TO ALI HAMSA, IGP, PEGAWAI2 KERAJAAN ETC : JUST SOME EXPLANATORY NOTES - ACCESSORY TO A CRIME, AIDING AND ABETTING A CRIME

1.  ACCESSORY TO A CRIME

Aiding or contributing in a secondary way or assisting in or contributing to as a subordinate.

In Criminal Law, contributing to or aiding in the commission of a crime. One who, without being present at the commission of an offense, becomes guilty of such offense, not as a chief actor, but as a participant, as by command, advice, instigation, or concealment; either before or after the fact or commission.

One who aids, abets, commands, or counsels another in the commission of a crime.

In common law, an accessory could not be found guilty unless the actual perpetrator was convicted. In most jurisdictions today, however, an accessory can be convicted even if the principal actor is not arrested or is acquitted. 

The prosecution must establish that the accessory in some way instigated, furthered, or concealed the crime. 

An accessory must knowingly promote or contribute to the crime. In other words, she or he must aid or encourage the offense deliberately, not accidentally. 

2.  AIDING AND ABETTING A CRIME

Aiding and abetting is a legal doctrine related to the guilt of someone who aids or abets in the commission of a crime. It exists in a number of different countries and generally allows a court to pronounce someone guilty for aiding and abetting in a crime even if they are not the principal offender.
 

A person who aids or abets in the commission of a crime is treated the same as a principal offender under the criminal law. 

Every one is a party to an offence who
 

(a) actually commits it;

(b) does or omits to do anything for the purpose of aiding any person to commit it; or

(c) abets any person in committing it.

To show that an accused aided or abetted in the commission of a crime, the PROSECUTION does not need to prove the guilt of a specific principal offender.

The PROSECUTION must show something more than mere presence to prove the act of aiding or abetting.

Presence in the commission of a crime might be evidence of aiding and abetting if the accused had prior knowledge of the crime, or if the accused had legal duty or control over the principal offender. 

For example, the owner of a car who lets another person drive dangerously without taking steps to prevent it may be guilty because of their control over the driver's use of the vehicle.

The PROSECUTION need only show that the accused had prior knowledge that "an offence of the type committed was planned", but it is not necessary that the accused desired the result or had the motive of assisting the crime. Intention to assist the crime is sufficient.