Needless to say, the BN controlled Parliament ignored Anwar’s attack on the DNA bill, which resulted in a flamboyant walkout by Anwar and Pakatan MPs – see Malaysiakini DNA bill: PKR supremo leads walkout in protest.
Guess what have been the feelings like, not only in the PKR camp but among organizations which don’t like the BN-UMNO, regarding the use of DNA to identify criminals?
Fears were raised about the potential for abuse and unethical use of the DNA database etc etc etc, with lots of human rights issue tossed into the fray.
The legal beagles want to scrutinize every clause, comma, and colon … for the reason they believe (not just opine) the UMNO-led government has sinister motives against Anwar Ibrahim.
In other words, while there may be many reasons to oppose the bill, I reckon the principal one has been their perception that it’s aimed at Anwar. And that definitely won't do!
But let me pose a hypothetical question – suppose Anwar has not been accused of sodomy, would you support such a bill?
All over the world, police and the justice system have been, are and will continue to use DNA evidence to identify the criminals, and to exonerate those unfairly accused.
Barry C. Scheck and Peter J. Neufeld at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York have, in late 2007, founded the Innocence Project, which used DNA evidence to successfully exonerate 208 criminals in the USA.
208 people! And those included 15 people on death row.
It also allowed police to trace the perpetrator of a 30-year old crime in Virginia. They used blood taken from a crime scene in 1977 to identify a murderer.
DNA information also permitted the identification of victims found in mass graves in the Balkans and as a result of the Boxing Day tsunami.
As I said, if Anwar Ibrahim were to be off the ‘threatened list’ as perceived by his cult acolytes, would they have considered the introduction of such a bill with less emotion and more objectivity.
Related:
To DNA, or not to DNA, that is the Question
I will leave the issue of the DNA Evidence Act's linkage to Anwar Ibrahim outside the door for now.
ReplyDeleteMALAYSIA'S DNA EVIDENCE ACT as it stands is a potentially very unjust law.
a) The bill makes it mandatory for the court to accept DNA as overiding evidence.
Courts in many countries have already realised that DNA evidence has to be considered in the context of how, when, where the DNA was found, and how the sample was handled in the aftermath.
In fact the case in Malaysia of Norita Samsudin’s murder is a good example. The accused semen DNA was found in the murder victim’s genitals - pretty damning evidence you would think. But they also found the semen DNA from 2 other unknown persons. So the judge was correct in considering the evidence of the accused DNA as NOT conclusive.
b) The bill places testimony of government employees handling the DNA - technicians, analysts, doctors out of bounds of legal challenge.
This is nonsensical. Evidence or testimony presented in court is ALWAYS subject to legal challenge.
Natural justice requires that it is up to the case judge to rule whether the legal challenge is valid or a frivolous one.
This DNA evidence act as it stands has the potential for much injustice.
Kittykat,
ReplyDeleteCOUULD'NT AGREE WITH YOU MORE!We have third world standards and can we trust the authorities.Remember the "Matress" for Anwar 's case!Better to scrap this bill.
Well said, KayTeeKat.
ReplyDeleteI wonder sometimes: would Kay Tee have to close shop should Anwar die tomorrow?
Kay Tee seems so obsessed with Ang Hwa that his mind seem to revolve around him!
It is altogether strange that Kay Tee does not see that this DNA Bill was concocted with the evil intention against Anwar.
What puzzles me why the lawyers in anwar's camp did not explain to the people that the DNA Act CANNOT be used against anwar or rather CANNOT be used to force anwar to give his DNA for his sodomy trial.. BECAUSE... Article 7 of the federal constitution give protection against retrospective criminal laws.
ReplyDeleteThe DNA Act will bi in force when it is gazzetted, that's some time in the future yet.. at least a few more months. And since anwar's "offence" was committed before the DNA Act is enforced, it doesn't apply to him.
Bisu,
ReplyDeleteNo, the act has a retrospective clause which allows it to be used for existing cases.
This one is normal, because many governments around the world have used DNA to reopen old cases.
In one sad case it has been shown that a person who was found guilty and executed some time ago was probably NOT the perpetrator.
I don't want to get into an argument with regard to Anwar Ibrahim.
The DNA Act needs to be attacked because it is a BAD Law the way it is currently written.
anon of 6:05 PM, are you on auto-attack when you come to my blog ;-)
ReplyDeleteyou don't appear to have read what I wrote but nonetheless attacked me on the basis that I had written something against anwar - which makes you a Class 2 anwarista wakakakakakakaka
What Anwar requested was to refer the bill to a select committee which will evaluate thoroughly the provisions within the law so that it will be fair and just. Anwar did not oppose the DNA bill per se but to ensure that any law enacted is good law instaed of bad law. BN is too obsessed with pushing through any laws without thinking thoroughly.
ReplyDeleteWe cannot have such bill when we do not have the IPCMC , independence ICAC , a powerless Suhakam and the judicial stinks.
ReplyDeleteDNA bill is more important than any of the above?
Even a simple request of having local election for town mayor got thrown out by umno.
A simple basic town mayor election can't be held and they wants to have DNA bill.
Absurd!
Yo Khun
ReplyDeleteNo town hall election and got thrown out of UMNO ? Well, I don't see that happening either in the 5 Pakatan ruled-states...remember PAS has been ruling Kelatan for years now.
KT :
The action of Anwar is easily explained. For DSAI his election as MP has nothing to do with saving Malaysia or serving the rakyat. But it is just a stepping stone for his personal ambition (or obession / greed) to be the PM.
Any laws that do not serve his needs would be deemed as useless and those that might endanger his position must be opposed.
Those morons who expect great things from the Pied Piper of Permatang Pauh going to be disappointed, for all he will be doing is to try to grab the spotlight in the Parliament and holding international press conference.
As for people of PP, good luck to you folks. If so far they have been partially forgotten, now they expect to be completely forgotten by the global leader. The only time they will see his would be when (and if) he seeks re-election.
Coming to this DNA Bill, well I am not going to wade into this and make some useless comments as DNA and law aren't my areas of expertise.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is stupid to argue on the basis that our judicial process is not ready. If we use this logic, then we might as well as remove all our laws and let the bloggers conduct a trial by media for criminal cases since the PR supporters feel our law enforcement and judiciary are all corrupt.
It would be good if we can compare our law with other countries' and see how we fare as these countries have more experience. Also this will reveal if the govt has any ulterior motives.
But refering it to a select committe is stupid. Since not many of our lawmakers are experts in any field, this would create a precendence where every law will be subjected to similar treatment.
Even though I used to support AAB, I cannot support the DNA Bill. It is a question of intent. What is the intent and motive for passing this Bill?
ReplyDeleteUMNO regrettably has of late, shown itself less than respectful of laws, procedures, and offices of this country such that confidence in this government is at a low now.
If what "Kittykat" says is correct, then this Law represents another "nail in the coffin" of freedom and justice for the people of Malaysia.
Indeed, if AAB and his men represents a "first-world" or should I say, a "first-class" administration, they would uphold democracy in a mature way and focus their fight on avoiding a "no-confidence" vote against them or UMNO-BN. But not this way. Not through the passing of draconian laws with perceived sinister purpose.
No, Mr AAB and Company, this is not the way. You are gentlemen. I understand Anwar has been a little too confrontational, but this however, is where you can imprint your mark of a statesman - as you ably did against Mr Mahathir.
If worse comes to worse and UMNO-BN MPs cross the line in the vote of "no confidence", it is a just and honourable act to resign as a mark of respect of the will of the people. It will be no shame and in fact be a good precedent for the future.
Mr Prody of Italy was able to do it, as were other outstanding politicians in matured democrscies in Europe. Why not us? I am sure we can also.
Do the right thing, Mr Abdullah. Drop the Bill. It is bad public relations and not in the interest of Malaysia and her people. Not at this point in time anyway.
Leave a legacy where by we can remember you fondly by.
Comparison to the National DNA Database in UK
ReplyDeletehttp://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/DNA-report2005-06.pdf
a) The UK DNA database organisation is headed by a Custodian responsible to the National DNA Database board, not the Police Force. Of course the Police Force is represented on the board, but does not on its own control the Database
b) The Board also has representation from the Human Genetics Commission, where civil society groups including Civil Rights groups, NGO are represented.
c) Yes, the UK Criminal Justice Act amendment 2003 allows compulsory acquisition of DNA from suspects.
d) Numerous, detailed policy requirements on maintaining the integrity of testing and sample storage
AND Most important of All,
e) No encroachment on the authority of UK courts to consider the circumstances, context and conditions under which DNA was obtained and draw conclusions on the evidence submitted.
DNA evidence has the same status as other evidence submitted to the court.
By contrast, the Malaysian DNA Act is trying to tie the hands of judges in considering the evidence.
I have my own conclusions on why this law is being written so.
You make your own judgement.
The BUMNOputras better pray they don't someday find themselves in a situation where their DNA inexplicably gets found at a crime scene...this Act they are about to pass is going to make it near impossible for them to defend their innocence.
That, my friends, would be supreme irony...
KT at his best as an anwar-songsangista!
ReplyDeletethe bill revolves around anwar just because it is NOW (and it's not suppose to). but can u blame anyone having such an opinion? i sure agree that it is being tabled now ALL becoz of the man.
if not becoz of him... the bill would not make it mandatory for the courts to accept DNA as overiding evidence as stated by kittykat. DNA evidence presented in courts too will be subjected to legal challenge.
please consider also why they want the police to be empowered to collect samples and not the judge or any other independent parties? why are they not for this.
yes, yes, yes... anwar is being targeted, and how can you say it's not, KT?
we need this DNA bill, but not for the reason 'get rid of anwar', that is wrong. that just shows how 'sincere' they are.
kaytee
ReplyDeleteenjoy your freaking life outside of this country and continut with your talk down.
wish you are paid well by UMNO and its cronies. take a hike/ coz you never get hurt with all the exhortations of changing our lifestyle by the moronic BN. change when I cant even afford the basics now?
supernova, where in my post have I said the DNA bill is NOT targeted at Anwar? ;-)
ReplyDeleteDNA evidence played a key role in solving cases of various natures and complexities, such evidence are used both as a means of convicting the guilty and exonerating the innocent.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely DNA laws help fight crime, an efficient tools for the police to nab offenders and prevent future crimes whereby thousands of lives can be saved.
DNA is not just important for solving crimes, but also to make sure when the police arrest someone and convict someone, they have the right guy.
Great Britain, which adopted a national DNA law in 1995, has solved some 70,000 crimes by matching the DNA at crime scenes to those in the database.
We should have the bill pass long time ago but the government was siting on it, until YB Anwar demonstrated to them the loophole by not cooperating to provide his DNA profiling. Clearly all loophole need to be tighten up and getting the DNA bill pass as soon as possible is the right direction, may it be YB Anwar sodomy allegation or not is not the issue. The issue is nabbing the right guy quickly and efficiently for the safety of the people are the most important.
idzan ismail use different username each time you post in the other blog
ReplyDeletecheers! if not all the hyennas will come after you . I have changed mine .
The question is not the need for A DNA law.
ReplyDeleteThis MALAYSIA DNA Law is an unjust law. It removes the right of the court to review the context and circumstances -how, where, when under which DNA was collected, and the right of the court to review testimony of the people who handled the DNA and testing.
The UK law has no such intrusions into the judicial process.
Wake up guys ! This Act covers day-to-day police cases, not political cases which you may think you are safe from since you are a BN supporter.
The next person who may be facing this unjust act may be your daughter, your brother, it may be YOU !.
Unless you are so sure IGP is going to "Tutup Kes" for you...Hahahaha
KTmoc,
ReplyDeleteI believe that many, if not all of the NGOs who oppose to the DNA bill are opposing it for human rights and various reasons and noe necessarily 'protecting Anwar'. Branding NGOs as 'protecting Anwar' and any who oppose to the bill as Anwar cult is not correct.
OTOH, Malaysia is a country with 'comparitively' good regulations, and lousy implementation. As long as we have Umno-owned police, Umno owned justice system, and Umno owned anti corruption agency, all the best USA or Europe rules and regulations in the world won't help one bit. The parliament is not focusing on the more important and urgent macro issues of independent police, army and judiciary etc etc...; yet want to 'improve' on micro things like DNA bill. They are clearly out of focus. So are you, KTemoc.
Being not an Anwar cultist my self, before you simply brand me so, I am pretty indifferent to the issue of weather the DNA bill is against Anwar or not. Though any well informed rakyat is surely skeptical of any bill Umno is trying to pass for obvious reasons that they should 'buy' a completely new justice system and police system before spending 5 bil here on 'police and spying equipments' and 10 bil there on other so called improvements. with no accountability and transparency whatsoever, the budget is such a joke.
The rakyat is not stupid, giving quota to the ACA to bag some bad egg in Custom and Puspakom but leave the Hundreds of Billions lost in 'legal' land deals where the Gov sold Malaysian land for not even 5% of its value is OUT OF FOCUS. Using our country's oil money to bail out inefficiently Managed so called private companies and never give us rakyat any accountability is OUT OF FOCUS. Before that what is the point of passing yet another DNA bill? no point instaling GPS system in when the driver of the car is drunk driving.
Our GOV is out of focus. your blog is OUT OF FOCUS.
KTemoc, it doesn't help to win 1000 with your Anwar fanatics or Anwar cultist as the FRU and Police can beat you up anytime and rape you anytime and get rewarded with 5 bil to buy better guns. you know what i mean?
I mean it doesn't help to win 1000 arguments and 1 mil debates with your Anwar fanatics or Anwar cultist.
ReplyDeleteHi Kittykat46,
ReplyDeleteIs an unjust law or a just law depends whether that person is a offender or a victim. Off cause, to the law breaker every laws are unjust, even carrying firearm. It got nothing to do with BN supporters, don't mix it up.
Lately with so many criminal cases of rapes and murders unresolved, you may need it to seek justice if your daughter, sister or wife are the victims ....Hehehehe
:-) ok, u didn't, KT.
ReplyDeletewhat's the big deal then about the whole thing? why can't ppl get emotinal when an unjust bill is tabled with a not-so-right motive! ah ha! no one say u can't get all work up, but u should not get emotional just becoz it involves Mr. A, right? ;-)
c'mon anon at 1:59 AM, August 30, 2008, i don't buy this lah... KT is no BN crony and he's not paid by UMNO/BN to write all these!
Two prominent people who are against this bill in it’s present form :
ReplyDeleteKimanis MP Datuk Anifah Aman (brother of Sabah Chief Minister)
Dato Dr. Chua Soi Lek (drchua9.blogspot.com)
Don't u guys think that with this DNA Act, victims like nurin can get justice?
ReplyDeleteThe courts are not stupid you know. There's the Evidence Act which covers all matters of admissibility and relevancy of evidence.
As an example, in drug trafficking cases, chemists are considered experts by law. But the court could still scrutinised other aspect of their evidence such as chain of exhibits, adequacy of analysis etc, even the instruments used for analysis.
There are other factors that could be attacked by a good lawyer, like handling of exhibits, contamination of crime scene etc to get the DNA evidence thrown out. Malaysian lawyers and court can be very creative when they want to disagree with the prosecution.
DNA is also just a supporting evidence. There are always other elements to be proven in any offence. If you have DNA but can't prove other elements, there still wont be a conviction.
The DNA Act could be a very useful tool for solving cases like nurin jazlin. Sometime in the future, her murderer could be caught because his DNA could be taken without his consent.
Bisu,
ReplyDeleteNo right thinking person disputes the need for A DNA evidence act.
But not this one, the way it is written.
I suggest you find a lawyer friend and walk through the draft DNA Identification Act.
The law as it is currently written is dangerous precisely because provisions in it restrict and even deny the right of the court to review many aspects of the admissibility of the DNA evidence.
The lawyer who helped me go through the draft act in detail is a relative who is actually an active BN supporter, which surprised me when he shook his head and said - "This has law has a lot of potential for injustice".
Justice is not about simply getting a conviction. That is Revenge, not Justice.
Justice is about making sure if a person is convicted, it is Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
Hi Kittykat46,
ReplyDeleteYou are right about "Justice is not about simply getting a conviction.
Justice is about making sure if a person is convicted, it is Beyond Reasonable Doubt".
That give us more reasons to get the DNA bill pass.
From your lawyer view that this law has a lot of potential for injustice, is not surprising, because it make harder for them (lawyers) to win their case.
kittykat,
ReplyDeleteIt is precisely about the standard of proof in criminal cases. Prosecution have to proof the charge on a 'maximum evaluation of the evidence' even at the prosecutuon stage. The burden of proof at the end of the defence stage is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
With the recent amendment to the criminal procedure code, the defence will get all documents to be used in the trial before the trial commence. That means the lawyers with get all the chance they need to prepare to challenge any DNA evidence to be used in the trial.
The courts could also fall back on the rule of natural justice if an accused is unfairly treated in a trial which uses the provisions of the DNA Act.
The retrospective provision only apply to criminals currently serving sentence (those who are already convicted). I don't see how having your DNA taken is a crime or a punishment on the convicted felon. There's no double jeorpardy here.
Aside from the benefits of identifying offenders or suspects, a DNA databank will also contribute to identifying unknown deceased, john/jane dos, missing persons, fatherless children and the like.
The benefit still outweigh the prejudicial effect, i think.