EXAMINING THE APPLICATION OF STANDARD OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL CASES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ISLAMIC LAW AND COMMON LAW IN MALAYSIA

Suhaizad Saifuddin; Hanifah Haydar Ali Tajuddin; Mohd Azhan Yahya; Mohamad Rizal Abd Rahman; Fatimah Yusro Hashim

doi:10.33102/mjsl.vol12no1.491

Authors

Suhaizad Saifuddin Pusat Kajian Undang-Undang Malaysia & Perbandingan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia
Hanifah Haydar Ali Tajuddin Pusat Kajian Undang-Undang Malaysia & Perbandingan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia
Mohd Azhan Yahya Pusat Kajian Undang-Undang Malaysia & Perbandingan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia
Mohamad Rizal Abd Rahman Pusat Kajian Undang-Undang Malaysia & Perbandingan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia
Fatimah Yusro Hashim Pusat Kajian Undang-Undang Malaysia & Perbandingan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol12no1.491

Keywords:

Criminal justice, evidence, Common law, Islamic law, standard of proof

Abstract

In criminal litigation, evidence plays a very significant role in ensuring that justice is delivered. Nevertheless, justice cannot be achieved without the correct application of standard of proof. Failure to apply the correct standard of proof could result in miscarriage of justice. This paper examines the concept of standard of proof from the Islamic and common law perspectives. It also analyses the similarities and differences in the application of standard of proof under both legal systems. This study is a doctrinal research and utilises qualitative methods. The primary and secondary data are gathered using the documentation method obtained from library, legal statutes and reported cases. The gathered data are then further analysed using content analysis method. Findings of this study show that there are similarities and differences in the concept of standard of proof in criminal cases under both legal systems. In spite of the similarities, several applications under the common law should not be referred or utilised in litigating Syariah criminal cases. This paper suggests that the standard of proof under Islamic law is to be harmonised with the common law in the prosecution of criminal cases in the Syariah courts. The research conducted contributes towards the knowledge in distinguishing between the Islamic and common law principles particularly for countries that practise Islamic criminal law.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

A. Othman, M. S. (1989). Pembuktian: Kepentingan beban dan hukumnya. Jurnal Hukum, 6(2), 167-193.

Abdullah, A.H.A. (1997). Furuq al-Lughowiyyah. Kaherah: Dar Ilmu wa Al-Thaqofah.

Abi Al-Dam, Z.A.I. (1985). Ghamz al-‘uyun al-basair syarh kitab al-asybah wa al-nazair. Beirut: Dar Kitab Al-‘Ilmiyyah.

Abi Sahl Abu Bakr, M. A.(1989). Al-Mabsut. Beirut: Dar Al-Ma’rifah.

Abu Bakr, A. Q. (1985). Al-Ta’rifat. Beirut: Maktabah Lubnan.

Ahmad, A.A.A. (1972). Mu’jam maqayis al-lughah. Mesir: Matba’ah Mustafa Al-Babi Al-Halabi.

Ahmad, A.M.S. (1989). Al-wajiz fi idah qawai’d al-fiqh al-kulliyyah. Riyadh: Maktabah Al-Ma’arif.

Ahmad, M. (2000). Al-tamhid fi usul al-fiqh. Beirut: Muassasah Al-Rayyan.

Ali, N. (2012). Dhabit al-takzir yasbitu ma’ al-syubhah. Arab Saudi: Syabakah Alukah.

al-Nawawī, Abu Zakaria Mohiuddin Yahya Ibn Sharaf. (1955). Sahih Muslim bi Sharh Al-Nawawi. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ Al-Kutub Al- ‘Arabiyyah.

al-Shatibi, Ibrahim Bin Musa. (1997). al-Muwafaqat fi usul al-Shariah. Egypt: Dar Ibnu Affan.

Ang Hiok Seng v Yim Yut Kiu (1997) 1 AMR 917.

Arulpragasan Sandaraju v Pendakwa Raya (1997) 1 MLJ 1.

Bahori, A., Mat Rashid, A., Yahya, M. A., Saifuddin, S., & Mat Salleh, M. K. (2023). Evidence and prosecution of out-of-wedlock pregnancies: A legal perspective of Syariah criminal offences in Malaysia. UUM Journal of Legal Studies, 14(1), 1-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32890/uumjls2023.14.1.1

Balachandran v Pendakwa Raya (2005) 2 MLJ 301.

Chan Chwen Kong v Public Prosecutor (1962) 1 MLJ 307.

Cruz, P.D. (2010). Comparison of legal system (Common Law, Civil Law and Socialist Law). Bandung: Nusa Media.

Dato Moktar Hashim & Anor v PP (1983) 2 MLJ 232

Haw Tua Tau v Pendakwa Raya (1981) 2 MLJ 49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-9382(81)90045-7

International Times & Ors v. Leong Ho Yuen (1980) 1 LNS 31.

Ismail, N. Ramlle, Z. & Abas, A. (2022) The legal proof of Macau Scam in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Syariah and Law, 10(1), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol10no1.307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol10no1.307

Jayaraman & Ors v. Public Prosecutor (1982) 1 LNS 126

Khan, H. (2013). Islamic law. US Institute of Peace: INPROL - International Network to Promote the Rule of Law.

Khoo Hi Chiang v Pendakwa Raya (1994)) 1 MLJ 265.

Letchumanan Chettiar Alagappan v Secure Plantation Sdn Bhd (2017) 4 MLJ 697.

Looi Kow Chai & yang lain v Pendakwa Raya (1997) 1 MLJ 1(MP) .

Mahsamani, S. (1946). falsafah al-tasyrie fi al-Islam. Beirut: Dar al-Kasyaf, Beirut.

Mat v Pendakwa Raya (1963) MLJ 263.

Mc Alhone, C. & Stockdale, M. (1996). Evidence in a nutshell. London: Sweet and Maxwell.

McKillop, B. (1964). Burden of proof on an accused in Malaysia. Malaya Law Review, 6(2) 250-279.

Miller v Minister of Pensions (1947) 2 All ER 372.

Mohamad I. A. A. (1983). Al-taqrir wa al-tahbir. Beirut: Dar Al-Kutub Al- ‘Ilmiyyah.

Mohamed Radhi bin Yaacob v Pendakwa Raya (1991) 3 MLJ 169

Mohammed Al-Aowfi, A. A. A. (1998). Al-misbah al-munir. Beirut: Maktabah Al-‘Asriyyah.

Mufaddal, A. A. A. (1978). Al-mufradat fi gharib al-Quran. Beirut: Dar Al-Ma’rifah.

Muhammad, A. A. A. (1911). Al-ahkam al-sultaniyah. Kaherah: Maktabah Al-Sa’dah.

Muhammad, A. I. (1998). Al-madkhal ila al-qawa'id al-fiqhiyyah al-kulliyah. Amman: Dar 'Ammar.

Muhammad, A. S. (1929). Hasyiah al-dusuki ‘ala al-syarh al-kabir. Cairo: Maktabah Al-Azhariyyah.

Muhammad, A. Z. (n.d.). Al-jarimah wa al- ‘uqubah fi al-fiqh al-Islami. Cairo: Dar Al-Fikr Al-Arabi.

Muhammad, B. (2000). Al-bahru al-muhith fi usul-fiqh. Beirut: Dar Al-Kutub Al- ‘Ilmiyyah.

Muhammad, S. A. (2006). Fi usul al-nizam al-jinaa’i. Egypt: Matba’ah Nahdah.

Mukararam. M. (2000). Lisan al-‘Arab. Beirut: Dar-Sader.

Murphy, P. (1980). Murphy on evidence. London: Blackstone Press Limited.

Mustafa, A. R. (1988). Prinsip undang-undang keterangan Islam. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Da’wah and Welfare Body of Malaysia.

Naggapan v Pendakwa Raya (1988) 2 MLJ 53.

Noel Kenneth Davidson v Firm Corp. Sdn. Bhd (1994) 2 MLJ 40 47.

Oxford English Dictionary. (2010). London: Oxford University Press

Oxford Latin Dictionary. (1968). London: Oxford University Press.

Pendakwa Raya v Chin Yoke (1940) MLJ 47.

Pendakwa Raya v Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim (1999) 2 MLJ 1.

Pendakwa Raya v Hanif Basre Abdul Rahman (2008) 3 MLJ 161.

Peters, M. (2013). Law of evidence in Malaysia. Petaling Jaya: LexisNexis.

Saifuddin, S. (2021). Peruntukan beban pembuktian di bawah enakmen keterangan Mahkamah Syariah: Satu penilaian. Jurnal

Undang-undang dan Masyarakat, 28, 78-91.

Saifuddin, S. Markom, R. & Muhamad, M. M. (2019). Kaedah pembuktian dalam undang-undang keterangan Mahkamah Syariah dan Mahkamah Sivil di Malaysia: Suatu kajian perbandingan. Jurnal Kanun, 31(1), 1-34.

Saifuddin, S. Mohd Shariff, A. A. Md. Said, M.H. Rajamanickam, R. & Tg. Zainudin, T.N.A. (2020). Pemakaian beban dan darjah pembuktian dalam kes jenayah Syariah di Malaysia: Suatu analisis. Akademika, 90(1), 87-98

Saifuddin, S. Mohd Shariff, A. A. Md. Said, M.H. & Yahya, M .A. (2021). Kepentingan aspek keterangan dalam penulisan alasan penghakiman kes jenayah Syariah di Malaysia: Satu Analisis. Islamiyyat, 43, 67-77.

Sinnaiyah & Sons Sdn Bhd v Damai Setia Sdn Bhd (2015) MLJU 0292.

Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997.

The Osbon’s Concise Law Dictionary. (2013). London: Sweet & Maxwell.

Umar, M.A. (1996). Hasyiah Ibn ‘Abidin. Mesir: Matba’ah Mustafa al-Halabi.

Wan Ismail, W. A. F., Abdul Shukor, S., Hashim, H., & Baharuddin, A. S. (2018). pembuktian melalui televisyen/ kamera litar tertutup (CCTV) dalam kes-kes jenayah: Tinjauan umum berdasarkan undang-undang keterangan Islam. Malaysian Journal of Syariah and Law, 6(1), 87-103. https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol6no1.101 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol6no1.101

Wan Ismail, W. A. F., Hashim, H., Mamat, Z., Abdul Mutalib, L., Baharuddin, A. S., & Jusof, N. (2021). Sumpah Nafy Al-’Ilmi Menurut Undang-Undang Keterangan Islam Di Malaysia: Nafy Al-‘Ilmi Oath According to Islamic Law of Evidence in Malaysia. AL-MAQASID: The International Journal of Maqasid Studies and Advanced Islamic Research, 2(2), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.55265/almaqasid.v2i2.11

Woolmington v Pendakwa Raya (1935) AC 462.

Zuhaili, M. M. (1982). Wasail ithbat fi al-Syariah al-Islamiah fi al-muamalat al-madaniyyah wa al-ahwal al-syakhsiyyah. Damsyik: Maktabah Dar Al-Bayan.

Zuhaili, W. (2004). Fiqh al- Islami wa adillatuhu. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr.