Labuan Financial Services Authority Act 1996 · s 28J

Suggest a correction

Tell us what is wrong in this text. We check every suggestion against the official version before we change anything.

What is wrong?Wrong or mistyped wordsWrong structure or numberingWrong title or detailsText that appears twice

What should change, and whyUp to 2,000 characters.The text as it should read (optional)

28J.
Admissibility of statements by accused persons
(1) In any trial or inquiry by a court into a criminal offence under this Act or under the laws specified in the Schedule, any statement, whether the statement amounts to a confession or not or is oral or in writing, made at any time, whether before or after the person is charged and whether in the course of an investigation or not and whether or not wholly or partly in answer to questions, by an accused person to or in the hearing of any investigating officer of the
Authority, whether or not interpreted to him by any officer of the
Authority or any other person, whether concerned or not in the arrest of that person, shall, notwithstanding any written law or rule of law to the contrary, be admissible at his trial in evidence and, if that person tenders himself as a witness, any such statement may be used in cross-examination and for the purpose of impeaching his credit.
(2)  No statement made under subsection (1) shall be admissible or used as provided for in that subsection if the making of the statement appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the person, proceeding from a person in the Authority and sufficient in the opinion of the court to give that person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.
(3)
Where any person is arrested or is informed that he may be prosecuted for any criminal offence, he shall be served with a notice

44                                      Laws of Malaysia                           ACT 545
in writing, which shall be explained or interpreted to him, as the case may be, to the following effect:

“You have been arrested/informed that you may be prosecuted for
.... (the possible criminal offence). Do you wish to say anything?
If there is any fact on which you intend to rely in your defence in court, you are advised to mention it now. If you hold it back till you go to court, your evidence may be less likely to be believed and this may have an adverse effect on your case in general. If you wish to mention any fact now, and you would like it written down, this will be done.”.
(4)
Notwithstanding subsection (3), a statement by any person accused of any offence made before there is time to serve a notice under that subsection shall not be rendered inadmissible in evidence merely by reason of no such notice having been served on him if such notice has been served on him as soon as is reasonably possible after the statement is made.
(5)
No statement made by an accused person in answer to a written notice served on him pursuant to subsection (3) shall be construed as a statement caused by any inducement, threat or promise as is described in subsection (2), if it is otherwise voluntary.
(6)
Where in any criminal proceedings against a person for an offence, evidence is given that the accused, on being informed that he might be prosecuted for it, failed to mention any such fact, being a fact which in the circumstances existing at the time he could reasonably have been expected to mention when so informed, the court, in determining whether the prosecution has made out a prima facie case against the accused and in determining whether the accused is guilty of the offence charged, may draw such inferences from the failure as appear proper; and the failure may, on the basis of those inferences, be treated as, or as capable of amounting to, corroboration of any evidence given against the accused in relation to which the failure is material.
(7)
Nothing in subsection (6) shall in any criminal proceedings—

Labuan Financial Services Authority                           45
(a)
prejudice the admissibility in evidence of the silence or other reaction of the accused in the face of anything said in his presence relating to the conduct in respect of which he is charged, in so far as evidence of it would be admissible apart from that subsection; or
(b)
be taken to preclude the drawing of any inference from any such silence or other reaction of the accused which could be drawn apart from that subsection.

Edit the text above. Up to 20,000 characters.Where you checked it (optional)A link to the official version, if you have one.

The text as we hold it

Open the official text

s 28JAdmissibility of statements by accused persons

(1)

In any trial or inquiry by a court into a criminal offence under this Act or under the laws specified in the Schedule, any statement, whether the statement amounts to a confession or not or is oral or in writing, made at any time, whether before or after the person is charged and whether in the course of an investigation or not and whether or not wholly or partly in answer to questions, by an accused person to or in the hearing of any investigating officer of the

Authority, whether or not interpreted to him by any officer of the

Authority or any other person, whether concerned or not in the arrest of that person, shall, notwithstanding any written law or rule of law to the contrary, be admissible at his trial in evidence and, if that person tenders himself as a witness, any such statement may be used in cross-examination and for the purpose of impeaching his credit.

(2)

No statement made under subsection (1) shall be admissible or used as provided for in that subsection if the making of the statement appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the person, proceeding from a person in the Authority and sufficient in the opinion of the court to give that person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.

(3)

Where any person is arrested or is informed that he may be prosecuted for any criminal offence, he shall be served with a notice

44 Laws of Malaysia ACT 545

in writing, which shall be explained or interpreted to him, as the case may be, to the following effect:

“You have been arrested/informed that you may be prosecuted for

.... (the possible criminal offence). Do you wish to say anything?

If there is any fact on which you intend to rely in your defence in court, you are advised to mention it now. If you hold it back till you go to court, your evidence may be less likely to be believed and this may have an adverse effect on your case in general. If you wish to mention any fact now, and you would like it written down, this will be done.”.

(4)

Notwithstanding subsection (3), a statement by any person accused of any offence made before there is time to serve a notice under that subsection shall not be rendered inadmissible in evidence merely by reason of no such notice having been served on him if such notice has been served on him as soon as is reasonably possible after the statement is made.

(5)

No statement made by an accused person in answer to a written notice served on him pursuant to subsection (3) shall be construed as a statement caused by any inducement, threat or promise as is described in subsection (2), if it is otherwise voluntary.

(6)

Where in any criminal proceedings against a person for an offence, evidence is given that the accused, on being informed that he might be prosecuted for it, failed to mention any such fact, being a fact which in the circumstances existing at the time he could reasonably have been expected to mention when so informed, the court, in determining whether the prosecution has made out a prima facie case against the accused and in determining whether the accused is guilty of the offence charged, may draw such inferences from the failure as appear proper; and the failure may, on the basis of those inferences, be treated as, or as capable of amounting to, corroboration of any evidence given against the accused in relation to which the failure is material.

(7)

Nothing in subsection (6) shall in any criminal proceedings—

Labuan Financial Services Authority 45

(a)

prejudice the admissibility in evidence of the silence or other reaction of the accused in the face of anything said in his presence relating to the conduct in respect of which he is charged, in so far as evidence of it would be admissible apart from that subsection; or

(b)

be taken to preclude the drawing of any inference from any such silence or other reaction of the accused which could be drawn apart from that subsection.