LEMBAGA TATATERTIB POLIS DIRAJA MALAYSIA BUKIT AMAN

On the court record

Illustrates how the courts supervise police disciplinary decisions on judicial review, insist on the fairness of the charge, the opportunity to make representations and necessary disclosure, and delimit the grounds on which a dismissal may be quashed.

The Lembaga Tatatertib Polis Diraja Malaysia Bukit Aman (the Disciplinary Board of the Royal Malaysia Police at Bukit Aman) appears in this corpus exclusively as a respondent, in judicial review challenges brought by police officers against decisions affecting their careers. The decisions sit in administrative and public-service law. The characteristic proceeding is an application under Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012 for certiorari and mandamus to quash a decision of the Disciplinary Board to dismiss an officer from the police force, where the officer contends that the disciplinary process was flawed. Recurring grounds include whether the charges laid were defective, whether the officer was afforded a proper opportunity to make representations after being issued a show-cause notice, and whether a serious miscarriage of justice occurred — for example where the officer was not provided with a document such as an investigation report necessary to answer the charges. The court examines whether the Board complied with the constitutional and regulatory safeguards governing dismissal and the requirements of natural justice, without substituting its own view of the officer's conduct. Because the Board is the disciplinary authority whose decision is under review, it is named as the respondent rather than as a party with a commercial interest. The matters are decided principally in the High Court, with an appeal to the Court of Appeal. Collectively the decisions in which the Police Disciplinary Board is a party illustrate how the courts supervise police disciplinary decisions on judicial review, insist on the fairness of the charge, the opportunity to make representations and the disclosure necessary to answer a case, and delimit the grounds on which the dismissal of a police officer may be quashed. Several of the reported matters also concern the consequences where a court allows a judicial review of a dismissal, including the relief that follows and the officer's reinstatement or other remedy, so that the decisions address both the legality of the disciplinary decision and its aftermath. Across these matters the Board appears as the disciplinary authority whose decisions are held to the standards of fairness the courts require.