Lydiana Law Chambers

On the court record

The firm's record shows the interplay of direct proof and the section 37(da) presumption in a drug-trafficking prosecution, and the courts' willingness to grant protective injunctions against harassment and the threatened dissemination of intimate images.

Lydiana Law Chambers appears in the corpus as counsel across criminal defence, judicial review and injunction work, argued in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) in both English and Bahasa Malaysia.

On the criminal side the firm acted for the accused at first instance in a drug-trafficking trial under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, where the court analysed the elements of the offence, distinguishing proof of trafficking by direct evidence of conduct falling within the definition in section 2 from proof by the statutory presumption under section 37(da) on proof of possession exceeding the threshold weight, and considered whether proximity alone, or being the named tenant of premises, established constructive possession. The firm also appeared for an appellant before the Court of Appeal in a related trafficking appeal engaging the presumption under section 37(da)(vi) and the treatment of a discrepancy between seizure and handing-over forms as a minor omission.

In administrative law the firm acted for an applicant in judicial-review proceedings under Order 53 challenging the reduction in rank of a prison officer under the public-service disciplinary regulations, raising the right to be heard, the absence of reasons and the doctrine of proportionality.

The firm also appeared in a civil matter of some social significance, seeking an interim injunction under Order 29 rule 1 to restrain harassment, intimidation and defamation, including threats to disseminate intimate images over social media, where the court addressed the tort of harassment, the serious question to be tried, the adequacy of damages and the balance of convenience, and granted the injunction in part. The firm's record is a varied practice engaging criminal, administrative and protective civil work, and it reflects a chambers willing to seek novel protective remedies alongside its criminal-defence and public-law advocacy. A common thread running through the firm's otherwise diverse matters is a concern with the fairness of the process and the protection of the individual against superior power, whether that power is the state prosecuting a capital charge, a disciplinary authority reducing an officer in rank, or a private party threatening harm through the misuse of intimate material.