Pendakwa Raya v MOHD SYAWALIZAM BIN MOD YUSOF

Case Significance

Illustrates the exercise of the discretionary sentencing power for drug trafficking under the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023: on a conviction for trafficking 294.03 grams of cannabis, the court imposed life imprisonment and caning rather than death, calibrating punishment to the quantity and the overall circumstances.

This High Court decision at Alor Setar is a drug-trafficking trial that ended in conviction and, under the reformed sentencing regime, a term of life imprisonment rather than death. The accused was charged with trafficking in a dangerous drug — 294.03 grams of cannabis — under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952), punishable under section 39B(2). The drugs had been found openly in the accused's room together with other paraphernalia, at a house in Mukim Kubang Rotan, Kota Setar, Kedah. The prosecution's case was complicated by two of its own witnesses being treated as hostile.

At the close of the prosecution case the court found that a prima facie case had been established and called on the accused to enter his defence. The accused gave sworn evidence and called witnesses. His defence was that another person had placed the drugs in his room; the suggestion that a named individual, "Pak Su," might have framed him emerged only at the defence stage. Having considered the evidence at the close of the defence, the court was satisfied of the accused's guilt and convicted him.

In sentencing, the court took into account that the quantity involved was 294.03 grams of cannabis and that, on the overall facts, this was not a case warranting the death penalty. It held it was the court's responsibility to consider the purpose behind the enactment of the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 (Act 846) in fixing an appropriate sentence, and it imposed life imprisonment commencing from the date of arrest together with 12 strokes of the cane, expressing the hope that the sentence would deter both the accused and the wider community. The judgment illustrates the exercise of the reformed sentencing discretion for drug trafficking, calibrating punishment to the quantity involved and the overall circumstances.