Kang Di-Pertuan Agong Case Study

In this case, a 12 year old boy was convicted for murder. However, because of his age, he escaped the noose but was instead, by virtue of s 97(2) of the Child Act 2001, ordered to be detained during the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. The appeal was on the argument that s 97 is ultra vires the Federal Constitution in that it violates the doctrine of separation of powers. The appeal was subsequently dismissed. However, a question arose from this case that was not duly addressed. The issue of the lack of any specific punishment for minors who if not for their age would have otherwise been sentenced to death, needs to be addressed. Placing the detention of the minor in the hands of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is simply sweeping the issue under

This is a case in which Parliament has provided for the entry of a conviction and passing of sentence but has made no valid law for the measure of sentence. A similar situation arose in Soon Kim Seng v Public Prosecutor [1978] 2 MLJ 107. He appealed on the ground that the legislation had not provided for any fine or punishment for the possession of a duplicating contrivance. Chang Min Tat J, in allowing the appeal held, with regret, that Parliament had failed to provide a punishment for the offence in question.

Here, similar to the first case, Parliament has said that the appellant shall not, by reason of his age, receive the capital punishment but has made no valid law conferring power upon the courts to impose some other sentence. Hence, there then exists a need for there to be proper law, rules and punishment regarding serious crimes committed by juvenile offenders. The question also arises whether in serious offences such as murder, should the sentencing of the capital punishment be