KUALA LUMPUR: An opposition MP disagrees with Putrajaya’s plan to abolish the mandatory death penalty for serious, cruel and premeditated crimes.
Speaking in the Dewan Rakyat, Mas Ermieyati Samsudin (PN-Masjid Tanah) argued that such crimes have a long-term negative emotional impact on the victims’ family members if those convicted are not given the death penalty.
“What about the emotions of those who have lost (their loved ones) when this (bill) is enforced?
“We must take into consideration the suffering (faced by the family members) when it comes to serious crimes,” she said during the debate on the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Bill 2023.
The bill also seeks to amend the imposition of life-long imprisonment and caning, as well as the provisions to amend seven related Acts – the Penal Code, Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, Arms Act 1960, Kidnapping Act 1961, Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Strategic Trade Act 2010, and the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).
The amendments of these Acts would be in line with the government’s policy to abolish the death penalty.
With the amendments, the court has the discretion to apply the death penalty or imprisonment for a period of not more than 40 years.
Abdul Latiff Abdul Rahman (PN-Kuala Krai) proposed that the court take into consideration the rights of the murder victims’ family members.
He questioned the criteria and factors for the court to consider before it decides not to sentence a convicted killer to death.
“For murder cases, the rights of the victims’ family members must be taken into consideration by the court. However, the death penalty should only be executed if there were demands by the family or their loved ones.
“If the convict is forgiven, the convict must pay a penalty or compensation to the family and an alternative punishment can be carried, including caning,” he said. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.