• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • RSS
  • Archives
  • Subscribe
The Nut Graph

The Nut Graph

Making Sense of Politics & Pop Culture

  • Projects
    • MP Watch
    • Found in Conversation
  • Current Issues
    • 6 Words
    • Commentary
    • Features
    • Found in Quotation
    • News
  • Columns
  • Interviews
    • Exclusives
    • Found in Malaysia
  • Multimedia
    • Audio
    • Pictures
    • Videos
  • Corrections
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Vault
    • Found in Translation

Youth who killed teacher’s daughter to remain in jail

July 23, 2009

PUTRAJAYA, 23 July 2009: A teenager who was convicted of killing his tuition teacher’s daughter in 2002 has exhausted all avenues to declare his punishment unconstitutional, and will remain behind bars at the pleasure of the king.

The youth, now 20 years old, had asked the Federal Court to restore the Court of Appeal decision that ordered his release on 25 July 2007, after declaring that Section 97 (2) of the Child Act, which provides the power to detain a minor convicted of murder at the pleasure of the ruler, was unconstitutional.

The Federal Court today heard the boy’s application to review its 23 Oct 2007 decision, which overturned the Court of Appeal order.

Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria and Federal Court judges Datuk Seri S Augustine Paul and Datuk Wira Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff unanimously ruled that this was not a rare and exceptional case that warranted the apex court to invoke its inherent power to review its previous ruling under Rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995.

Justice Arifin said the arguments put foward by the boy’s counsel, Karpal Singh, on the doctrine of separation of powers had already been raised and considered by an earlier panel of the Federal Court.

In 2003, the High Court ordered the boy to be detained at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong after convicting him of stabbing his tuition teacher’s 11-year-old daughter 24 times at her house in Taman Sri Rampai, Wangsa Maju, between 3:30pm and 4:30pm on 30 May 2002.

He was 12 years old when he committed the offence.

The case caused an uproar in 2007 when the then Court of Appeal judge, Datuk Gopal Sri Ram (now Federal Court judge), in a landmark decision, ruled that Section 92 (2) of the Child Act was unconstitutional as it gave the power to the executive to sentence a child convicted of murder.

He said it went against the doctrine of separation of powers as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

Sri Ram had held that the courts must have the exclusive authority to find a person guilty of murder and then impose a penalty, and it could not merely convict a person but leave the responsibility of sentencing to the king, the rulers or governors who acted on the advice of the executive.

Sri Ram upheld the conviction, saying that there was “abundant” evidence against the boy, but set him free after holding that there was no law that prescribed a sentence for a child convicted of murder.

In his submission today, Karpal Singh said the Federal Court ought to invoke its jurisdiction to review the case because there were differing opinions by the government and the judiciary on the doctrine of separation of powers.

He said the Federal Court had ruled that the doctrine of separation of powers was not a provision of the country’s constitution.

However, he added, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz said in the Dewan Rakyat on 23 June that the executive was of the view that the doctrine of separation existed in the country.

“Doesn’t it make a rare case for the Federal Court to review? The Federal Court is obliged to do so,” Karpal said.

Deputy public prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin urged the court to reject the review application as she contended that there was no procedural misdirection or injustice in this case that warranted the apex court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to review the case.

She said there was no issue on infringement of doctrine of separation of powers as the matter had been deliberated on by the Federal Court previously, and any inteference by today’s panel would only amount to a matter of different opinion.

There must be a finality to this case, she said. — Bernama

Filed Under: News

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. siew eng says

    July 23, 2009 at 6:34 pm

    How is it that justice Gopal Sri Ram’s argument (which sounded right to me) didn’t hold up?

Primary Sidebar

Search

Recent Comments

  • Wave33 on The Nut Graph stops publication
  • Adam on The Nut Graph stops publication
  • PSTan on The Nut Graph stops publication
  • PSTan on The Nut Graph stops publication
  • Andre Lai on The Nut Graph stops publication

Recent News

  • The Nut Graph stops publication
  • Nasihat tentang sepupu yang mengganggu perasaan
  • Uncommon Sense with Wong Chin Huat: The Sunni-Shia split and the answer to Muslim unity
  • Why Malaysia needs the national unity bills
  • Challenging government in the digital age: Lessons from Kidex
  • Najib’s failure
  • Babi, anjing, pondan: Jijik orang Islam Malaysia
  • Kidex and the law – What the government’s not telling you
  • Beyond Dyana Sofya
  • Uncommon Sense with Wong Chin Huat: Does Malaysia need hate speech laws?

Tags

Abdullah Ahmad Badawi Anwar Ibrahim Barisan Nasional BN Bukit Selambau by-election dap Deborah Loh Ding Jo-Ann Election Commission elections Found in Malaysia Found in Quotation Gan Pei Ling government high court Hishammuddin Hussein ISA islam Jacqueline Ann Surin Khairy Jamaluddin KW Mak Lim Guan Eng Malaysia MCA Menteri Besar MP Watch Muhyiddin Yassin muslim Najib Razak Pakatan Rakyat Parliament Parti Keadilan Rakyat pas Penang Perak PKR police politics prime minister Selangor Shanon Shah Umno Wong Chin Huat Zedeck Siew

Footer

  • About The Nut Graph
  • Who Are We?
  • Our Contributors
  • Past Contributors
  • Guest Contributors
  • Editorial Policy
  • Comments & Columns
  • Copyright Policy
  • Web Accessibility Policy
  • Privacy Policy
The Nut Graph

© 2025 The Nut Graph