Summonses issued under the Automated Enforcement System (AES) are invalid and Road Transport Department (RTD) officers do not have the power to issue summonses, or even charge the alleged offenders in court, PAS says.
The Islamic party's anti-postal summons group, Kase, said charging offenders in court by the RTD would breach the Road Transport Act 1984, which states that only the public prosecutor or a person acting on his authority can do so.
"We will object any charge in court before it is read out. Based on the Act, the charges cannot be pressed if those doing so are RTD officers as they don't have the right to do so," Kase legal adviser Zulhazmi Sharif (right) said.
"The public prosecutor, or at the very least his deputy, should be the ones representing the RTD," Zulhazmi told a press conference at the PAS headquarters in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.
"For RTD to present the charge, it needs to have consent from the public prosecutor. If it does not have the sanction, it can't take action," he said, adding that consent could only be given in writing.
Zulhazmi elaborated that when he objected to one such charge brought by an RTD officer in a Sepang magistrate's court yesterday morning, the court suspended all such cases until a deputy public prosecutor replaced the RTD officer.
Abuse of court process
However, he lamented, the same could not be said for the courts in Putrajaya, Kajang and Kuala Lumpur, as they continued to issue summonses to those who admitted guilt to various traffic offences.
"This is an abuse of the court process! It can also be counted as contempt of court since the RTD officers do not have the right to charge the alleged offenders," he exclaimed.
"The court should withdraw the summonses as the charges, from the very beginning, are not valid. If the cases are not valid, then the penalty is also invalid," Zulhazmi said.
Zulhazmi maintained that he was only questioning the court process. "As long as the AES charges are pursued by the RTD officers (in court), we will object."
PAS, through Kase, yesterday represented five individuals issued with AES summonses in the magistrate's court in Putrajaya, eight in Sepang, two in Kajang and three in Kuala Lumpur.
The Islamic party's anti-postal summons group, Kase, said charging offenders in court by the RTD would breach the Road Transport Act 1984, which states that only the public prosecutor or a person acting on his authority can do so.
"We will object any charge in court before it is read out. Based on the Act, the charges cannot be pressed if those doing so are RTD officers as they don't have the right to do so," Kase legal adviser Zulhazmi Sharif (right) said."The public prosecutor, or at the very least his deputy, should be the ones representing the RTD," Zulhazmi told a press conference at the PAS headquarters in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.
"For RTD to present the charge, it needs to have consent from the public prosecutor. If it does not have the sanction, it can't take action," he said, adding that consent could only be given in writing.
Zulhazmi elaborated that when he objected to one such charge brought by an RTD officer in a Sepang magistrate's court yesterday morning, the court suspended all such cases until a deputy public prosecutor replaced the RTD officer.
Abuse of court process
However, he lamented, the same could not be said for the courts in Putrajaya, Kajang and Kuala Lumpur, as they continued to issue summonses to those who admitted guilt to various traffic offences.
"This is an abuse of the court process! It can also be counted as contempt of court since the RTD officers do not have the right to charge the alleged offenders," he exclaimed.
"The court should withdraw the summonses as the charges, from the very beginning, are not valid. If the cases are not valid, then the penalty is also invalid," Zulhazmi said.
Zulhazmi maintained that he was only questioning the court process. "As long as the AES charges are pursued by the RTD officers (in court), we will object."
PAS, through Kase, yesterday represented five individuals issued with AES summonses in the magistrate's court in Putrajaya, eight in Sepang, two in Kajang and three in Kuala Lumpur.
Their cases were put off so that the RTD officers concerned could obtain the public prosecutor's consent to appear in the cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.