
Why no legal action in Batu Puteh's case? — Hafiz Hassan
This is where a prosecution policy would be useful.
The policy should outline the relevant factors and considerations which should be taken into account when prosecutors exercise their discretion to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence.
The policy should also serve to inform the public and lawyers of the principles which guide the decisions made by the prosecutors.
In Australia, the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth provides a two-stage test that must be satisfied before a prosecution is commenced.
First, there must be sufficient evidence to prosecute the case. Second, it must be evident from the facts of the case, and all the surrounding circumstances, that the prosecution would be in the public interest.
In December 2024, a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) recommended a criminal investigation against Dr Mahathir under Section 415(b) and Section 418 of the Penal Code. — Picture from X/ahmadmaslan
In determining whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute a case the prosecutors must be satisfied that there is prima facie evidence of the elements of the offence and a reasonable prospect of obtaining a conviction. The existence of a prima facie case is not sufficient.
In making this decision, the prosecutors must evaluate how strong the case is likely to be when presented in court.
They must take into account matters such as the availability, competence and credibility of witnesses, their likely effect on the arbiter of fact, and the admissibility of any alleged confession or other evidence.
The prosecutors should also have regard to any lines of defence open to the alleged offender and any other factors that could affect the likelihood or otherwise of a conviction.
The possibility that any evidence might be excluded by a court should be taken into account and, if that evidence is crucial to the case, this may substantially affect the decision whether or not to institute or proceed with a prosecution.
The prosecutors must look beneath the surface of the evidence in a matter, particularly in borderline cases.
Having been satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation or continuation of a prosecution, the prosecutors must then consider whether the public interest requires a prosecution to be pursued.
In this regard, the prosecutors must consider all of the provable facts and all of the surrounding circumstances.
The public interest factors to be considered inevitably vary from case to case, but the following may be considered:
whether the offence is serious or trivial;
any mitigating or aggravating circumstances;
the youth, age, intelligence, physical health, mental health or special vulnerability of the alleged offender, witness or victim;
the alleged offender's antecedents and background;
the passage of time since the alleged offence;
the availability and efficacy of any alternatives to prosecution;
the prevalence of the alleged offence and the need for general and personal deterrence;
the attitude of the victim;
the need to give effect to regulatory or punitive imperatives; and
the likely outcome in the event of a finding of guilt.
The above are not the only factors, but generally the more serious the alleged offence is, the more likely it will be that the public interest will require that a prosecution be pursued.
The decision to prosecute must be made impartially and must not be influenced by any inappropriate reference to race, religion, sex, national origin or political association.
The decision to prosecute must not also be influenced by any political advantage or disadvantage to the government.
If age is just a factor and not the only factor to prosecute a case, why the decision not to pursue legal action against former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad over Malaysia's withdrawal of its claim to Pulau Batu Puteh?
In December 2024, a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) recommended a criminal investigation against Dr Mahathir under Section 415(b) and Section 418 of the Penal Code.
Dr Mahathir said then that he was prepared to face any investigation and emphasised his integrity during his time as prime minister.
Let there be an investigation. It is not even a prosecution, not yet.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Star
8 hours ago
- The Star
Take me to court if I am wrong, Dr M says on Batu Puteh issue
KUALA LUMPUR: Take me to court if I am wrong in the Pulau Batu Puteh issue, says Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. The 100-year-old, who braved the crowd and rainy weather, to speak at the Turun Anwar rally here on Saturday (July 26) said that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim should not be acting like a judge. 'This country has courts, judges and public prosecutors. But Anwar did not use these,' he said. 'You are not a judge, you are a prime minister. You cannot decide who is guilty. Only the judges can determine whether I am wrong or not,' he said. Dr Mahathir said he is not afraid to fight it out in court and does not need immunity. On Tuesday (July 22), Anwar, in Parliament, had said that although an inquiry had found Dr Mahathir likely responsible for the loss of Batu Puteh to Singapore, no legal action was initiated due to his age.


The Sun
8 hours ago
- The Sun
No further action against Dr M did not override AG's decision
PUTRAJAYA: No further action against former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad over the sovereignty issue of Pulau Batu Puteh did not override the Attorney-General's decision, said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. The Prime Minister said the decision was made by the Cabinet, despite the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) having recommended otherwise. 'The RCI had recommended that criminal investigations be initiated against Tun Mahathir for betraying the country and for follow-up action to be taken. 'So, I did not override the Attorney-General's decision; it was a Cabinet decision. Although the wrongdoing was a serious betrayal, considering the circumstances and situation, we proposed that it need not be taken further,' he told reporters after attending the 50th Prime Minister's Cup Debate Finals here today. Anwar was responding to Perikatan Nasional (PN) chief whip Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan's motion to refer him to the Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee over his remarks on the RCI into the Pulau Batu Puteh issue. Previously, Anwar said the government has decided not to proceed with action against Dr Mahathir due to age-related considerations. The RCI on the Handling of Matters Related to the Sovereignty of Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge had recommended that criminal investigations be initiated against Dr Mahathir. That recommendation was among those included in the 217-page RCI report that was distributed to Members of Parliament in the Dewan Rakyat. - Bernama

The Star
11 hours ago
- The Star
AGC to re-examine influencer's false report case
PETALING JAYA: The Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) will re-examine the case involving a motoring influencer who lodged a false police report claiming to be missing which led to a massive search and rescue operation in Sungai Tui, Bukit Kepong just over a week ago. According to Sinar Harian, Attorney General Tan Sri Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar said that although the court has already sentenced the influencer and his brother to one month in jail and fined them RM1,500, his office would conduct a thorough review of the charges and facts of the case. 'I cannot comment further at this point because sentencing falls under the jurisdiction of the court. 'But we will look into the matter again comprehensively — that's all I can say for now,' he told reporters after launching the Santuni Madani: Satu Pemimpin Satu Kampung programme at SK Pulai Chondong near Machang in Kelantan on Saturday (July 26). On Friday, Magistrate Suzana Mokhtar at the Muar Magistrate's Court in Johor sentenced the accused, Tengku Nizaruddin Tengku Zainudin, 38, better known as 'Ija,' and his younger brother, Tengku Abdul Aziz, 30. They pleaded guilty to lodging a false report under Section 182 of the Penal Code, which carries a maximum jail term of six months, a fine of up to RM2,000, or both upon conviction. The case sparked public outrage among the influencer's followers and frustration among rescue personnel, including the Water Rescue Team (PPDA), whose divers carried out more than 10 high-risk dives in the murky river in search of the two men. Earlier, in an impact statement delivered in court, Fire and Rescue Zone 4 chief Senior Fire Superintendent II Norshuhada Amsari, who led the operation, described the accused's actions as an abuse of emergency resources. She said the hoax disrupted actual emergency operations and wasted government assets and logistics. Norshuhada also revealed that the false alarm forced her team to postpone another critical search mission at Sungai Gersik involving a victim believed to have fallen from a bridge.