Can charges be quashed for lack of particulars?

Question

Accepted Answer

Charges Can Be Quashed for Lack of Particulars If They Fail to Inform the Accused of the Alleged Offence

Prosecutors have argued that the four charges against former prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin contain sufficient particulars for him to mount a defence. However, the defence contends that these charges are defective due to a lack of detail, failing to inform the accused of how the alleged offences were committed, which they argue violates constitutional rights. The prosecution's stance is that they are not obligated to provide such specifics, citing legal interpretations that deem it unnecessary for a charge to detail the exact method of committing an offence.
Legal Requirements for Informing an Accused Person

The defence team for Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has asserted that the charges against him are non-compliant with Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). This section is understood to grant an accused person the constitutional right to be adequately informed about the manner in which they allegedly committed an offence. The argument presented is that the charges, being similarly worded except for dates, locations, and amounts, leave Muhyiddin in a position of having to guess and speculate about the specifics of the alleged abuse of his position.
Prosecution's Interpretation of MACC Act Provisions

Deputy public prosecutor Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin countered the defence's argument by referencing Section 23(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act. This provision, according to the prosecution, does not oblige them to provide particulars on how an accused person committed an offence or abused their power. The prosecution further stated that various Malaysian courts have previously decided it is not mandatory to detail the method by which an offence was committed within the charge itself.
Sufficiency of Notice for Defence Preparation

The prosecution maintains that the charges, as presented, are complete and offer ample notice for Muhyiddin to prepare his defence. They highlighted that the charges include specific dates, key factual details, and figures, which they believe are sufficient for the accused to understand the allegations. This perspective suggests that the information provided allows the accused to know what they have done, thereby enabling them to construct a defence.
Court's Consideration of the Application

Muhyiddin Yassin filed a motion seeking to be acquitted and discharged from the four charges, alleging they lacked the necessary particulars regarding how he purportedly abused his position or the Prime Minister’s Office for gratification. The specific allegations involve Muhyiddin, as Prime Minister and Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) president, purportedly using his position to receive RM232.5 million in bribes from three companies and an individual for his party. The High Court judge has fixed August 15 for a decision on this application.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Can charges be quashed for lack of particulars?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends