In Malaysia, the increase in juvenile delinquency has always been a source of worry. The discussion around juvenile sentencing is always centred on the familial aspect of rehabilitating adolescents and the punitive role of criminal punishments. The proponents of restorative justice think that children in their vulnerable position should not be subjected to harsh sentences, whereas the proponents of punitive justice advocate for harsher, deterrent punishments. In light of this, this study aims to examine the practice of sentencing children in Malaysia. This essay examines the challenges judges encounter when selecting appropriate sentencing for juvenile criminals. This study applied a doctrinal methodology to discuss the legal provisions of the Child Act 2001, Criminal Procedure Code, Penal Code and reported cases. This study employed content analysis of the reported cases from online databases such as the LexisNexis and Current Law Journal. The data from primary sources of law such as legislation and reported cases were accompanied with secondary data obtained from journal articles, textbooks, conference papers, theses, published statistics, and webpages. This study found that the sentencing practice with regard to children in Malaysia differs from one case to another. Judicial discretion given to the judges are not accompanied by specific guidelines but rather general considerations such as the age of the offenders, the gravity of the offence, the probation report and previous conviction. This study concludes that juveniles' punishments must be proportional to the severity of their crimes. A sentencing guideline should be established to guarantee that sentencing practices are consistent. Besides, clear procedures in preparing a probation report must also be established. For future research, this study recommends a relook on the role of probation officers and the significance of probation report in assisting judges to impose appropriate punishment towards juvenile offenders.
Amnesty International. (2019). Fatally flawed: Why Malaysia must abolish death penalty. Amnesty International.
Burnett, R., & McNeill, F. (2005). The place of the officer-offender relationship in assisting offenders to desist from crime. Probation Journal, 52(3), 221–242.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0264550505055112
Department of Statistics, Malaysia. (2021). Children Statistics 2021.
https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/pdfPrev&id=d1YxK0tsUWp4RGNHQXZTZTIzNUxWdz09
Dlamalala, C. N. (2018) The role of a probation officer in diversion of children from the criminal justice system: A penological perspective [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of South Africa.
Malik Yatam lwn Pengarah Penjara Kajang. (2021) 1 LNS 1420 (Malaysia).
Mohammad, T., & Azman, A. (2018). Probation officers and the experience of juvenile offenders in the juvenile system. Kajian Malaysia, 36(2), 69–88.
https://doi.org/10.21315/km2018.36.2.4
Mouseri, S., Nordin, R., & Shapiee, R. (2012). Children offenders in Iran: Legal analysis on age of criminal responsibility and sentencing. International Journal of West Asia Studies, 1(4), 31-48. https://doi.org/10.5895/ijwas.2012.03
Azizan, N. A. V. PP. (2012). 6 CLJ 370 (Malaysia).
PP v J. B. D. (1981) 1 MLJ 315 (Malaysia).
PP v Jessica Lim Lu Ping & Anor (2004) MLJU 159 (Malaysia).
PP v K. W. K. (2007) 6 CLJ 341 (Malaysia).
PP v Low Kian Boon (2006) 6 MLJ 254 (Malaysia).
PP v M. T. (2007) 6 MLJ 642 (Malaysia).
Public Prosecutor v Hidayatul Akmal Azman (2020) 1 CLJ 562 (Malaysia).
Public Prosecutor v Fatt, L. C. (1976). 2 MLJ 256 (Malaysia).
Public Prosecutor v SAK (the child). (2021). MLJU 1707 (Malaysia).
Rahim, A. A. (2014). Jenayah Kanak-kanak dan Undang-undang Malaysia (in Malay language). Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Ramli, Re J. bin (1956) MLJ 56 (Malaysia).
Rosli, Z. (2021). An observation on 'basikal lajak' kids. Malayan Law Journal Articles, 2, 193-199.
Samuri, M. A., & Awal, N. A. M. (2009). Hukuman terhadap pesalah kanak-kanak di Malaysia: Pencegahan atau pemulihan? (in Malay language). Jurnal Undang-undang Malaysia, 13, 35-54.
Sidhu, B. S. (2003). An overview of the Child Act 2001 and the criminal procedure aspects. Malayan Law Journal Articles, 2, 49-59.
Sidhu, B. S. (2011). Criminal litigation process (2nd ed.). Sweet & Maxwell Asia.
Social Welfare Department, Malaysia. (2016). Piagam Kanak-kanak (in Malay language.) retrieved from
https://www.jkm.gov.my/jkm/index.php?r=portal/left&id=VfpsU3gzeUVFVFlBQ0llY1dXTEtnZz09
Soosainathan v PP. (2001). 2 MLJ 377 (Malaysia).
Ulla Mahapatra v King. (1950). Cut 293 (India).
Ullah v the King AIR. (1950). Orissa 251 (India).
Vincent, M., & Newman, F. E. (2010). Juvenile sentencing schemes. Report Human Right Advocators. Retrieved from https://www.humanrightsadvocates.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Juvenile-Sentencing-Schemes.pdf
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Child. (1989).
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child Yg (A Child) (2020) MLJU 1705 (Malaysia).
In-Text Citation: (Randawar et al., 2022)
To Cite this Article: Randawar, D. K., Ikhsan, M. I., & Monil, F. (2022). Sentencing Child Offenders in Malaysia: When Practice Meets its Purpose. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 12(7), 1211– 1220.
Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s)
Published by Knowledge Words Publications (www.kwpublications.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
