Why does the prosecution seem less interested in appealing for heavier sentences in rape cases than they do in sedition cases?

That is the question asked by lawyer Michelle Yesudas, commenting on the man who escaped his rape charge after marrying his 14-year-old victim.

"Why in sedition cases, even after conviction, the prosecution always appeals for a heavier sentence but not so interested in rape?" she asked in a series of Twitter postings today.

Yesudas (photo) also described it as "deeply disturbing" that a marriage certificate can absolve a man from rape charges.

Marriage is not the answer to statutory rape, she insisted, because a child is not able to consent to sex the way adults do.

"(It's) unacceptable that 21st century Malaysia has a provision to prevent rape and it is then 'ended' by having the perpetrator marry the child," she said.

Earlier today DAP lawmaker Teo Nie Ching had argued that the courts should not let rapists of underage girls off the hook just because they marry their young victims.

She said that statutory rape is a very serious offence and that the marriage of the accused and the victim does not have the retrospective effect to right the wrong.

The man had been charged with statutory rape of the girl late last year and had faced up to 30 years in jail and whipping for the offence.

However, the man later married the girl under Islamic law, and a court in Kuching then ruled that there was no need to proceed with the case after their marriage certificate was submitted and the girl withdrew the complaint.

This court ruling had also sparked outrage from various women's rights groups.