Back to Top

Print this page

Issue #17/2021 29 April 2021

New This Week Case(s) of the Week SIMPLEX SDN BHD & ORS v. PP [2021] 4 CLJ 595 ABLE FOOD SDN BHD v. OPEN COUNTRY DAIRY LTD [2021] 4 CLJ 614 JUDICIAL QUOTES  Appeal Updates Appeal Updates Latest Cases Legal Network Series CLJ 2021 Volume 4 (Part 4) CLJ 2021 Volume 4 (Part 5) Articles LNS Article(s) Legislation Highlights Principal Acts Amending Acts PU(A) PU(B) Legislation Alert

SIMPLEX SDN BHD & ORS v. PP [2021] 4 CLJ 595
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
MOHTARUDIN BAKI JCA; YAACOB MD SAM JCA; SURAYA OTHMAN JCA
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: W-09-15-01-2017]
05 JANUARY 2021

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE: Customs Act 1967 - Section 135(1)(g) - Under-declaring value of goods at time of import - Allegations of fraudulently evading customs duties and Taxed imposed on goods imported - Property seized following allegations of proceeds of unlawful activity - Whether there were elements of customs duties involved - Whether there was link connecting monies seized and unlawful activity - Whether Customs Department offered any compound or prosecuted - Whether prosecution succeeded in disclosing that offence under s. 135(1)(g) of Customs Act 1967 had been committed

CRIMINAL LAW: Anti-Money Laundering, Anti Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 - Section 56(1) - Forfeiture - Allegation of fraudulently evading payment of customs duties and taxes on goods at time of import - Whether elements of offence established - Whether offence committed

---

ABLE FOOD SDN BHD v. OPEN COUNTRY DAIRY LTD [2021] 4 CLJ 614
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
LIZA CHAN SOW KENG JC
[SUIT NO WA-22NCC-653-11-2019]
18 DECEMBER 2020

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Service - Foreign defendant - Service of notice of writ - Whether served in accordance with laws of New Zealand - Whether there were fundamental irregularities in service - Whether there was non-compliance with rules - Whether High Court of Malaya seized of extra-territorial jurisdiction - Whether Malaysian courts could assume jurisdiction over dispute - Whether there was express choice of jurisdiction in Contract - Appropriate forum to hear dispute - Whether service ought to be set aside

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Setting aside - Application for - Application to set aside service of notice of writ - Foreign defendant - Whether notice of writ served in accordance with laws of New Zealand - Whether there were fundamental irregularities in service - Whether there was non-compliance with rules - Whether High Court of Malaya seized of extra-territorial jurisdiction - Whether Malaysian courts could assume jurisdiction over dispute - Whether there was express choice of jurisdiction in Contract - Appropriate forum to hear dispute - Whether service ought to be set aside

---

“It is our considered view that the learned judge had fallen into error in holding that the advance ruling is amenable to judicial review and that the application for judicial review is not premature. Although the advance ruling is disadvantageous to the respondent by treating the distribution fee payable by the respondent to non-resident, PDL, as royalty, it has not adversely affected the respondent until the respondent has filed its tax return and tax was assessed. Until then the advance ruling remains at best the appellant's view on the tax treatment for the distribution fee payable under the proposed transaction between the respondent and PDL with no tax liability.”

“It is as clear as daylight that by coming to the court as a forum to address its grievance in respect of the advance ruling, the respondent was using the backdoor to appeal against the advance ruling which is final and unappealable and it is also circumventing the function of the Special Commissioners. This is an abuse of the court process and ought not be allowed.”  – per Yew Jen Kie JCA in Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri (LHDN) v. IBM Malaysia Sdn Bhd [2021] 1 CLJ 776

---

1. MS Elevators Engineering Sdn Bhd v. Jasmurni Construction Sdn Bhd And Another Appeal [2019] 1 LNS 813 (CA) affirming the High Court case of MS Elevators Engineering Sdn Bhd v. Jasmurni Construction Sdn Bhd [2018] 1 LNS 1107

2. Ooi Say Hup & Ors v. Loh Chee Seng & Anor [2018] 1 LNS 2006 (CA) affirming the High Court case of Ooi Say Hup & Ors v. Loh Chee Seng & Anor [Civil Suit No: 22NCVC-55-7/2015]

Legal Network Series

[2019] 1 LNS 1123	MOHAMAD ZUKHAIRI YUSOFF lwn. NIK MUHAMAD AMIRUL NIK MAZELAM & YANG LAIN 1. Kedua-dua pihak plaintif dan defendan wajar bertanggungan cuai 50% dalam kemalangan apabila plaintif mempunyai banyak ruang dan peluang untuk mengambil tindakan untuk mengelak perlanggaran daripada berlaku ketika defendan memotong jalan dan masuk ke laluan sah plaintif dari arah yang bertentangan. 2. Defendan tidak wajar dipertanggungjawabkan 100% terhadap kemalangan semata-mata kerana ketidakhadiran defendan ke Mahkamah untuk memberikan keterangan kerana defendan masih boleh melepaskan tanggungan melalui soal balas terhadap saksi-saksi plaintif dan juga bergantung kepada keterangan dokumentari yang dikemukakan sebagai eksibit. LALULINTAS JALAN: Kecuaian - Kemalangan jalan raya - Perlanggaran kenderaan dari arah bertentangan - Kemalangan berlaku ketika defendan memotong jalan dan masuk di laluan sah plaintif - Keadaan jalan yang lurus dan luas - Plaintif telah pertama kali melihat defendan pada jarak 20 meter dan membawa kenderaan pada kelajuan 70 km sejam - Sama ada wujud banyak ruang dan peluang untuk plaintif mengambil tindakan untuk mengelak perlanggaran - Sama ada plaintif mempunyai tanggungjawab untuk mengelak kemalangan - Sama ada kedua-dua pihak masing-masing bertanggungan cuai 50% terhadap kemalangan KETERANGAN: Beban pembuktian - Pelepasan beban bukti - Kecuaian - Liabiliti terhadap kemalangan - Defendan gagal menghadiri Mahkamah untuk memberikan keterangan - Sama ada defendan wajar dipertanggungjawabkan 100% terhadap kemalangan atas sebab kegagalan menghadiri Mahkamah untuk memberikan keterangan - Sama ada beban pembuktian masih di atas bahu plaintif untuk membuktikan kesnya di atas imbangan kebarangkalian sehingga di akhir kes - Sama ada defendan masih boleh melepaskan tanggungan melalui soal balas terhadap saksi-saksi plaintif dan juga bergantung kepada keterangan dokumentari yang dikemukakan sebagai eksibit KETERANGAN: Dokumen - Kebolehterimaan - Laporan awal perubatan plaintif - Laporan awal perubatan plaintif telah dirujuk di dalam laporan pakar defendan - Keperluan untuk memanggil pembuat dokumen - Sama ada terdapat keperluan untuk memanggil doktor yang menyediakan laporan awal perubatan plaintif untuk memberikan keterangan - Sama ada laporan awal perubatan plaintif telah dipersetujui pihak-pihak dan wajar diterima masuk sebagai ekshibit Bagi pihak perayu/plaintif - Ahmad Mustaqim Zaki & Adrian; T/n Saleha Tahir & Partners Bagi pihak responden kedua/defendan kedua - Roselizawati Mustapha & Siti Shafiqah; T/n Othman Hashim & Co Bagi pihak responden ketiga/defendan ketiga - Lavia; T/n SG Lingam & Co
[2019] 1 LNS 1145	KAIRUL AFNIZAM ALWI lwn. PP 1. Sabitan terhadap tertuduh adalah selamat setelah keterangan tidak bersumpah yang diberikan oleh mangsa kanak-kanak telah disokong oleh keterangan material yang lain. 2. Keterangan pakar perubatan dan laporan perubatan tidak boleh dilihat secara berasingan tetapi secara keseluruhan dengan keterangan-keterangan sokongan yang lain. 3. Keterangan sokongan merupakan satu keterangan yang bebas dan ia tidak boleh berpunca dari pengadu. Keterangan yang diberikan oleh ibubapa pengadu berkenaan perlakuan tertuduh yang telah diceritakan oleh pengadu kepada ibubapa tidak boleh menjadi satu keterangan sokongan yang bebas. Namun demikian, keterangan ibubapa pengadu boleh dilihat secara keseluruhan dengan keterangan sokongan yang lain. PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap sabitan - Kesalahan seksual - Seksyen 377CA Kanun Keseksaan - Perbuatan memasukkan objek ke dalam kemaluan kanak-kanak yang berumur 3 tahun - Mangsa kanak-kanak memberikan keterangan tidak bersumpah - Sama ada sabitan terhadap tertuduh adalah berdasarkan keterangan mangsa yang disokong oleh keterangan material yang lain - Sama ada keterangan pakar perubatan dan laporan perubatan mengesahkan keterangan mangsa - Sama ada keterangan saksi pakar dan laporan perubatan boleh dilihat secara berasingan dengan keterangan sokongan yang lain - Sama ada peruntukan s. 133A Akta Keterangan 1950 telah dipenuhi KETERANGAN: Sokongan - Ibubapa - Kesalahan seksual - Mangsa memberitahu kejadian dan perlakuan tertuduh kepada ibu mangsa - Sama ada keterangan ibubapa mangsa dengan sendiri boleh menjadi satu keterangan sokongan - Sama ada keterangan yang berpunca dari pengadu boleh menjadi keterangan sokongan PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Rayuan - Rayuan terhadap hukuman - Hukuman 24 tahun penjara dan 14 sebatan bagi kesalahan di bawah s. 377CA Kanun Keseksaan - Sama ada hukuman yang telah dijatuhkan adalah keterlaluan Bagi pihak perayu - Nik Saiful Adli; T/n Irmohizam Rosley & Nik Adli Bagi pihak responden - TPR Nazlyza; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Kelantan
[2019] 1 LNS 1249	PP lwn. YAP YEE HUAT Mahkamah mempunyai kuasa budibicara di bawah s. 39B(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 ('ADB') untuk menjatuhkan hukuman penjara seumur hidup dan sebatan tidak kurang 15 kali keatas mana-mana tertuduh yang telah disabitkan bersalah atas kesalahan pengedaran dadah berbahaya sebagai alternatif kepada hukuman gantung sampai mati sekiranya tertuduh telah memenuhi pra-syarat yang digariskan di bawah s. 39B(2A)(a), (b) atau (c) dan (d) ADB. PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Hukuman - Hukuman alternatif - Kesalahan pengedaran dadah berbahaya - Kuasa budibicara Mahkamah - Seksyen 39B(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 ('ADB') - Pengakuan bersalah - Sama ada Mahkamah mempunyai kuasa budibicara untuk menjatuhkan penjara seumur hidup dan sebatan untuk kesalahan pengedaran dadah berbahaya - Sama ada tertuduh telah memenuhi pra syarat di bawah s. 39B(2A)(a),(b) atau (c) dan (d) ADB Bagi pihak pendakwaan - Mohd Faisal Md Noor; Timbalan Pendakwa Raya; Kamar Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Selangor Bagi pihak peguambela - Alfred Egin; T/n Alfred Egin & Co
[2019] 1 LNS 1631	OVERSEAS REALTY SDN BHD v. WONG YAU CHOY & ORS Objection pertaining to the manner in which a preliminary issue is emplaced in court cannot be sustained when sufficient notice and time has been given to all parties to prepare and address the subject matter of the preliminary issue. Irregularities concerning emplacement of a preliminary issue is curable pursuant to O. 1A, O. 2 r. 1 and O. 92 r. 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 even when a party is deemed to have flouted the requirement of placing his preliminary issue through a formal application. CIVIL PROCEDURE: Preliminary issue - Principles and procedures - Objection on emplacement of a preliminary issue - Notice to raise preliminary issue given to court orally and through letter to opponent's solicitors - Whether preliminary issue should have been raised through a formal application - Whether sufficient notice had been provided to all parties on preliminary issue raised - Whether parties were provided sufficient time to prepare their submissions - Whether provisions under O. 1A, O. 2 r. 1 and O. 92 r. 4 of Rules of Court 2012 are applicable For the defendant 2 - Rashpal Singh; M/s Rashpal Singh & Co For the defendant 3 - PM Lee; M/s Khong & Son For the defendant 4-6 - Suhaila Haron ; Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang For third party - KL Mahkamah; M/s KSU Mahkamah
[2019] 1 LNS 1633	GOLDEN STATE RESOURCES SDN BHD v. MY MEDICAL CENTER SDN BHD An understanding between parties at various meetings and through exchange of communications without the same being reduced into writing and agreed upon remain non-binding on the parties. Such understanding will not create any contractual obligation between the parties and thus no breach could occur in regard to a non-existent contractual obligation. CONTRACT: Formation - Terms - Understanding reached during various meetings and exchanges of communication - Understanding of parties not reduced into writing and agreed upon by parties - Whether understanding remained non-binding CONTRACT: Breach - Allegation of - Breach of obligations of parties under contract - Agreement entered between defendant being a land owner adjacent to plaintiff's land to assist in plaintiff's efforts to raise platform of its land - Plaintiff alleged defendant had contractual obligation to allow plaintiff to create slope on defendant's land at common boundary - Whether sloping was part of contractual term agreed upon by parties - Whether defendant's consent was required in order for plaintiff to carry out sloping works - Whether there could be any breach in regard to a non-existent contractual obligation - Whether contract merely required defendant to bring down platform level at defendant's land only CONTRACT: Construction - Intention of parties - Contractual obligations - Existence of several documents governing transaction between parties - Whether intention of parties should be construed by looking at documents together or separately For the plaintiff - Henry Lim Nguong Hin & Kok Li Shan; Henry Lim & Co For the defendant - Sheanna Shanta; Shean-Low, Noor & Tan

---

CLJ 2021 Volume 4 (Part 4)

Order 59 of the Rules of the High Court 1980 ('RHC 1980') did not stipulate any time period for filing the application to tax costs. When no time for compliance was stipulated in an order for costs, time was at large and the Registrar had the power to fix time if the need should arise. If the court did not fix time, the applicant was not required to take immediate action to enforce the award of costs and, therefore, the applicant was not barred, purely by reason of passage of time, from executing the order and to have the quantum of costs determined.
Badru Duja Khan Mohamed Nabi Khan (Decd) v. Ayaz Ahmad Mohamed Salleh Khan & Ors [2021] 4 CLJ 467 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Dalam kes di mana 'orang didaftar' di bawah Akta Pencegahan Jenayah 1959 dikenakan sekatan kediaman terhad di bawah satu Perintah Pengawasan Polis (PPP) yang dibuat di bawah s. 15 Akta, hujah bahawa PPP tidak teratur kerana Pendaftar atau pihak polis gagal merekodkan butir-butir cap jari, foto dan lain-lain butiran orang didaftar sebelum membawanya ke lokasi pengawasan, dan sekaligus melanggar kehendak ss. 12 dan 13 Akta, adalah tidak bermerit. Perkataan 'boleh' di dalam ungkapan "mana-mana pegawai polis berpangkat Inspektor dan ke atas boleh melalui suatu arahan bertulis mengarahkan mana-mana orang yang namanya perlu disenaraikan di dalam Daftar supaya hadir di hadapannya bagi diambil cap jari dan dirakam gambar atau dicatatkan apa-apa butiran lain yang ditetapkan" (s. 13) tidak bersifat mandatori tetapi hanyalah suatu opsyen. Natijahnya, hanya nama, nombor kad pengenalan dan alamat orang didaftar sahaja perlu direkodkan bagi tujuan pendaftaran di bawah s. 12 Akta.
Mohammad Zaidie Zawawi v. Dato’ Abdul Razak Musa (Pengerusi, Lembaga Pencegahan Jenayah) & Yang Lain [2021] 4 CLJ 477 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Isu mengenai pengambilan keterangan saksi terlindung di bawah s. 265A Kanun Tatacara Jenayah tidak wajar dirujuk oleh Mahkamah Tinggi di sini ke Mahkamah Persekutuan. Ini kerana hujah yang dibangkitkan pemohon-pemohon bahawa s. 265A tidak berperlembagaan adalah isu yang boleh diputuskan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi sendiri; walaupun Mahkamah Persekutuan mempunyai bidangkuasa untuk memutuskan soal berkaitan kesan mana-mana peruntukan Perlembagaan Persekutuan seperti yang diperuntuk oleh fasal 128 nya, mahkamah tertinggi tersebut tidak harus dibebankan dengan perkara-perkara yang boleh diputuskan di peringkat Mahkamah Tinggi. Merujuk isu ini ke Mahkamah Persekutuan dan menangguhkan perbicaraan kes tidak akan membawa kesan penyelesaian penentuan pertikaian ini dengan lebih cepat seperti kehendak s. 84 Akta Mahkamah Kehakiman 1964.
Aizz Amidie Aziz & Yang Lain lwn. PP [2021] 4 CLJ 496 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The proper redress for a judgment debtor that is aggrieved by the judgment in default ordered against him as a guarantor for a loan would be for him to apply to set aside the said judgment, and not to resist the bankruptcy proceedings at the creditor's petition stage, especially when such proceedings were properly taken out against him. It is not open to a judge in exercising his jurisdiction in bankruptcy proceedings 'to strike out the creditor's petition by disputing the validity of orders made in earlier execution proceedings when the orders had not been set aside particularly so when the respondent had not at any time taken steps to have it set aside.'
Credit Guarantee Corporation Malaysia Bhd v. Supermaniam Selitan [2021] 4 CLJ 516 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The proper forum for disputes amongst natives in respect of overlapping or competing claims of native customary rights (NCR) to land is the District Native Court which has the sole and original jurisdiction to adjudicate on such matters, and not the High Court. This said, where the land in question has already been alienated to a third party, believable and cogent factual evidence of a continuous settlement and crop cultivation of the land must be presented by the native before it could be possible for the High Court to consider his claim that he has acquired or inherited NCR over the land. Absent that, the court would be hard pressed to dispossess a registered owner of his indefeasible interest in the land, or to find him liable for trespassing on the land.
Edward Gella Baul & Ors v. Superintendent Of Land And Survey & Ors [2021] 4 CLJ 525 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

Where the accused persons had pleaded guilty to a charge under s. 323 of the Penal Code for voluntarily causing hurt to a complainant, and it was found that the offenders were merely defending their mother from the complainant resulting in a fight that led to the complainant suffering injuries, these were circumstances which indicated that the accused persons had succumbed to a sudden temptation, or the offence committed by him/them was committed only as a result of a sudden uncontrollable impulse, or it was the result of sheer thoughtlessness. This thus affords some reason to exercise discretion under s. 173A of the Criminal Procedure Code and the order for the accused persons to enter, without recording a conviction, a bond for good behaviour for a period of two years.
PP v. Muhammad Fiqry Jafri & Anor [2021] 4 CLJ 552 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In a taxation exercise of a solicitor's bill on a solicitor-client basis, where a party alleges that the bill was unreasonable and ought not be allowed and where it was established that the parties had agreed for billings to be made on a time cost basis, it would not suffice for that party to simply make a general allegation that the total bill was unreasonable without identifying the particular disputed time entries and articulating why the time incurred was unreasonable, having regard to the complexity and volume of the work undertaken.
Skrine (Claiming As A Firm) v. NS Water Consortium Sdn Bhd [2021] 4 CLJ 571 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

CLJ 2021 Volume 4 (Part 5)

Money laundering is principally concerned with proceeds from unlawful activities, and this includes proceeds from an offence under s. 135(1) of the Customs Act 1967 (Act 235). Where, however, an application was made under s. 56(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Act 613) to forfeit monies seized in relation to an offence of fraudulent evasion of customs duties under s. 135(1) of Act 235, the court, after having considered the conditions and prerequisites of s. 56(1), and applying the standard of proof of "on a balance of probabilities" thereto, must further consider and determine the existence of the predicate offence under s. 35(1) of Act 235 but by applying thereto, in accordance with the mandate of s. 70(2) of Act 613, not the standard of balance of probabilities but the standard of "proof beyond reasonable doubt". And, once the predicate offence has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the court must then seek for proof, albeit again on a balance of probabilities, that the specific proceeds as derived from the predicate offence was used in the commission of money laundering. This last condition, of necessity, requires and calls for the element of mens rea.
Simplex Sdn Bhd & Ors v. PP [2021] 4 CLJ 595 [CA]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

In the matter of service of a notice of writ to a foreign defendant, service is considered good and accords with the requirements of the law when the cause papers have been served on the defendant in his country by a Malaysian High Commission, and there is confirmation by the defendant country's Consular office that the document had indeed been so served. Eminently, such matter is suitable for the application of O. 1A and O. 2 r. 1(3) of the Rules of Court 2012. This said, where a contract is made in Malaysia, and the breach occurred in Malaysia and most of the witnesses and evidence are within the jurisdiction of Malaysia, the Malaysian court is the appropriate forum to hear the dispute and should therefore assume jurisdiction over the same.
Able Food Sdn Bhd v. Open Country Dairy Ltd [2021] 4 CLJ 614 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

The plaintiff, having initiated a claim for loss of use of property arising from an act of trespass by the defendant, cannot further claim for restitutionary damages for the defendant's gains; to do so would offend the underlying principle of restitutio in integrum to restore the plaintiff to the same position he would have been in had there been no injury sustained.
Amsiah Rahim v. Borneo Samudera Sdn Bhd [2021] 4 CLJ 658 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

As a public servant, the accused Minister herein, in obtaining without any consideration RM2,000,000 from a company which he knew had dealings with him while carrying out his official duties, commits an offence under s. 165 of the Penal Code. Although the monies was argued to be a political donation, the documentary evidence and the money trail overwhelmingly defied that; the monies, which landed into the bank account of a company in which the accused had a 99.9% share and interest, must have been there for the benefit of the accused.
PP v. Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor [2021] 4 CLJ 668 [HC]

• SUBJECT
• CORAM
• COUNSEL

---

LNS Article(s)

1. THE IMPLICIT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO LIVE IN A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT: A MALAYSIAN PERSPECTIVE ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Ahmad Masum^[i] Nehaluddin Ahmad^[ii] Hajah Hanan Haji Awang Abdul Aziz^[iii] [2021] 1 LNS(A) liv

[2021] 1 LNS(A) liv



MALAYSIA

---

THE IMPLICIT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO LIVE IN A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT:
A MALAYSIAN PERSPECTIVE

by
Ahmad Masum^[i]
Nehaluddin Ahmad^[ii]
Hajah Hanan Haji Awang Abdul Aziz^[iii]

Abstract

The right to a healthy environment is a vital aspect of the right to life, for without a healthy environment it would not be possible to sustain an acceptable quality of life or even life itself. A healthy environment is vital to human life as it allows a person to grow physically, mentally and intellectually healthy. The right to live in a healthy environment has rapidly gained constitutional protection around the world. The right to live in a healthy environment continues to gain recognition. The constitutional right to live in a healthy environment represents a tangible embodiment of hope, an aspiration that the destructive, polluting ways of the past can be replaced by cleaner, greener societies in the future. The paper aims to examine the constitutional right to live in a healthy environment by making reference to Article 5(1) of the Malaysian Federal Constitution. The paper concludes that there is no express constitutional provision on the right to live in a healthy environment under the Malaysian Federal Constitution. However, the right to life appearing in Article 5(1) of the Malaysian Federal Constitution can be described as the right of every citizen in Malaysia to live in a healthy and clean environment. In other words, the right to live in a healthy environment is implicit and embodied in Article 5(1) of the Malaysian Federal Constitution.

. . .

[i] Senior Assistant Professor, Faculty of Shariah and Law, Sultan Sharif Ali Islamic University, Jalan Pasar Baharu, Gadong BE1310, Bandar Seri Begawan, Negara Brunei Darussalam. Email: ahmad.masum@unissa.edu. bn or medi24my@yahoo. com.

[ii] Professor, Faculty of Shariah and Law, Sultan Sharif Ali Islamic University, Jalan Pasar Baharu, Gadong BE1310, Bandar Seri Begawan, Negara Brunei Darussalam. Email: ahmadnehal@yahoo.com.

[iii] Lecturer, Faculty of Shariah and Law, Sultan Sharif Ali Islamic University, Jalan Pasar Baharu, Gadong BE1310, Bandar Seri Begawan, Negara Brunei Darussalam. Email: hana.aziz@unissa.edu.bn.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

2. A LEGAL AND PLANNING ANALYSIS ON THE EXTENSION OF THE RIGHTS TO EDUCATION OF THE ORANG ASLI TO INCLUDE PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY: MALAYSIAN EXPERIENCE ^{[Read excerpt]}
   by Siti Sarah Sulaiman* Inna Junaenah** [2021] 1 LNS(A) lv

[2021] 1 LNS(A) lv



MALAYSIA

---

A LEGAL AND PLANNING ANALYSIS ON THE EXTENSION OF THE RIGHTS TO EDUCATION
OF THE ORANG ASLI TO INCLUDE PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY:
MALAYSIAN EXPERIENCE

by
Siti Sarah Sulaiman*
Inna Junaenah**

ABSTRACT

Article 12 of the Federal Constitution (FC) of Malaysia recognises the right to education, for which the Malaysian Government had successfully provided education to its citizens without prejudice on the basis of religion, race, descent, place of birth, or gender. In this regard, the Orang Asli have not been left out. This right is also enshrined in section 17 of the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954. Unfortunately, the provision is deficient pertaining to clear standards which might strengthen Malaysia's Planning on physical accessibility to the right to education. The extent to which the aborigines can go to school for learning, considering the difficulty in reaching the school, is of great concern due to its long-distance, inadequate infrastructure, improper route, and syllabus availability. Therefore, this article discusses the right to education for the aborigines based on the physical accessibility perspective of the learning institution or school. A library-based study is conducted by analysing relevant Acts, policies, legal documents and reviewing articles to identify the research gap. This study will be valuable to strengthen the aborigines' rights by extending the meaning of right to education to the right to physical accessibility to education. This meaning comprises the reachable school location, adaptable facilities at the school building; manageable school by a community member; and adjusted national curricular through remote communication. Legal effort can be made by proposing an improved regulation for determining the schools' location and suitability for the Orang Asli.

. . .

* Senior Lecturer of Faculty of Law, University Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah Alam, Malaysia, email sitisarahsulaiman78@gmail.com.

** PhD Researcher of Faculty of Law, University Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah Alam, Malaysia, email inna.junaenah@unpad.ac.id.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

3. RULE OF LAW IN A TIME OF PANDEMIC^{+ [Read excerpt]}
   by The Hon Chief Justice Helen Murrell* [2021] 1 LNS(A) lvi

[2021] 1 LNS(A) lvi



AUSTRALIA

---

RULE OF LAW IN A TIME OF PANDEMIC⁺

by
The Hon Chief Justice Helen Murrell*

A year ago, we were gathered in one ceremonial courtroom, side by side, shaking hands, remarking on the interstate and overseas holidays that some of us had taken during the Christmas shutdown period, and bemoaning the commencement of the work year.

It is now almost a year since 11 March 2020, when the World Health Organisation declared the coronavirus outbreak to be a pandemic, and we sit 1.5 metres apart and in two courtrooms, but we still meet as one profession and sit as one Court. We welcome the fact that we are here at all. We are happy to be surrounded by our colleagues, and that they and we have survived with our health intact.

But have our institutions survived with their health intact? Has liberal democracy survived with its health intact?

The pandemic and the rule of law in Australia

A year on, it is instructive to reflect on how the past year has both accelerated change in the delivery of justice and exposed the fragility of the rule of law – that pillar of liberal democracy that is so important to us as lawyers.

. . .

+Published with kind permission of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory. See Ethos Issue 259. Autumn 2021.

*Chief Justice Helen Murrell, ACT SUPREME COURT, Commencement of the 2021 Legal Year.

---

Please subscribe to cljlaw or login for the full article.

Principal Acts

Amending Acts

PU(A)

PU(B)

Legislation Alert