Monday, June 06, 2011

Why need to fingerprint all documents affirmed before Commissioner of Oaths?

As of 19/5/2011, when we go affirm(swear) a document before the Commissioner of Oaths, it is no longer enough for us to place our signature - but we also need to place our fingerprint ('cap jari') - this was the direction contained in a letter by the Office of the Chief Registrar of the Federal Court of Malaysia addressed to all Commissioners of Oaths.

Statutory Declarations, Affidavits, Agreements, .... all documents that need to be affirmed before a Commissioner of Oaths..

WHY? Is not a signature of the person sufficient? Why suddenly we need to also place our fingerprint? No rationale was given why this new requirement is being imposed? [...there was a statement in the letter stating that the require to use 'fingerprint-pad ink' not ordinary stamp pad - maybe, someone has got exclusive rights on 'fingerprint-pad ink' and this new requirement may be to help them in their business???]. Come General Elections all the polling and counting agents .... will also now require to place their fingerprint - will certainly take so much more time getting normally about 500-1000 (or more) persons to not just sign the required forms, the Commissioners record book but also now place fingerprints ...certainly a lot of paper tissues will be wasted cleaning the ink off.

The letter from the Chief Registrar talks about 'cap jari' (finger print) - does it mean all fingers will be printed? If it was to be only a thumbprint, normally it would clearly state so...

Another matter that is odd - is that forms that need to sworn/affirmed before a Commissioner of Oaths are issued by various departments, entities,... and in the form, it is they that decide whether it is to be signature or fingerprint or both... so this letter seems to be ousting the authority of all other authorities/entities/government bodies/... [Some forms certainly have only require signatures and have spaces for signatures only - and no space for thumbprint or fingerprints...]

It maybe OK for the Chief Registrar to tell Commissioner of Oaths that they require fingerprints of persons who come before them to affirm documents on the Commissioner's own record books - but certainly not on ALL documents that have been so affirmed.

Will the tissue be provided by Commissioner of Oaths for us to clean the ink of our fingers? Or will be finding more 'defaced' walls as people try to get rid of the excess ink from their fingers... will there be available water and soap nearby? It really makes no to why we need to place fingerprints - when even banks only require signatures of checks, etc..

Another action that will only burden persons in Malaysia...

What is the rationale for this new practice....please tell the people

No comments: