August 11, 2012
Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG) to the Appeal Court: Clarify Your Judgement
August 10 — Yesterday, the Court of Appeal unanimously decided to overturn a High Court decision sentencing national bowler Noor Afizal Azizan to five years’ jail for statutory rape. Instead, he was bound over for five years for good behaviour, for a sum of RM25, 000.
In his judgment, Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Raus Md Shariff (left) noted that “public interest would not be served if Noor Afizal was sent to jail as he had a bright future.”
While the Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG) acknowledges the lack of information on factors influencing the appellate court’s decision in sentencing, we are troubled that the perpetrator’s potential for “a bright future”, presumably derived from his status as a national athlete, was used as one of the grounds for sentencing.
If this was the sole influencing factor in sentencing, then JAG expresses regret over the decision by the Court of Appeal that the perpetrator was released on probation of good conduct for the offence of statutory rape.
On the surface, the judgment appears to hint at the application of a double standard by implying that anyone with the right “credentials” can commit a crime, and get away with a rap on the knuckles. Does it mean that an individual who is perceived to have no future would get a heavier sentence?
JAG respects and upholds the discretionary powers of the court in sentencing; we believe that the court has a duty to exercise its powers equitably so as to ensure that justice is applied equally to all strata of society.
We recognise the potential complexities involved in statutory rape cases. While statutory rape laws are put into place to protect children from abuse by older, predatory partners, teenagers in a sexual relationship can sometimes get caught in the crossfire.
We urge the judiciary to clarify in their judgment all of the factors that were taken into account for the sentencing. JAG hopes that although the victim may have “consented” to sex, the effect of the crime on the victim (i.e. a child of 13 years) was also considered.
* The Joint Action Group for Gender Equality (JAG) comprises Sisters In Islam (SIS), the Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO), All Women’s Action Society (AWAM), Women’s Centre for Change, Penang (WCC), Perak Women for Women Society (PWW) and Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (EMPOWER).
“In his judgment, Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Raus Md Shariff (left) noted that “public interest would not be served if Noor Afizal was sent to jail as he had a bright future.”
This is one of the WTF moments didi has been waiting for. Yet she’s never around when she is needed.
By the same reasoning i.e. the guy who did the crime “has a bright future” a Malaysian court would have to release the shooter who killed 12 people during the screening of the latest Batman movie in Colorado, U.S. James Holmes was a Ph.D. student in neuroscience.
The entire panel of the Court of Appeal should be sent to prison. Let’s wait to read their written judgements to find out what legal theories they use in the search for mitigating circumstances. Over here he would be spending eight years in jail. With good behaviour and one third remission he should expect to be released only in 2017.
Judges in this country are worth just two sen ‘a piece’. Now, what justice can they dispense?
It’s the same with UMNO politicians, ulamaks, police, AG, the media and even the royalty.
They make convoluted judgments, rulings and decisions and then show their middle fingers at us. Now what can we do to this blatant display of arrogance?
SOME DAY some of these so called judges daughters may become the victims of this rapist . Then lets see what they say!
someday your son may have made a mistake and have sex with his girl friend who apparently is underage.
_________________
So what? He too must go to jail and deserves that for statutory rape. No sympathy from me.–Din Merican
It is after reading something like this that Imam Hoslan Hussain’s boots come to mind. Imam Hoslan Hussein – a simple man with no degree in law to his name but he knew right from wrong and knew how to use his boots too!
Sometime ago, a judge in the High Court was roundly castigated for giving a similar (not the exact) sentence for such an offence. In that case, the accused was 18 and the victim was 15. The judge went through psychological trauma and ended up an insomiac. When asked why such a verdict was made, she (yes, a she) said that the offense was consensual and that the minor was ‘experienced’ and looked mature beyond her age. The perp was an ordinary boy – who like all ordinary boys with raging hormones, did the ‘needful’. Who was i to argue?
So i prescribed the Xanax. Guilty as charged. I really think that this particular case was appealed because of the golden bowling ball and nothing else.
That is why we have prosecutor, judge and jury. And we don’t have all three rolled into one. The judge is a tribunal on the law and the jury the trier of the facts. The judge gives directions to the jury on the law. The jury applies the law to the facts as determined by them (jurors). We have a right to a trial by jury of our peers for felony offences which carry the threat of incarceration.
But I cannot believe that appeal judges sitting as a panel on a simple case which did not go to full trial because the accused made a guilty plea found reason to interfere with the sentencing by a lower court judge because “it is in the public interest.’ The sentencing range prescribed to trial judges requires in this case that the accused spend jail time. How much? That will be left to the trial judge. Cases like this one don’t normally go on appeal. Leave for appeal will be refused – unless sentencing is clearly excessive and meets the definiton of ‘cruel and inhumane’.
Justice in Malaysia has touched rock bottom.
I’d like to do a Noor Afrizal on T.S Raus Md Shariff’s daughter,but if she resembles him,then forget it,perhaps to one of his more beautiful nieces,at my age I too have a bright future,bright in the sense that if his daughter or niece is pretty,sexy or sluttish,then my future to have more pleasure will be assured and sanctioned by him,no less,what say you Mr Bean? maybe a gang bang would roust him from his slumber and make better and smarter judgement.With this kind of idiotic judge,who needs an appeal court jester.sheeesh,Bolo punya olan