2007 09: Fate of killer teen on hold

The Star online. News. Courts. Tuesday September 18, 2007

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has reserved its judgment on the prosecution’s appeal against a Court of Appeal’s decision to release a teenager detained in prison at the pleasure of the King for the murder of his tuition teacher’s daughter five years ago.

Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, Court of Appeal president Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad, Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Justice Richard Malanjum and Federal Court judge Tan Sri Zaki Tun Azmi said they needed time to deliberate the matter as it involved the Federal Constitution.

The same panel also dismissed Karpal Singh’s application to recuse the Chief Justice and Justice Zaki from hearing the appeal.

The boy, who turned 18 last month, was freed on July 25 because Malaysia has no law that can sentence a child convicted of murder.

In 2003, the High Court found the boy guilty of murdering the 11-year-old girl at her house here, by stabbing her 20 times and slashing her four times with a sharp object on May 30, 2002, and ordered him to be detained at the pleasure of the King. The boy was 12 when he killed the girl.

On July 12, the Court of Appeal upheld the conviction but ruled that the sentencing was “unconstitutional” as Section 97(2) of the Child Act 2001, which provided for this sentence violated the doctrine of separation of powers by giving the Executive the judicial power to set the term to be served by a juvenile offender.

However, Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail argued that the Child Act 2001 was validly passed by Parliament and the High Court could pass a sentence allowed by the law.
That law said the only sentence for a juvenile convicted of murder was that he or she would have to be detained at the pleasure of the King.

The boy’s counsel Karpal Singh, however, had argued that the country operated on the doctrine of the separation of powers and the Federal Constitution clearly set out the different roles of the legislative, executive and judiciary.

“There is constitutional guarantee of these arms being independent of each other and it is the doctrine of separation of powers which pervades in the parts and chapters adverted to.”
He added in this case, the offence for murder carried a death sentence, so it was not punishable by law, as Section 97(2) and 97(4) of the Child Act was void.