The Bar Council said today that it was not necessary to draft a new law to protect eyewitnesses to crimes as a legislation offering statutory protection for such witnesses already exists.

"The 1947 Abduction and Criminal Intimidation of Witnesses Act, revised in 1977, provides that whoever commits criminal intimidation with intent to impede with the course of justice shall be punished," said council chairman Mah Weng Kwai in a press statement.

Mah was referring to Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's statement yesterday that the government was considering drafting a law to protect eyewitnesses to crimes, adding that it was necessary as there had been cases where important eyewitnesses were threatened with dire consequences if they testified.

Mahathir had said Malaysians were reluctant to assist the police in investigations although they had witnessed crimes committed due to fear of retribution.

According to Mah, witnesses were reluctant to come forward and give evidence to the police as they find it a hassle to lodge a police report.

"If the police are more people friendly in this respect and the police procedures streamlined, perhaps more members of the public will be ready to come forward as witnesses," he said.

"The Bar Council is of the view that the Malaysian public must be further educated on civic mindedness and be reminded of their duties as citizens in a civil society," said Mah.

Political leanings

Mah also commented on Mahathir's statement that some lawyers with political leanings appeared for suspected criminals to gain political mileage, irrespective of whether their clients had committed a crime or not.

He explained that there is no rule of practice or etiquette which prohibits such lawyers to act for accused persons.

Meanwhile, senior lawyer Karpal Singh welcomed the government's move to introduce the new law to protect eyewitnesses and called for the repeal of all legislations which provide for detention without trial with the coming of the new law.

"The reason given by the government for the perpetuation of laws which provide for detention without trial is the reluctance of witnesses to come forward to testify in an open court of law owing to possible reprisals," said Karpal who is also DAP deputy chairman.

Karpal was referring to suspected criminals being detained without trial for lack of evidence and the reluctance of witnesses to testify in court.

Karpal said the new Act should see the repeal of the 1975 Essential Security Cases Regulations (Escar) which even provided for hooded witnesses, the Internal Security Act, the Emergency Ordinance, the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) and the Restricted Residence Acts.

"The government should be pragmatic and not ignore the universal rejection of detention without trial," he added.

Karpal said the new eyewitness protection law should also include the protection of all witnesses and not just eyewitnesses.