Mohamad Arif Aizuddin Masrom

On the court record

Mohamad Arif Aizuddin Masrom appears in the reported corpus as counsel for the prosecution in serious criminal appeals before the Court of Appeal. Much of his reported work concerns drug trafficking under seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952), read with seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan (section 34 of the Penal Code). In one matter the reported catchwords engage the agent provocateur, the credit-worthiness presumption under seksyen 40A of the Act, and the narrative or chain of evidence, while in another — a rayuan terhadap sabitan dan hukuman (an appeal against conviction and sentence) for trafficking and possession — the defence had sought to establish that one appellant did not reside at the premises, putting in issue whether the prosecution had proved possession and knowledge.

His prosecution work extends beyond drugs to other grave offences. He was engaged in a Court of Appeal appeal under section 26J of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2009 concerning the smuggling and conveyance of migrants, where the question was whether six Indonesians were "smuggled migrants" within the meaning of section 2 of the Act, and in an appeal concerning attempted rape under section 376(2)(a) of the Penal Code read with section 511, where the issue was whether the appellant was the person who had sexually assaulted the victim and the sufficiency of the evidence of physical contact. Appearing for the prosecution, his reported work engages the statutory presumptions and evidential chains of a drug case, the statutory definition of a smuggled migrant, and proof of identity in a sexual-offence appeal. The reported matters mark Mohamad Arif Aizuddin Masrom as prosecuting counsel in serious criminal appeals. Taken together the reported matters show prosecuting counsel engaged with the full apparatus of a serious criminal appeal — the statutory presumptions and evidential chains of a drug case, the definitional questions that decide a migrant-smuggling charge, and proof of identity where the evidence of physical contact is disputed in a sexual-offence appeal.