PETALING JAYA: The uproar rages over “No Further Action” (NFA) against Plantation Industries and Commodities Mohd Minister Khairuddin Aman Razali who breached mandatory home quarantine upon his return from abroad.
The decision to classify the case as NFA after more than 100 days of police investigations was made by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC).
Reason: A health ministry officer failed to issue Khairuddin a 14-day home quarantine order on his return from Turkey in July.
Senior lawyer Mohd Haaziq Pillay sheds light on the processes of the law in the case that has brought quarantine rules in the country under scrutiny.
Whose right is it to NFA a matter?
Police will investigate the matter and present their findings to the AGC.
The ultimate decision whether to charge a person or not lies with the AGC that will base it on the evidence presented.
Nolle prosequi (to be unwilling to pursue) cannot be questioned by any court of law. This is provided by Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution.
Hasn’t Khairuddin admitted guilt by paying a compound fine?
No. He merely paid a compound fine for breaching the SOP.
He was never charged in court where a plea is taken.
And the basis of the plea was never adjudicated by a court of law.
A guilty plea is only valid when an accused person pleads guilty in court after the charge is read to him.
Will a compoundable offence be registered in a person’s record?
A matter that is not brought to court will not be in a person’s record.
Can an appeal be made to the attorney-general on the decision to NFA the case?
Technically, an appeal can be made to the attorney-general to reconsider his decision but ultimately the discretion whether to reconsider it lies with him.
Can the ‘technical error’ of failure to issue a home quarantine order be contested in court?
Any decision made by the attorney-general cannot be questioned in court. So, the issue of the technical error cannot be ventilated in court.
Do you see this outcome as double standards between the elite and average Malaysian?
It is a difficult question as the attorney-general in his wisdom deemed it fit that it would be difficult to get a conviction by the absence of Form 14b which is an order by the ministry of health for mandatory quarantine under Act 342. It is a statutory requirement.
Was it morally wrong for Khairuddin to not undergo mandatory quarantine?
Although he was not served with the form, the minister should have quarantined himself as many other Malaysians had to undergo the same process upon returning home. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.