Public caning: Suhakam questioning state's jurisdiction - PAS

Summary

• The PAS Ulama Council refutes Suhakam’s statement on public caning in Terengganu, saying it’s ‘inappropriate’ to question state jurisdiction.

• Its chief Ahmad Yahaya says the punishment is based on clear legal provisions and does not violate state powers.

The PAS Ulama Council has refuted Suhakam’s statement on public caning, stressing that it is inappropriate for the human rights body to question a state’s jurisdiction.

Its chief Ahmad Yahaya said the punishment handed down by the Terengganu Syariah Court is based on clear legal provisions and does not violate state powers as stipulated in List II of the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution.

“Moreover, the decision of the Syariah Court judge should be respected by all parties. Public caning is appropriate and not intended to humiliate the offender.

“Instead, it should be seen as a punishment that fosters repentance among the offender and society to prevent similar actions in the future,” Ahmad (above) said in a statement yesterday.

Suhakam described the punishment as exceeding the jurisdiction of federal law, specifically the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, which only permits caning and does not allow it to be carried out in public.

Suhakam also argued that Section 125(3)(c) of the Terengganu Syariah Criminal Procedure Enactment 2001, which allows the Syariah Court to determine the location of public caning, is not provided for under the Syariah Courts Act.

The commission also stated that public caning is a violation of human dignity, contrary to international legal principles, and inconsistent with the Federal Constitution.

Review the law

Malaysian Bar president Mohamad Ezri Abdul Wahab urged the federal and Terengganu state government to review the law that allows for public caning, to ensure it is balanced, rehabilitative, and respects human dignity.

He further stated that public punishment undermines the dignity of the individual and could be considered a violation of Article 5 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees personal liberty.

This punishment, being implemented for the first time, was handed down to a repeat offender of khalwat (close proximity) and scheduled to take place at the Al Muktafi Billah Shah Mosque in Kuala Terengganu today.

Ahmad, however, stressed that the principles of proportionate punishment and deterrence are essential under the law.

“Do not lump everything under the banner of human rights to the extent of disregarding the role of law in managing human life.

“Suhakam should uphold legal principles and evaluate human rights from a religious perspective, not rely on the Western human rights agenda, which is already flawed,” he added.

LETTER | Execution of public caning according to law

COMMENT | Does public caning exceed Act 355 jurisdiction?

Bar calls for public caning laws to be reviewed

Public caning: 40 cops to be deployed to ensure smooth process this Friday

G25 urges halt to public caning for khalwat in T'ganu