KUALA LUMPUR: Parliament deferred the second and third reading of amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and Evidence Act to its next meeting.
This was due to heavy criticisms from Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat members on the CPC. The Evidence Act is yet to be debated.
Barisan Nasional Backbenchers Club (BNBBC) chief Tan Sri Shahrir Samad (pic) told The Star that there was "unhappiness" on certain amendments to the CPC, especially on matters related to judiciary discretion.
The Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Bill 2015 was tabled for its first reading last Monday.
During debates, some vocal Barisan backbenchers even called on the Government to withdraw the amendments.
Outspoken lawmaker Datuk Bung Mokhtar Radin (BN-Kinabatangan) said he could not "accept" the Bill which has "clear elements of abuse."
"I will not even vote in favour of this Bill now. This Bill in my opinion allows for the violation of the rights of others.
"The police cannot assume the role of a judge or the Attorney General. In our country, we must respect the separation of powers," said Bung.
Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said (BN-Pengerang) questioned the lack of in depth discussion on the Bill as it is "unfair" in many aspects.
"I would not say it is cruel but why the eagerness in tabling this Bill until the amendments seem to neglect the role of the judge and other agencies," she asked.
Datuk Shamsul Anuar Nasarah (BN-Lenggong) said on a personal note, he was not against the Bill but there was a need for the Government to review it in the interest of the public and uphold the roles of the police and judiciary.
"We can see from this Bill that there are some provisions that gives too much power to the police and some parties like judges have their powers reduced," he said.
Datuk Dr Marcus Mojigoh (BN-Putatan) said he disagreed with the amendment that gives the police the discretion to seize any property that they suspect is illegal.
Opposition MPs like M. Kulasegaran (DAP-Ipoh Barat) said the amendment to Section 282, which requires the Court to impose a consecutive sentence if a person is convicted at one trial for any two or more offences, was against the rules of natural justice.
The amendment reads: "when a person is convicted at one trial of any two or more offences, the Court shall not order the sentences of imprisonment to run concurrently."
Lim Lip Eng (DAP-Segambut) called the amendment unfair as the ultimate aim of the penalty should be to encourage the accused to repent.
"Usually the jail terms are imposed concurrently but if this is passed, an accused would have to stay much longer and a become more hardcore criminal," said Lim.
He suggested the formation of a law reform commission consisting of NGOs, Bar Council, Attorney-General Chambers and the police to study any future amendments to criminal laws before it is tabled.
Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa (PAS-Parit Buntar) also proposed for a special committee to be set up to discuss the details of future laws to be tabled.
"After that, it should go through public consultation before being tabled in Parliament and we can have better quality debates," he said.
Limited time offer:
Just RM5 per month.
