FMT:
Not every murderer will get the death sentence, says court
The Court of Appeal says the circumstances surrounding each murder differ so greatly that it is wrong to impose the death penalty for all cases.
Judges have been given sentencing discretion for murder and drug trafficking after amendments to several laws took effect on July 4. (Pixabay pic)
PUTRAJAYA: Not every convicted murderer will receive the death sentence, says the Court of Appeal.
Justice SM Komathy Suppiah said judges are now given the option to impose a jail term or capital punishment, and that not all murders are equally heinous.
“The factual circumstances surrounding murders differ so greatly from each other that it is wrong that they should all attract the death penalty,” she said in a judgment on the case of a Nigerian man who was sentenced to 35 years in jail for murdering a nurse in 2019.
On Aug 9, the bench, chaired by Justice Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera alongside Justices Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim and Komathy, also ordered Alowonle Oluwajuwon Gilbert, 40, to receive 12 strokes of the rotan.
Sentencing discretion for murder and drug trafficking was given to judges through amendments to several laws that took effect on July 4.
For murder, judges may impose a jail term of between 30 years and 40 years, while male offenders below 50 years of age could be flogged a minimum of 12 times.
Komathy, who wrote a 15-page judgment that was posted on the judiciary’s website yesterday, said the bench is of the view that the death sentence is reserved for the more “serious and exceptional murders”.
Unfortunately, she said, there are no explanations or illustrations to Section 302 of the Penal Code to indicate the factors which the judge is to take into account in determining whether or not to impose the death penalty.
She said as a broad guideline, the bench is of the view that the death penalty would be justified in dealing with, among others, hired and serial killers, those who rape and kill their victims for purposes of sexual gratification, dismembering the bodies of their victims, dangerous criminals who use firearms, and those who plan a murder and execute it in a cold-blooded manner.
Komathy said in Gilbert’s case, there was no evidence that he planned nor had a motive to kill his lover, Siti Kharina Kamarudin, in a condominium in Cyberjaya.
“The circumstances preceding the killing suggest that a sudden misunderstanding occurred between them some time in the early hours of May 9, 2019,” she said.
She said that while Siti was killed in a brutal manner, it was not the sole criterion for deciding whether the death sentence was warranted.
“It is true that an innocent victim has lost her life, but if the legislative purpose of Section 302 is ignored and the death sentence is continued to be imposed on every person convicted of murder, it would render the change in law redundant,” she added.
PUTRAJAYA: Not every convicted murderer will receive the death sentence, says the Court of Appeal.
Justice SM Komathy Suppiah said judges are now given the option to impose a jail term or capital punishment, and that not all murders are equally heinous.
“The factual circumstances surrounding murders differ so greatly from each other that it is wrong that they should all attract the death penalty,” she said in a judgment on the case of a Nigerian man who was sentenced to 35 years in jail for murdering a nurse in 2019.
On Aug 9, the bench, chaired by Justice Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera alongside Justices Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim and Komathy, also ordered Alowonle Oluwajuwon Gilbert, 40, to receive 12 strokes of the rotan.
Sentencing discretion for murder and drug trafficking was given to judges through amendments to several laws that took effect on July 4.
For murder, judges may impose a jail term of between 30 years and 40 years, while male offenders below 50 years of age could be flogged a minimum of 12 times.
Komathy, who wrote a 15-page judgment that was posted on the judiciary’s website yesterday, said the bench is of the view that the death sentence is reserved for the more “serious and exceptional murders”.
Unfortunately, she said, there are no explanations or illustrations to Section 302 of the Penal Code to indicate the factors which the judge is to take into account in determining whether or not to impose the death penalty.
She said as a broad guideline, the bench is of the view that the death penalty would be justified in dealing with, among others, hired and serial killers, those who rape and kill their victims for purposes of sexual gratification, dismembering the bodies of their victims, dangerous criminals who use firearms, and those who plan a murder and execute it in a cold-blooded manner.
Komathy said in Gilbert’s case, there was no evidence that he planned nor had a motive to kill his lover, Siti Kharina Kamarudin, in a condominium in Cyberjaya.
“The circumstances preceding the killing suggest that a sudden misunderstanding occurred between them some time in the early hours of May 9, 2019,” she said.
She said that while Siti was killed in a brutal manner, it was not the sole criterion for deciding whether the death sentence was warranted.
“It is true that an innocent victim has lost her life, but if the legislative purpose of Section 302 is ignored and the death sentence is continued to be imposed on every person convicted of murder, it would render the change in law redundant,” she added.
No comments:
Post a Comment