah makmal penyiasatan di Lyon pada 1910. Beliau memperkenalkan prinsip asas dalam bidang forensik yang mengaitkan tiga elemen utama iaitu penjenayah, mangsa dan tempat kejadian yang boleh membawa kepada pengecaman dan pengenalpastian untuk mengaitkan tertuduh dengan mangsa dan tempat kejadian. Prinsip ini dipanggil Prinsip Pertukaran Locard (Locard's Principle of Exchange).[1]

Secara umumnya, dalam kes-kes jenayah, titik permulaan penyiasatan ialah tempat kejadian jenayah (crime scene). Apabila perbuatan jenayah (seperti membunuh, merogol, mencuri, merompak, mengedar dadah, menculik dan sebagainya) telah dilakukan oleh mana-mana orang, sudah tentunya wujud tempat perbuatan itu dilakukan. Hal ini bermakna dalam semua kes jenayah yang berlaku, pastinya terdapat tempat kejadian jenayah. Sehubungan itu, penyiasatan sesuatu kes jenayah biasanya dimulakan daripada tempat kejadian jenayah. Sebagai contoh, katakan satu pembunuhan telah berlaku di kawasan A, penyiasatan pihak polis/forensik akan dimulakan dari kawasan A yang mengandungi banyak keterangan yang bernilai. Begitu juga dalam satu kes mencuri, penyiasatan akan dilakukan ditempat di mana kecurian yang dilaporkan itu berlaku. Dalam kedua-dua contoh kes bunuh dan curi itu, pegawai penyiasat memulakan penyiasatannya dari tempat di mana kejadian itu telah berlaku iaitu apa yang boleh dianggap sebagai tempat kejadian jenayah.


. . .

* Pensyarah, Fakulti Undang-undang, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), 43600 Bangi, selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia. rama@ukm.my


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
[2014] 1 LNS(A) xxx MALAYSIA

CABARAN PENGUATKUASAAN DAN PELAKSANAAN PERINTAH NAFKAH DI MAHKAMAH SYARIAH NEGERI SELANGOR DARI PERSPEKTIF PEGUAM SYAR'IE*

(Challenges to the Enforcement and Implementation of Maintenance Order in the Selangor Syariah Court from the Syar'ie Lawyer's Perspective)

oleh

ZAINI NASOHAH**


ABSTRAK

Perintah Mahkamah Syariah tentang nafkah sama ada dalam bentuk perintah sementara ataupun sebaliknya, merupakan keputusan penghakiman yang mesti dipatuhi oleh pihak-pihak terbabit. Perintah yang telah dikeluarkan perlu dipatuhi sehingga ia diubah atau dibatalkan oleh mahkamah. Kegagalan pihak bertanggungan melaksanakan perintah mahkamah akan menyebabkan matlamat sesuatu penghakiman itu tidak tercapai. Ia juga bermakna bahawa keadilan telah gagal ditegakkan. Fokus utama artikel ini adalah untuk mengenengahkan cabaran-cabaran dan masalah dalam penguatkuasaan dan pelaksanaan perintah nafkah di negeri Selangor menurut perpektif Peguam Syar'ie. Soalselidik telah digunakan untuk mendapatkan maklumat daripada responden. Hasil kajian menunjukkan terdapat beberapa masalah utama dalam penguatkuasaan dan pelaksanaan perintah nafkah yang perlu kepada pertimbangan lanjut. Sebahagian besar masalah tersebut mempunyai kaitan dengan faktor sikap manusia. Oleh kerana itu, faktor-faktor tersebut hendaklah diberi perhatian dalam mencari langkah penyelesaian jangka panjang.

Katakunci: nafkah; Mahkamah Syariah; penguatkuasaan dan pelaksanaan perintah; sikap manusia; keadilan.


. . .

* Jurnal Undang-undang. Diterbit dengan kebenaran Jawatankuasa Penerbitan Fakulti Undang-undang, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

** Prof. Madya Dr. Zaini Nasohah. Jabatan Syariah, Fakulti Pengajian Islam Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor. zbn@ukm.my


Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.
x