The defence in the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial has applied for the supply of all clinical notes, reports, materials, specimens and other notes by the three Kuala Lumpur Hospital doctors.
It also wants a complete medical history of the alleged victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's examination at the hospital.
In addition they want the prosecution to hand over the standard sexual assault equipment and kits used in the examination.
The defence also wants to know the qualification and experience of the three doctors - Dr Khairul Nizam Hassan, Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim and Dr Siew Sheue Feng.
This follows the filing of the motion by the opposition leader this morning to obtain the documents.
The reason for the move is that Australian forensic expert, Dr David Wells (left) had complained that he would not be able to advise the defence team unless such documents were at hand.
In Dr Wells's supporting affidavit to the motion, the Professor at Victoria Institute of Forensic Medicine said that his capacity to advise the solicitors had been severely compromised by the absence of the documents.
"For any meaningful advice to the applicant's solicitors it is pertinent and essential to have sight of all documents and materials."
The restrictive ruling on providing such documentary evidence was handed down by the Federal Court, when the defence , even before the trial proper commenced had applied for the prosecution to provide them with all the necessary documents.
However, the Federal Court ruled that it was not necessary as the application could be made during the course of a trial.
It also wants a complete medical history of the alleged victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's examination at the hospital.
In addition they want the prosecution to hand over the standard sexual assault equipment and kits used in the examination.
The defence also wants to know the qualification and experience of the three doctors - Dr Khairul Nizam Hassan, Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim and Dr Siew Sheue Feng.
This follows the filing of the motion by the opposition leader this morning to obtain the documents.
The reason for the move is that Australian forensic expert, Dr David Wells (left) had complained that he would not be able to advise the defence team unless such documents were at hand.In Dr Wells's supporting affidavit to the motion, the Professor at Victoria Institute of Forensic Medicine said that his capacity to advise the solicitors had been severely compromised by the absence of the documents.
"For any meaningful advice to the applicant's solicitors it is pertinent and essential to have sight of all documents and materials."
The restrictive ruling on providing such documentary evidence was handed down by the Federal Court, when the defence , even before the trial proper commenced had applied for the prosecution to provide them with all the necessary documents.
However, the Federal Court ruled that it was not necessary as the application could be made during the course of a trial.
Law amendment a hinderance
With this restrictive ruling if Anwar's defence wanted to apply for documents or any other evidence, it would have to submit an application like this notice of motion.
Normally, in all criminal cases all documentary evidence is provided before the start of a trial.
This follows provision of and amendments to Section 51 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Anwar's lawyer had on the outset applied for such documents to be handed over for a smooth running of the trial and to prevent any trial by ambush.
However, as in Anwar's case the apex court ruling may set a dangerous precedent in limiting the provision of such documents and evidence before a trial.
Judge Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah has fixed June 18 to hear submissions on the notice of motion.
Normally, in all criminal cases all documentary evidence is provided before the start of a trial.
This follows provision of and amendments to Section 51 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Anwar's lawyer had on the outset applied for such documents to be handed over for a smooth running of the trial and to prevent any trial by ambush.
However, as in Anwar's case the apex court ruling may set a dangerous precedent in limiting the provision of such documents and evidence before a trial.
Judge Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah has fixed June 18 to hear submissions on the notice of motion.
No comments:
Post a Comment