Sunday, July 17, 2016

POCA (Prevention of Crimes Act) - Azmin Ali supports Selangor police plans?

Gambling offenders can be detained under POCA



POCA (Prevention of Crimes Act) - the simple solution for the 'lazy' police/ government to arrest and detain an 'innocent' person...
WHY? If police use POCA - nobody can challenge even in court whether the reason for the arrest and detention and/or restriction is TRUE or not. So, police really do not even have to investigate and find sufficient evidence to proof the person arrested is GUILTY - Why? The case will not go to court...there is NO TRIAL ....and even the person, who is detained,  cannot apply to Court and claim that he/she is wrongly detained...The COURT HAS NO POWER TO LOOK AND SEE IS THE REASON FOR THE DETENTION/RESTRICTION IS LAWFUL OR NOT?? 
HOW MANY ARE DETAINED WITHOUT TRIAL UNDER POCA? Probably 100s - maybe thousands - well, Malaysia is not a transparent government, so we really do not know this information. Only way is usually by Parliamentary questions - but how many MPs will ask these questions - and even when they ask questions, how many share their answers with the people...?? [Remember annswers in writting to MPs are not published on the Parliamentary website - and if these MPs do not share with us the questions and answers, we will not know?]
POCA - well, Sanjeevan's case draw attention to this DRACONIAN law - and now, the news report below, shows us how dangerous this law is...
Why use POCA against those involved in 'gambling"? You can simply charge them in open court and give them a trial? 
"Selangor police today issued a stern warning to all owners of online gambling centres in the state to close down their operations or face action under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA)."
So, why do the Selangor police want to even use POCA - they could use the ordinary criminal laws - arrest, detain and charge them in Court, and give them a fair trial? Why POCA - which does not give a person the right to a fair trial, and also no right to challenge the reason or lawfullness of whatever Detention or Restriction Order they are placed under?
 
Or maybe, it is not safe to charge and try some because they may reveal the involvement of some politician or their wife/family, or maybe they may reveal evidence of corruption against some police officer...or public prosecutor...? 
And, why has Azmin Ali and the Selangor government responded - saying that POCA should not be used - but charge them in open court an accord them a fair trial? 
Well, maybe if they are charged and tried, the alleged operator of gambling centers may come out shouting 'Betrayal" - why we have been paying money to this and that politician (or political party) or policeman or 'Datuk?' - with the assurance that the police will not raid or take action against us and our people? So, is POCA used to avoid this?? I wonder?
Wait and see whether Azmin Ali will stay silent on what the Selangor police is saying ...and make us your mind as to the reason behind the lack of comment, or contents of his comment?
Will Wan Azizah, the leader of the Opposition say anything about the this statement and the POCA?
WHO will come out and protest the use of POCA? and who will not? Watch and see and make your own conclusions...
How many Opposition parties have taken the position that POCA must be repealed? 
 
Gambling offenders can be detained under POCA
Prisoner behind jail bars, concept of crime and corruption
Source: Bernama Source:
Bernama

SHAH ALAM, 15 July 2016: 

Selangor police today issued a stern warning to all owners of online gambling centres in the state to close down their operations or face action under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA).

State police chief Datuk Abdul Samah Mat said Selangor police were very serious about combating the illegal activity as the operators were seen to be active again.

Hence, since Wednesday, he said, he had ordered all the nine district police headquarters in Selangor to intensify operations against illegal gambling activities.

Abdul Samah said police intelligence work showed that the districts of Petaling Jaya, Serdang, Subang Jaya, Kajang, Gombak and Klang South had the biggest number of illegal online gambling joints.

“Within 48 hours since Wednesday, 222 raids were conducted with 233 operators of online gambling premises and 83 gamblers arrested

"Seized in the operations were 3,120 desktop computers, 207 laptops, six gambling simulator machines and cash of RM19,205.”

On another matter, Abu Samah said 39,542 summonses were issued for various traffic offences during ‘Op Selamat’ 9/2016 ih the state in conjunction with the Aidilfitri celebration recently.

He said the number showed an increase of 13 per cent or 4,432 summonses over the number of summonses issued during last year’s Raya celebration, which showed public adherence to traffic rules was still low.

He added that among the six main offences focused on were speeding, driving on the emergency lane, crossing the double line and using the mobile phone while driving.

Earlier, Abdul Samah witnessed the handing-over of duty to the new Selangor deputy police chief Datuk Mohd Fuad Abdul Latiff, who replaced Datuk Abdul Rahim Jaafar, effective today.

Mohd Fuad, 59, was previously federal police Management (Training) deputy director in Bukit Aman, while Abdul Rahim has been promoted to the post of Kelantan police chief. - Rakyat Post, 15/7/2016

Friday, July 15, 2016

MADPET urges Putrajaya to announce moratorium on death penalty(FMT) and Full Statement

* See full statement below

MADPET urges Putrajaya to announce moratorium on death penalty

FMT Reporters
 | July 14, 2016
The NGO expressed satisfaction that Malaysia has in place a "moratorium" on executions, especially for those languishing on death row for drug trafficking.
MADPET

KUALA LUMPUR: MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) has expressed satisfaction that Malaysia has in place a “moratorium on executions, especially for those languishing on death row for drug trafficking.

The NGO urged the Malaysian Government to extend the “moratorium” on executions to all persons on death row, not for just those convicted for drug trafficking. “This only makes sense, since Malaysia is now in the process of abolishing the death penalty, beginning with the mandatory death penalty,” said MADPET spokesman Charles Hector in a statement.

He referred to Edmund Bon Tai Soon, Malaysia’s current AICHR (ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights) representative, as reportedly saying “…Malaysia’s moratorium, I understand, is only for drug trafficking cases…’ (Star, 10/7/2015).”

“It must be noted that the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), also did reiterate on 29 March 2016 their recommendation that a moratorium on the use of the death penalty be put in place in Malaysia”.

MADPET thinks that “this positive development” should not be kept secret, but should have long been proudly announced by the Malaysian Government.

In fact, continued Hector, Nancy Shukri, then de facto Law Minister, should have proudly announced Malaysia’s moratorium on executions when she took the stage at the 6th World Congress Against Death Penalty in Malaysia.

The existence of the mandatory death penalty, for offences that do not result in death, as in the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, only unnecessarily increases the risk of victims and/or witnesses to these crimes being killed by perpetrators to avoid the mandatory death penalty, said MADPET.

There are at least 10 offences in Malaysian laws that carry the mandatory death penalty, whereby only three are for offences that result in the death of the victim, added Hector. He cited the laws: Murder (sec.302 Penal Code), Committing terrorist acts where the act results in death (sec. 130C (1)(a) Penal Code); and Hostage taking where the act results in death (sec. 374(a) Penal Code).

For all the other mandatory death penalty offences, death does not result, he pointed out. “We are referring to Drug Trafficking (sec. 39B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) and six types of offence listed in the Schedule of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, which includes robbery, kidnapping, extortion and house trespass.” - FMT News, 14/7/2016



Note: Below extract from news report of an interview with Edmund Bon Tai Soon, Malaysia’s new representative to the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) as published by the Star..
Is there a consensus within Asean with regard to the death penalty?
>No. But within AICHR, there is a move to study whether we should get rid of the death penalty. One of the countries in AICHR has proposed this. We’re looking at how we can do it in stages. Malaysia’s moratorium, I understand, is only for drug trafficking cases. To the credit of my predecessor, he has raised this a number of times but he has not and we (AICHR) have not said, ‘let’s make a decision on this’ because some countries need the time to buy in, be comfortable that the death penalty is not sufficiently a deterrent punishment looking at the statistics. So we need a thematic study to convince the countries, including Malaysia. - Star, 9/7/2016, Improving Malaysia’s profile
 

Media Statement – 14/7/2016

‘SECRET’ MORATORIUM ON EXECUTIONS IN MALAYSIA MUST BE PROUDLY ANNOUNCED AND MADE PUBLIC
-Abolish Death Penalty - 

MADPET is happy that Malaysia have in place a moratorium on executions, especially for those languishing on death row for drug trafficking. Edmund Bon Tai Soon, Malaysia’s current AICHR (ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights) representative, was recently reported saying ‘…Malaysia’s moratorium, I understand, is only for drug trafficking cases…’ (Star, 10/7/2015). It must be noted that Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), also did reiterate on 29 March 2016 their recommendation that a moratorium on the use of the death penalty be put in place in Malaysia.


MADPET is of the opinion that this positive development should not be kept secret, but should have long been proudly announced by the Malaysian government. In fact, Nancy Shukri, the de facto Law Minister, should have proudly announced Malaysia’s moratorium on executions when she took the stage at the 6th World Congress Against Death Penalty in Malaysia. 


At the said Congress in Oslo, Norway on 21 June 2016, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, did state that Malaysia will soon be amending the laws to do away with the mandatory death penalty. Although, no time frame was mentioned, MADPET and others have called that these long overdue amendments be tabled at the upcoming sitting of Parliament in October 2016. In November 2015, the same Minister has said that the amendments would be tabled in the March 2016 sitting of Parliament.


MADPET urges Malaysia to extend the moratorium on executions to all persons on death row, not just those convicted for drug trafficking. This only makes sense, since Malaysia is now in the process of abolishing the death penalty, beginning with the mandatory death penalty. 


In May 2016, Malaysia disclosed that there are 1,041 persons on death row. Based on the statistics revealed in 2011, when the number on death row was 696 (as 22/2/2011), 479(69%) were for drug trafficking, 204(29%) were for murder and 13(2%) for illegal processions of arms. It looks like almost all  that may be on death row are for mandatory death penalty offences.


There are at least 10 offences in Malaysian laws that carry the mandatory death penalty, whereby only 3 are for offences that result in the death of the victim – Murder [sec.302 Penal Code], Committing terrorist acts where the act results in death [sec. 130C (1)(a) Penal Code]; and Hostage taking where the act results in death [sec. 374(a) Penal Code]. For all the other mandatory death penalty offences, death does not result, namely Drug Trafficking (sec. 39B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) and 6 types of offence listed in the Schedule of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, which includes robbery, kidnapping, extortion and house trespass.


The existence of mandatory death penalty, for offences that do not result in death, as in the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, only unnecessarily increase the risk of victims and/or witnesses to these crimes being killed by perpetrators to avoid the mandatory death penalty.


Malaysia’s moratorium on execution will be most welcome by everyone including the international community, as it will be seen to be in compliance with the now 5 existing United Nations General Assembly(UNGA) Resolutions, the first in 2007 and the last being in 2014, that called for ‘a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty’. Every time, these UNGA Resolutions have been tabled, the number of countries that have voted in favour have been increasing, demonstrating that the global trend is towards abolition.


Malaysia has every reason to be proud of the fact that they have been considering abolition, have in fact carried out serious studies which have now been concluded, and will be soon be taking the first step by abolishing mandatory death penalty. Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali, also the Public Prosecutor, is also for the scraping of the mandatory death penalty, and he was reported saying in 2015, that the ‘…mandatory death sentences were a "paradox", as it robbed judges of their discretion to impose sentences on convicted criminals….’.


MADPET also urges Edmund Bon, to emulate his predecessor, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, in publicly declaring his personal position for the abolition of the death penalty. AICHR Representatives should also at the very least take a stand for the abolition of the death penalty in ASEAN, as had been done by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM).


MADPET urges Malaysia to immediately extend the moratorium on executions to all, not just only for those convicted for drug trafficking.


MADPET urges that Malaysia tables in the upcoming sitting of the Malaysian Parliament in October 2016, amendments and/or legislations that will see the abolition of the mandatory death penalty; and


MADPET urges Malaysia to abolish the death penalty.

Charles Hector
For and on behalf of
MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
 



Wednesday, July 13, 2016

Lim Guan Eng - Not just a Legal Question, But also a matter of Morals and Principles?

 LIM GUAN ENG - CHIEF MINISTER OF PENANG

- now facing allegations of corruption, and has been charged in court for corruption - and, it concerns his possible abuse of position as Chief Minister...

Well, legally - he does not have to resign as Chief Minister - and the Malaysian Bar statement is right on this... he is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty... In fact, legally even if he is found guilty - he still need not resign - no need until he has exhausted all his avenues of appeal...

But, the question really is not simply a LEGAL question but really a MORAL question...since he is no mere Member of Parliament or ADUN - but this is the Chief Minister, the one who effectively wields the Executive Power in Penang...could he affect potential witnesses who are State employees? Could he still directly and/or indirectly tamper with evidence?  The Malaysian Bar also acknowledges the risk, when they say...'However, the risk cannot be ignored if there is a need for oral witness evidence — independently or in addition to the evidence contained in the formal documents — and the relevant witnesses are his subordinates.'

Knowing Lim Guan Eng, I do not think that he has done anything wrong - but my opinion, or the opinions of other supporters and friends really do not matter now... for the issue now, is what should a Prime Minister, Minister, Chief Minister, Menteri Besar, State Exco member or head of departments do when faced with similar allegation of corruption and/or abuse of power. Some may say it is a 'selective targetting' of political opponents by the BN Federal government - that too matters not. The same could also be said if it was the Prime Minister or some BN Minister who were facing a similar situation..

In some countries, Prime Ministers have stepped down when such allegations have been made - even when there is yet any charges filed in court? 

Remember, many wants Najib to resign because of that large sum of money found in its account, about the matters related to 1MDB, etc..

Should Guan Eng set the example - and step aside as Chief Minister? Surely, the Opposition government would have suitable alternatives who can be Acting Chief Minister (if Guan Eng does not resign but merely take a leave of absence) or Chief Minister if Guan Eng chooses to resign...

Will his resignation on a matter of principle affect his credibility, or the credibility of the DAP, or the credibility of the Opposition Coalition? I think not - in fact, I believe that it will be have positive influence and will garner greater support - it may show how Guan Eng is more principled...

Do the people of Penang want Guan Eng to remain as Chief Minister...or to leave? Well, that really is the question, is it not? Maybe, Penang should have a Referendum...

Well, some may say, why go back to people and have a Referendum - all that is needed is to go back to the State Legislative Assembly, table a motion of Confidence and show that the people's reps(the ADUNs) in Penang still want Guan Eng to remain... well, then Najib can say the same - the majority of MPs in Parliament clearly still want him to be PM??? 

Thus, maybe going back to the people and having a Referendum may be better option...

What will Guan Eng do now ultimately depends on Guan Eng? the DAP? the ADUNs in Penang? 

BUT WHAT GUAN ENG DOES NOW WILL REFLECT ON HIM, THE DAP AND THE OPPOSITION COALITION RULING PENANG, WHO HOPES TO RULE MALAYSIA SOON?

THE SAME STANDARDS WILL APPLY ALSO TO BN - AND WE MAY NO MORE BE MORALLY JUSTIFIED IN CALLING FOR NAJIB TO RESIGN, IS THERE?



Press Release | Presumption of Innocence is the Cornerstone of the Criminal Justice System and Must be Respected

Monday, 11 July 2016 07:20pm
ImageThe Malaysian Bar refers to the recent prosecution of Penang Chief Minister YAB Lim Guan Eng and Phang Li Koon.  

YAB Lim Guan Eng was arrested by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (“MACC”) on 28 June 2016 and detained overnight before being charged on 30 June 2016 under Section 23 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 (offence of using office or position for gratification) and under Section 165 of the Penal Code (public servant obtaining any valuable thing, without consideration, from person concerned in any proceeding or business transacted by such public servant).  

Phang Li Koon was also charged under Section 109 of the Penal Code, read together with Section 165, for purportedly abetting YAB Lim Guan Eng in the commission of the alleged offences.

MACC began its investigation into allegations of corruption against YAB Lim Guan Eng in March 2016.[1] YAB Lim Guan Eng has been apparently fully cooperative in the investigation.[2] It was reported that he voluntarily presented himself for questioning by the MACC on 6 May 2016[3] and on 7 May 2016[4] for 9 hours and 10 hours, respectively.  He attended questioning again on 22 May 2016, and acceded to MACC’s request to inspect his home.[5]  

As YAB Lim Guan Eng had been cooperating willingly in the MACC’s investigation, there appears to have been no basis for MACC to have arrested and detained him overnight on 29 June 2016.  Enforcement agencies should never resort to the power to arrest and detain, to intimidate, harass or victimise an accused person.  This would be plainly a blatant misuse of power by any enforcement agency.

YAB Lim Guan Eng’s bail set at RM1 million was extraordinarily high and thus punitive.  The purpose of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person in court for the trial.  In this instance, there seems to be nothing to suggest that YAB Lim Guan Eng posed a flight risk.  Excessive bail would be perceived as punishing or penalising an accused person prior to the trial, and would be manifestly unfair to the accused person.

The Malaysian Bar is aware that there have been calls for YAB Lim Guan Eng to take a leave of absence, or to resign, from his position as the Chief Minister of Penang pending the conclusion of the prosecution against him.  There is no strict legal requirement for him to do so.  However, there appears to be instances where a public official facing prosecution for an alleged criminal offence has vacated office (temporarily or permanently), if there is a real or apparent risk of direct or indirect interference by the official in investigatory and/or prosecutorial decisions.  

As the prosecution of YAB Lim Guan Eng has already commenced, the investigation would presumably have been completed.  There should no longer be any possibility of interference with the investigation. 

With regard to the prosecution, the risk of interference would depend on the evidence that is to be adduced by the prosecution in support of the charges.  On the face of the charges, the evidence is uncertain and it would be premature at this stage to decisively conclude whether YAB Lim Guan Eng should still remain in office.  For example, if the prosecution intends to rely on formal documents (e.g. minutes of state committee meetings) that only require identification by relevant witnesses to confirm their authenticity, the risk of interference in the prosecution’s case can be disregarded.  These documents should already be in the possession of the prosecution and their contents should be self-explanatory.  However, the risk cannot be ignored if there is a need for oral witness evidence — independently or in addition to the evidence contained in the formal documents — and the relevant witnesses are his subordinates.

The Malaysian Bar reiterates that all accused persons must enjoy the presumption of innocence and, pending the determination of a case by the court, no accused person should be treated as if he or she is guilty of a criminal offence.

Steven Thiru
President
Malaysian Bar
11 July 2016


[1] “MACC to open investigation paper on Lim Guan Eng over bungalow
​​
​​
”, Astro Awani, 18 March 2016.



[4] “MACC wraps up probe on Guan Eng after 10-hour grilling”, Malaysiakini, 7 May 2016.

[5] “MACC visit to Guan Eng's home not a raid, says Gobind”, Malaysiakini, 22 May 2016.

PREVENTION OF CRIME ACT 1959(REVISED - 1983) & Comments ?

Comments

1- The 'victim' of POCA is denied the right to a fair trial - he can simply be subjected to Detention Orders(indefinite), Police Supervision/Restriction Orders(indefinite), and the 'victim' cannot even challenge these orders. 

2.  NO Judicial Review of the reasons why these orders were made is not allowed -  Judicial Review is where the Courts will review the lawfulness decisions of the Executive/Legislative - a very important check and balance. Here we a Board making Orders - and WHO is this Board? {Also there is no right to appeal to the Minister].  In fact, the Act fails to identify the responsible Minister - possibly the Home Minister?

  no judicial review in any court of, and no court shall have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of, any act done or decision made by the Board in the exercise of its discretionary power

3 - Even, when it comes to REMAND - the discretionary powers of the Magistrate is removed - all that police is required is produce a written statement stating  'there are grounds for believing that the name of that person should be entered on the Register' - looks like the Magistrate cannot even 'evaluate' the said grounds...and maybe even the lawyer(or the suspect) cannot also challenge - police give the document and Magistrate no choice but give 21 day remand? It defeats the entire reason of REMAND - it is for the Magistrate to make sure that the police is not abusing their power of keeping suspects in detention - so the Magistrate makes sure that detention is really because the police needs the suspect for investigation - not simply to 'punish' by keeping him/her locked up...POCA removes this 'check and balance', necessary to prevent abuse...

4 - POCA allows the police to be 'lazy' - no need to properly investigate, and find sufficient evidence needed to prove a person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Now, simply can resort to POCA and send the person off to Detention Centres - and commonly it is known as 'Pusat Pemulihan' [Rehabilitation Centres]. Persons who are innocent, or who may be able to prove their innocence in court, can be deprived that right... and they have no legal remedy for their 'wrongful detention'

5 - Suspects, even if they are guilty, are prejudiced - for their 'detention without trial' will not prevent them being charged at a later date for the same offence, and sentenced again by court...

6 - During inquiry - inadmissible evidence will be considered, person's right to be present during inquiry not guaranteed, right to be represented by lawyer is denied 'except when his own evidence is being taken and recorded by the Inquiry Officer'..
 
6 - POCA must be repealed - and, if the police/prosecution cannot prove a person guilty in court - then the person is considered innocent..and should be FREE.




PREVENTION OF CRIME ACT 1959 (REVISED - 1983)                   
ACT 297  
            
Preamble

An Act to provide for the more effectual prevention of crime throughout and for the control of criminals, members of secret societies, terrorists and other undesirable persons, and for matters incidental thereto.
[1 April 1959, L.N. 85/1959]
WHEREAS action has been taken and further action is threatened by a substantial body of persons both inside and outside Malaysia to cause, or to cause a substantial number of citizens to fear, organized violence against persons or property;

AND WHEREAS Parliament considers it necessary to stop such action;

NOW, Therefore, pursuant to Article 149 of the Federal Constitution IT IS ENACTED by the Parliament of Malaysia as follows:

PART I   POWERS OF ARREST AND REMAND

1  Short title

(1) This Act may be cited as the Prevention of Crime Act 1959.

(2) This Act shall apply throughout Malaysia.

2  Interpretation

(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires-

    "Board" means the Prevention of Crime Board established under section 7B;    [Ins. Act A1459:s.5]

    "district, mukim, town or village" means the land included in any district, mukim, town or village under the provisions of any law for the time being in force relating to land;

    "Inquiry Officer" means an officer appointed by the Minister under section 8;

    "Peninsular Malaysia" (Deleted by Act A1460:s.5)

    "Register" means the register kept by the Registrar under section 12;

    "registered person" means a person whose name is entered on the Register;

    "registrable categories" means any of the categories prescribed in the First Schedule;

    "Registrar" means the Registrar of Criminals appointed under section 3 of the Registration of Criminals and Undesirable Persons Act 1969 [Act 7];

    "terrorist" has the same meaning assigned to it by the Penal Code [Act 574];
    [Ins. Act A1484:s.3]

(2) References to the supervision of the police shall be construed as references to the obligations imposed upon persons subject to police supervision under section 296 of the Criminal Procedure Code [Act 593].

3  Arrest and production before a Magistrate

(1) A police officer may without a warrant arrest any person if he has reason to believe that grounds exist which would justify the holding of an inquiry into the case of that person under this Act.

(1A) When a person is arrested under subsection (1), the case shall be referred by the police officer to the Public Prosecutor for direction not later than seven days from the date of arrest.
[(1A) Ins. Act A1484:s.4]

(2) Any person arrested under subsection (1) shall, unless sooner released, be taken without unreasonable delay, and in any case within twenty-four hours (excluding the time of any necessary journey) before a Magistrate.

4  Procedure before Magistrate

(1) Whenever any person is taken before a Magistrate under subsection 3(2) the Magistrate shall-

    (a) on production of a statement in writing signed by a police officer not below the rank of Inspector stating that there are grounds for believing that the name of that person should be entered on the Register, remand the person in police custody for a period of twenty-one days; or
[Am. Act A1459:s.6]

    (b) if no such statement is produced, and there are no other grounds on which the person is lawfully detained, direct his release.

(2) Any person remanded under paragraph (1)(a) shall, unless sooner released, on or before the expiry of the period for which he is remanded be taken before a Magistrate, who shall-

    (a) on production of-

        (i) a statement in writing signed by the Public Prosecutor stating that in his opinion sufficient evidence exists to justify the holding of an inquiry under section 9; and
        [Am. Act A1484:s.5]

        (ii) a statement in writing signed by a police officer not below the rank of Assistant Superintendent stating that it is intended to hold an inquiry into the case of that person under section 9,

    order the person to be remanded in custody for a period of thirty-eight days; or
    [Am. Act A1459:s.6]

    (b) if no such statements are produced, and there are no other grounds on which the person is lawfully detained, direct his release.

(2A) No person shall be arrested and detained under this section solely for his political belief or political activity.
[(2A) Ins. Act A1484:s.5]

(3) Except as provided in subsection 9(5), the provisions of section 28A of the Criminal Procedure Code shall apply to any person remanded under section 4.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.6]

(4) The Public Prosecutor may appear in any application made under this section.
[(4) Ins. Act A1484:s.5]

(5) For the purpose of this section, "political belief or political activity" means engaging in a lawful activity through-

    (a) the expression of an opinion or the pursuit of a course of action made according to the tenets of a political party that is at the relevant time registered under the Societies Act 1966 [Act 335] as evidenced by-

        (i) membership of or contribution to that party; or

        (ii) open and active participation in the affairs of that party;

    (b) the expression of an opinion directed towards any government in Malaysia; or

    (c) the pursuit of a course of action directed towards any government in Malaysia.
[(5) Ins. Act A1484:s.5]

5             [Deleted]

6             Person in custody to be brought before Inquiry Officer

Every person remanded in custody under section 4 shall, if not sooner released, as soon as possible be brought before an Inquiry Officer.
[Am. Act A1459:s.8]

7  Release of person remanded in custody

(1) Any person remanded in custody under section 4 may at any time be taken before a Magistrate who, if there are no other grounds on which the person is lawfully detained-
[Am. Act A1459:s.8]

    (a) shall direct his release if there is produced to him a statement in writing signed by a police officer not below the rank of Assistant Superintendent stating that it is not intended to continue with an inquiry into the case of that person under section 9; or

    (b) in any other case, on the application of a police officer may direct his release subject to-

        (i) the execution by the person of a bond, with or without sureties, for his due appearance at such place or places and at such time or times and within such period not exceeding fifty-nine days, as the Sessions Court Judge may direct; or
        [Am. Act A1459:s.8]

        (ii) the supervision of the police for such period not exceeding forty-two days as the Sessions Court Judge may direct.
        [Am. Act A1459:s.8]

(2) If a person is released under paragraph 7(1)(b), an electronic monitoring device shall be attached on the person in accordance with subsections (3) and (4).
[Ins. Act A1459:s.9]

(3) If the police officer intends to release the person under paragraph (1)(b) and attach an electronic monitoring device on the person upon his release, he shall submit a report to the Public Prosecutor before the application under paragraph (1)(b) is made.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.9]

(4) Upon receipt of the report under subsection (3), the Public Prosecutor may apply to the Sessions Court Judge for the person to be attached with an electronic monitoring device in accordance with section 7A for the period of his release as allowed under paragraph (1)(b).
[Ins. Act A1459:s.9]

7A  Special procedures relating to electronic monitoring device

(1) Upon application by the Public Prosecutor under section 7, the Sessions Court Judge shall order the person to be attached with an electronic monitoring device for a period as the Sessions Court Judge may determine but which shall not exceed the period of his release as allowed under paragraph 7(1)(b).

(2) The Sessions Court Judge shall explain the operation of the electronic monitoring device and the terms and conditions of the electronic monitoring device to the person.

(3) The person shall sign a form as specified in the Third Schedule and deposit the form with the Sessions Court Judge.

(4) The person shall be attached with an electronic monitoring device by a police officer.

(5) The person shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the electronic monitoring device and shall report to the nearest police station at such time as specified in the form.

(6) Any person who fails to comply with the terms and conditions under subsection (5) shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.

(7) Any person who tampers with, or destroys, the electronic monitoring device shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years and such person shall be liable to pay for any damage to the electronic monitoring device arising from his action.

(8) Upon expiry of the period referred to in subsection (1), the person shall report to the nearest police station for removal of the electronic monitoring device.
[7A. Ins. Act A1459:s.10]

7B  Prevention of Crime board

(1) A Prevention of Crime Board is established which shall consist of the following members to be appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong:

    (a) a Chairman, who shall be a legally qualified person with at least fifteen years experience in the legal field;

    (b) a Deputy Chairman; and

    (c) not less than three and not more than six other members.

(2) Every member of the Board shall, unless he sooner resigns, hold office for a period not exceeding three years and is eligible for re-appointment once for another period of three years.

(3) Every member of the Board may at any time resign his office by giving notice in writing to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

(4) The appointment of any member of the Board may at any time be revoked by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

(5) The quorum for any sitting of the Board shall be three members.

(6) Subject to this Act, the Board shall determine its own procedure.

(7) Every member of the Board shall be deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of the Penal Code.
[7B. Ins. Act A1459:s.11; Subs. Act A1484:s.6]

PART II   INQUIRIES

8             Appointment of Inquiry Officers

The Minister may by writing under his hand appoint any person by name or office, and either generally or for any particular case, to be an Inquiry Officer for the purposes of this Act: provided that no police officer shall be appointed to be an Inquiry Officer.

9             Duties and powers of Inquiry Officers

(1) When any person is brought before an Inquiry Officer under section 6 the Inquiry Officer shall inquire and report in writing to the Board whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the person is a member of any of the registrable categories.
[Am. Act A1459:s.12]

(2) An inquiry held under subsection (1) shall be held in such manner and in accordance with such procedure as the Board may direct.
[Am. Act A1459:s.12]

(3) An Inquiry Officer may, for the purpose of any inquiry under this Act-

    (a) procure and receive all such evidence, in any form and whether the same be admissible or not under any written law for the time being in force relating to evidence or criminal procedure, which he may think necessary or desirable;
    [Am. Act A1459:s.12]

    (b) summon and examine witnesses on oath or affirmation, and may for those purposes administer any oath or affirmation;

    (c) require the production of any document or other thing in his opinion relevant to the inquiry;

    (d) if he considers it necessary in the public interest or to protect a witness, or his family or associates, receive evidence in the absence of the person who is the subject of the inquiry:
    [Am. Act A1459:s.12]

        Provided that where any such evidence is received the Inquiry Officer shall communicate to the person the substance of the evidence, so far as he may consider it compatible with the public interest or the need to protect a witness, or his family or associates so to do, and shall in every such case include in any report made under subsection 10(2) a statement of the circumstances in which the evidence was received;
        [Am. Act A1459:s.12]

    (e) give any direction as may be necessary.

(4) Any person summoned as a witness under subsection (3) who without reasonable excuse fails to attend at the time and place mentioned in the summons or who, having attended, refuses to answer any question that may lawfully be put to him or to produce any document or thing which it is in his power to produce, shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding two thousand ringgit or to both.
[Am. Act A1459:s.12]

(5) Neither the person who is the subject of the inquiry nor a witness at an inquiry shall be represented by an advocate and solicitor at the inquiry except when his own evidence is being taken and recorded by the Inquiry Officer.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.12]

(6) The Public Prosecutor may appear at an inquiry to assist the Inquiry Officer.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.12; Am. Act A1484:s.7]

(7) The Minister may by regulations prescribe the allowances to be paid to witnesses summoned under subsection (3).
[(7) Ins. Act A1484:s.7]

9A  Access by Inquiry Officer to detainees or prisoners

(1) Notwithstanding any other written law, an Inquiry Officer conducting an inquiry under this Act shall be allowed to have access to any person whom he has reason to believe to be connected to or has any evidence of any offence who is-

    (a) being detained under any other written law; or

    (b) under confinement in prison, whether convicted or not.

(2) Nothing in this section shall authorize the attendance of the subject of the inquiry or his advocate and solicitor or representative, if any, at the place of detention or prison.
[9A. Ins. Act A1459:s.13]

10  Report of Inquiry Officer

(1) If the Inquiry Officer is satisfied that there are no sufficient grounds for believing that the person who was the subject of the inquiry is a member of any of the registrable categories, he shall report his finding, together with his reasons for it, to the Board, and shall forward a copy of his finding to the officer having custody of the person, who shall forthwith serve a copy of the finding of the Inquiry Officer on that person.
[Subs. Act A1459:s.14]

(2) If the Inquiry Officer is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the person who was the subject of the inquiry is a member of any of the registrable categories, he shall report the grounds, together with his finding, to the Board, and shall forward a copy of his finding to the officer having custody of the person, who shall forthwith serve a copy of the finding of the Inquiry Officer on that person.
[Am. Act A1459:s.14]

(3) Whenever the Board, after considering the finding of the Inquiry Officer submitted under subsection (1), is satisfied with respect to any person that-

    (a) there are no sufficient grounds for believing that the person is a member of any of the registrable categories, the Board shall forthwith direct any person having the custody of that person, within twenty-four hours of the receipt of the direction, to produce the person before a Sessions Court Judge, who shall thereupon discharge the order of remand made under section 4 and, if there are no other grounds on which the person is lawfully detained, shall order his immediate release;

    (b) based on the Inquiry Officer’s finding there are sufficient grounds for believing that the person is a member of any of the registrable categories, the Board shall proceed in accordance with Parts III, IV and IVA of this Act.
[(3) Ins. Act A1459:s.14]

(4) If the Board makes a decision under paragraph (3)(b), it shall forward a copy of its decision to the officer having custody of the person, who shall forthwith serve a copy of the decision of the Board on that person.
[(4) Ins. Act A1459:s.14]

11  Review by the Board of decision of Inquiry Officer
[Shoulder note Am. Act A1459:s.15]

(1) Any person who was the subject of an inquiry who is dissatisfied with any finding made under subsection 10(2) or decision under paragraph 10(3)(b) may within fourteen days of the service thereunder of the copy of the finding or decision on him by notice in writing request the Board to review the finding or decision.
[Am. Act A1459:s.15]

(2) The Board shall, upon making any review under subsection (1), and after considering the advice of a law officer thereon:
[Am. Act A1459:s.15]

    (a) confirm the finding made under subsection 10(2) or decision under paragraph 10(3)(b); or
    [Am. Act A1459:s.15]

    (b) reverse the finding or decision:
    [Am. Act A1459:s.15]

        Provided that if the Board reverses any such finding or decision, and the person who made the request is still in custody, the Board shall within twenty-four hours of its decision direct the person to be taken before a Sessions Court Judge, who shall thereupon discharge the order of remand and, if there are no other grounds on which the person is lawfully detained, shall order his immediate release.
        [Am. Act A1459:s.15]

PART III   REGISTRATION

12  Registration of persons believed to be members of any of the registrable categories

(1) The Registrar shall keep a Register for the purposes of this Act, in which shall be entered the name of every person-

    (a) who is reported by an Inquiry Officer to be a person in respect of whom there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is a member of any of the registrable categories; and

    (b) who has not requested any review under section 11, or in respect of whom the Board has confirmed the finding made under subsection 10(2) or made or confirmed the decision under paragraph 10(3)(b),
    [Am. Act A1459:s.16]

together with such other particulars as may be prescribed.

(2) The Board may, if it considers it in the interest of public order or security to do so, with or without inquiry under this Act direct the Registrar to enter in the Register the name, and such other particulars as may be prescribed, of any person who is a member of any of the registrable categories prescribed in Part II of the First Schedule.
[Am. Act A1459:s.16]

13  Person to be registered to attend before a police officer

(1) Any police officer of or above the rank of Inspector may by order in writing direct the attendance before him at such time and place as may be specified in the order of any person whose name is required to be entered in the Register, for the purpose of-

    (a) taking the finger impressions and photograph of the person;

    (b) obtaining any other particulars relating to the person as may be prescribed or as may be necessary for effecting any such registration.

(2) If any person fails to attend as so directed a police officer may report the failure to a Magistrate who shall thereupon issue a warrant to secure the attendance of that person as required.

14  Removal of name from the Register

The Board may at any time in its discretion direct the Registrar to remove the name of any person from the Register, and thereupon the person shall cease to be a registered person, unless and until his name is subsequently re-entered in the Register in accordance with section 12.
[Am. Act A1459:s.17]

PART IV   CONSEQUENCES OF REGISTRATION

15  Police supervision

(1) The Board may by order direct that any registered person named in the order shall be subject to the supervision of the police for any period not exceeding five years if the Board is satisfied that it is necessary that control and supervision be exercised over the registered person but that it is not necessary to detain him, and may renew any such order for a further period not exceeding five years at a time; and the registered person shall be conveyed under police escort to the State, district, mukim, town or village in which he is required to reside under subsection (2) (if any).
[Am. Act A1459:s.18]

(2) Any person placed under the supervision of the police by order made under this section shall also be subject to all or any of the following restrictions and conditions, as the Board may by order direct:
[Am. Act A1459:s.18; Am. Act A1484:s.8]

    (a) he shall be required to reside within the limits of any State, district, mukim, town or village specified in the order;

    (b) he shall not be permitted to transfer his residence to any other State, district, mukim, town or village, as the case may be, without the written authority of the Chief Police Officer of any State concerned;

    (c) except so far as may be otherwise provided by the order, he shall not leave the State, district, mukim, town or village within which he resides without the written authority of the Chief Police Officer of the State concerned;

    (d) he shall at all times keep the Officer in Charge of the Police District in which he resides notified of the house or place in which he resides;

    (e) he shall be liable, at such time or times as may be specified in the order, to present himself at the nearest police station;

    (f) he shall remain within doors, or within such area as may be defined in the order, between such hours as may be specified in the order, unless he obtains special permission to the contrary from the Officer in Charge of the Police District;

    (g) except so far as may be otherwise provided by the order, he shall not be permitted to enter any State, district, mukim, town or village specified in the order;
    [Am. Act A1459:s.18]

    (h) he shall use only equipment and facilities of communication which are declared to and approved by the Chief Police Officer of any State concerned;

    (i) except so far as may be otherwise provided by the order, he shall not access the internet;

    (j) he shall keep the peace and be of good behaviour;

    (k) he shall enter into a bond, with or without sureties as the Board may direct and in such amount as may be specified in the order, for his due compliance with the restrictions and conditions imposed on him by the order;

    (l) he shall be attached with an electronic monitoring device.
    [(h)-(i) Ins. Act A1459:s.18]

(3) The Board may by order in writing served on the registered person, vary, cancel or add to any restrictions and conditions imposed under this section.
[Am. Act A1459:s.18; Am. Act A1484:s.8]

(4) A registered person who contravenes or fails to comply with any order or restriction or condition imposed on him under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years and not less than two years.
[Am. Act A1459:s.18; Am. Act A1484:s.8]

(5) Any person who conspires with, abets or assists any registered person to breach any restriction or condition under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years and not less than two years.
[Am. Act A1484:s.8]

(6) Sections 173A and 294 of the Criminal Procedure Code shall not apply in respect of offences under subsections (4) and (5).

(7) The punishment imposed under subsection (4) and any term of imprisonment imposed under any written law shall not be taken into consideration for the purpose of the period of supervision imposed under subsection (1) and the period of supervision shall be continued from the date of completion of the sentence of imprisonment imposed.
[(5)-(7) Ins. Act A1459:s.18]

15A  Judicial review of act or decision of board

(1) There shall be no judicial review in any court of, and no court shall have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of, any act done or decision made by the Board in the exercise of its discretionary power in accordance with this Act, except in regard to any question on compliance with any procedural requirement in this Act governing such act or decision.
[Am. Act A1484:s.9]

(2) In this Act, "judicial review" includes proceedings instituted by way of-

    (a) an application for any of the prerogative orders of mandamus, prohibition and certiorari;

    (b) an application for a declaration or an injunction;
    [Am. Act A1484:s.9]

    (ba) a writ of habeas corpus; and
    [(ba) Ins. Act A1484:s.9]

    (c) any other suit, action or other legal proceedings relating to or arising out of any act done or decision made by the Board in accordance with this Act.

16  Registered person not to consort with other registered persons
(1) No registered person shall consort or habitually associate with any other registered person without the permission of the Officer in Charge of the Police District in which he resides, unless he shall prove that he did not know and had no reason to suspect that such other person was a registered person.

(2) Any person who contravenes the provisions of this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fifteen years and not less than five years.[Am. Act A1459:s.20]
17  Double penalties for crimes of violence
Any registered person who is convicted of any offence committed after the date of the entry of his name on the Register under the provisions of any law specified in the Second Schedule shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of twice as long as the maximum term for which he would have been liable on conviction for that offence, and also to whipping.
18  Loitering by a registered person in a public place, etc.

Any registered person who-

    (a) is found between the hours of sunset and sunrise frequenting or loitering in or about any public place or in or in the neighbourhood of any place of public entertainment; or

    (b) at any time is found in the company of two or more registered persons; or

    (c) at any time is found in or near any place in which any act of violence or breach of the peace is being or has just been committed,

and who is unable satisfactorily to account for his presence at such place or time or in such company shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit or to both.
[Am. Act A1459:s.21]

19  Harbouring
(1) Any person who knowingly conceals or harbours any person who enters any State, district, mukim, town or village in contravention of any order under section 15 shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit or to both: provided that this subsection shall not apply to the case of a wife harbouring or concealing her husband or a husband harbouring or concealing his wife.
[Am. Act A1459:s.22]

(2) Any person aware of the presence in any State, district, mukim, town or village of any person, not being the husband or wife of the first-mentioned person, who has been ordered not to enter the State, district, mukim, town or village or has been ordered to reside in any other State, district, mukim, town or village, and being aware also of the making of the order, shall in the absence of reasonable excuse, proof whereof shall lie on him, forthwith give information thereof to the nearest police officer or Magistrate, and in default of his so doing shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to both.
[Am. Act A1459:s.22]

PART IVA   DETENTION ORDERS

 19A        Detention orders

(1) The Board may, after considering the report of the Inquiry Officer submitted under section 10 and the outcome of any review under section 11, direct that any registered person be detained under a detention order for a period not exceeding two years, and may renew any such detention order for a further period not exceeding two years at a time, if it is satisfied that such detention is necessary in the interest of public order, public security or prevention of crime.

(2) The direction of the Board under subsection (1) shall be subject to review by the High Court.

(3) Every registered person detained in pursuance of a detention order shall be detained in such place (hereinafter referred to as a "place of detention") as the Board may direct and in accordance with any instructions issued by the Board and any regulations made under section 23.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.23]

(4) A copy of every detention order made by the Board under subsection (1) shall as soon as may be after the making of the order be served on the person to whom it relates, and every such person shall be entitled to make representations to an Advisory Board constituted under Clause (2) of Article 151 of the Federal Constitution in accordance with the prescribed procedures.
[Ins. Act A1484:s.10]
19B  Validity of detention orders

No detention order shall be invalid or inoperative by reason-

    (a) that the person to whom it relates-

        (i) was immediately before the making of the detention order detained in any place other than a place of detention referred to in subsection 19A(3);

        (ii) continued to be detained immediately after the making of the order in the place in which he was detained under section 3 before his removal to a place of detention referred to in subsection 19A(3); or

        (iii) was during the duration of the order on journey in police custody or any other custody to a place of detention referred to in subsection 19A(3); or

    (b) that the detention order was served on him at any place other than the place of detention referred to in subsection 19A(3), or that there was any defect relating to its service upon him.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.23]
19C  Suspension of detention orders
(1) The Board may, at any time, direct that the operation of any order under section 19A be suspended subject to all or any of the restrictions and conditions which the Board is empowered by subsection 15(2) to impose by an order under section 15, and subject, if the Board so directs, to the requirement that the person against whom the order under section 19A was made shall enter into a bond as provided in subsection 15(2).

(2) Where an order under section 19A is suspended, subsection 15(3) shall have effect as if the restrictions and conditions on which the order under section 19B is suspended were restrictions and conditions imposed by an order under section 15.
[Am. Act A1484:s.11]

(3) The Board may revoke the suspension of any detention order under section 19A if it is satisfied that the person against whom the order was made has failed to observe any restriction or condition imposed upon him or that it is necessary in the interest of public order that the suspension should be revoked, and in any such case the revocation of the suspension shall be sufficient authority to any police officer to re-arrest without warrant the person against whom the order was made, and that person shall as soon as practicable be returned to his former place of detention or, if the Board so directs, sent to another place of detention.

(4) The suspension of any order under this section shall, subject to subsection (3) as applied by subsection (2) and subject also to subsection (3), continue in force for the unexpired portion of the period of the order specified under subsection 19A(1).
[Ins. Act A1459:s.23; Am. Act A1484:s.11]

19D  Effect on term of imprisonment
Where a person-

    (a) who is undergoing detention under section 19a is sentenced to any term of imprisonment under this Act or any other written law; or

    (b) has his period of detention renewed under section 19a whilst he is serving any such term of imprisonment,

the detention or extended detention shall be deemed to be undergone concurrently with that term of imprisonment, and if upon completion of any such term of imprisonment, there still remains any unexpired portion of the detention period or of the extended detention period, he shall be required to be detained for such unexpired portion thereof.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.23]

19E  Power to order removal
(1) The Board may by order direct the removal from any place of detention to another place of detention to be specified in such order of any person detained under section 19A to be there detained for the whole or any part of such period for which it has been ordered that such person shall be detained.

(2) Any person who is in the course of removal under subsection (1) shall be deemed to be in lawful custody.
[Ins. Act A1459:s.23; Subs. Act A1484:s.12]

19F  Power to order production of detained person

(1) On proof to his satisfaction that the presence at any place of any person detained under section 19A, or lawfully in the custody of the police or confined in any prison whether under section 19A or under an order of any court or otherwise howsoever, and notwithstanding any order of any court or other authority whatsoever, is required in the interests of justice, or for the purpose of any public or other inquiry, or in the national interest, or in the interests of the person detained, in custody, or confined, the Commissioner General of Prison where the person is detained in a place of detention or prison, or the Inspector General of Police where the person is in the lawful custody of the police, may order that such person be taken to that place.

(2) Any person in the course of being taken to any place under subsection (1) and whilst at such place shall be kept in such custody as the Commissioner General of Prison or the Inspector General of Police, as the case may be, may direct and whilst in that custody shall be deemed to be in lawful custody.

(3) In this section, "Commissioner General of Prison" has the same meaning assigned to it by subsection 2(1) of the Prison Act 1995 [Act 537].
[Ins. Act A1459:s.23; Subs. Act A1484:s.12]
19G  Saving in respect of prosecution of persons detained

The detention of any person under this Part shall be without prejudice to the taking of any criminal proceeding against that person, whether during or after the period of his detention.
[19G. Ins. Act A1484:s.13]
PART V   GENERAL

20  Powers of police to investigate
(1) When a police officer not below the rank of Sergeant has reason to believe that grounds exist which would justify the holding of an inquiry into the case of any person under this Act he or any police officer subordinate to him and acting under his orders may investigate the facts and circumstances of the case so far as they may be relevant to any proceedings in respect of that person under this Act.

(2) In making any investigation under subsection (1) a police officer may exercise all or any of the powers in relation to police investigations in any seizable case which are given him by the law for the time being in force relating to criminal procedure.
20A        Arrest

A police officer may without a warrant arrest any person if he has reason to believe that the person has committed an offence against section 16, 18 or 19 and every such offence shall be seizable and non-bailable for the purposes of the Criminal Procedure Code.
21           Taking of photographs and finger impressions
[Shoulder note Am. Act A1484:s.14]

(1) A police officer may take or cause to be taken the photograph and finger impressions of any person arrested under subsection 3(1), or whose name is required to be entered on the Register under subsection 12(2), and shall send the photograph and impressions to the Registrar for identification and report; and every such person shall be legally bound to submit to the taking of his photographs and finger impressions, and may be compelled thereto by the use of force if necessary.

(2) Any person who, being legally bound under subsection (1) to submit to the taking of his photographs or finger impressions refuses or fails to submit thereto on demand shall be guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six month or to a fine not exceeding two thousand ringgit or to both.
[Am. Act A1459:s.24]

(3) Whenever-

    (a) any person whose photograph and finger impressions have been taken under this section is released under section 4, 7, 10 or 11; or
    [Am. Act A1459:s.24]

    (b) the name of any person is removed from the Register under section 14,

the officer in charge of the case shall forthwith notify the Registrar thereof, and the Registrar shall, upon the application of the person, deliver to that person the sheet upon which his finger impressions have been made, together with the negative and all copies of any photograph taken of him and forwarded to the Registrar under this section.
[Am. Act A1484:s.21]
21A  Disclosure of information

Nothing in this Act or in any regulations made under this Act shall require the Board, any member of the Board, any Inquiry Officer or any public servant to disclose facts or to produce documents which he considers-

    (a) to be against the public interest to disclose or produce; or

    (b) would compromise the protection of a witness, or his family or associates.
[21A Ins. Act A1459:s.25]
22  Power to amend Schedules

The Minister may, by order published in the Gazette, amend the Schedules.
[Subs. Act A1459:s.26]

23           Regulations

(1) The Minister may make regulations for carrying out the purposes of this Act.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred by subsection (1) the regulations may-

    (a) prescribe the form of the Register, and such other forms as may be necessary or desirable to be used in connection with the matters deal with in this Act or in any regulations made thereunder;

    (b) require all or any class of registered persons to carry identity cards, provide for the form, issue, production, inspection, cancellation, alteration, endorsement on and replacement of those cards, and the substitution thereof for identity cards issued to those persons under any other written law, and for all other matters necessary or desirable in connection with the cards or the carrying thereof or the enforcement of the regulations, including the prescription of penalties not exceeding in respect of any offence a fine of five thousand ringgit or imprisonment for a term of three years or both;

    (ba) provide for the maintenance and management of places of detention and for the discipline and treatment of persons detained therein and different regulations may be made for different places of detention;
    [Ins. Act A1459:s.27]

    (bb) provide for the administration and management of the Board, including provisions on training for the members of the Board
    [(bb) Ins. Act A1484:s.15]

    (c) provide for any other matter which under this Act is required or permitted to be prescribed.

(3) (Deleted by Act A1484:s.15)

               FIRST SCHEDULE
[Sections 2 and 22]
REGISTRABLE CATEGORIES

PART I

1. All members of unlawful societies which-

    (i) use Triad ritual; or

    (ii) are constituted or used for purposes involving the commission of offences that are seizable under the law for the time being in force relating to criminal procedure; or

    (iii) maintain secrecy as to their objects.

2. Persons who belong to or consort with any group, body, gang or association of two or more persons who associate for purposes which include the commission of offences under the Penal Code.
[Am. PU(A) 122/2014:O.2]

3. All traffickers in dangerous drugs, including persons who live wholly or in part on the proceeds of drug trafficking.
[Subs. PU(A) 122/2014:O.2]

4. All traffickers in persons, including persons who live wholly or in part on the proceeds of trafficking in persons
[Subs. PU(A) 122/2014:O.2]

5. All persons concerned in the organisation and promotion of unlawful gaming.
[Am. PU(A) 122/2014:O.2]

6. All smugglers of migrants, including persons who live wholly or in part on the proceeds of smuggling of migrants.
[Ins. PU(A) 122/2014:O.2]

7. Persons who recruit, or agree to recruit, another person to be a member of an unlawful society or a gang or to participate in the commission of an offence.
[Ins. PU(A) 122/2014:O.2]

8. Persons who engage in the commission or support of terrorist acts under the Penal Code.
[Ins. PU(A) 201/2015:O.2]

PART II

[Subsection 12(2)]

1. All persons who, being not less than twenty-one years of age, have since attaining the age of seventeen been convicted on at least three occasions of offences involving dishonesty or violence.

2. All persons, who have been convicted of offences against subsection 52(3) of the Societies Act 1966 [Act 335].

3. (Deleted by PU(A) 122/2014:O.2).

4. (Deleted by PU(A) 122/2014:O.2).


               SECOND SCHEDULE
[Sections 17 and 22]

1. Offences under sections 42, 43, 44 and 52 of the Societies Act 1966.

2. Offences under the Penal Code [Act 574], as follows:

    Sections 323, 324, 325, 327, 332, 333, 346, 347, 352, 353, 356 357, 365, 379, 384 to 387, 392, 393, 399, 401, 402, 447, 448, 450 to 453, 455, 457 to 457A and Chapter V and Chapter VIB and section 511.
[Am. PU(A) 122/2014:O.3]

3. Offences under the Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act 1958 [Act 357].

4. Offences under section 4 or 4B of the Common Gaming Houses Act 1953 [Act 289].
[Ins. PU(A) 122/2014:O.3]

               THIRD SCHEDULE
[Section 7A]

FORM

ELECTRONIC MONITORING DEVICE

IN THE SESSIONS COURT AT.................. IN THE STATE OF...............................

1. Name: ...............................................................................................................

2. Case No.: ..........................................................................................................

3. Identity Card No.: ..............................................................................................

4. Address: ............................................................................................................

5. Telephone No.: ..................................................................................................

6. Family members to be contacted: ........................................................................

............................................................................................................................

7. Period to be attached with electronic monitoring device ("device?): ......................

8. Terms and conditions-

    (a) to report to the nearest police station at/for every .............................;

    (b) understands that all movements will be tracked and retained as an official record;

    (c) agrees to be required to report for device equipment checks if necessary;

    (d) to notify the police officer if there is any change of address;

    (e) to allow inspections of the device by the police officer;

    (f) to report to the nearest police station for removal of the device;

    (g) to return all the device equipment to the police officer;

    (h) to submit to procedures required by the police officer;

    (i) to maintain the device as instructed by the police officer;

    (j) to comply with any directions of the police officer;

    (k) to comply with any other conditions as the court may determine.

9. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions is an offence under subsection 7A(6) of the Prevention of Crime Act 1959.

I hereby agree to and shall comply with the terms and conditions as stated in this Form.

.........................................................

(____________________________)

[Third Sch Ins. Act A1459:s.28]