You are on page 1of 1



FACTS: Yazid Sufaat and 2 others were arrested under section 4 of SOSMA and separately
charged before the Magistrate’s Court, Ampang for security offences under the provision in
Penal Code which is section 130G(a) which the penalty can be up to 30 years' jail and a fine.
Yazid was charged for promoting an act of terrorism and that act was regarded as being
intended as a threat to the members of public in Syria. Two other respondents were arrested
for abetting Yazid (first respondent). The High Court held that the charges did not apply to
the offences relating to the acts of terrorism committed outside Malaysia since art. 149 of the
Constitution deal with the action or threat committed within Malaysia by any substantial
body of persons from inside or outside Malaysia. The High Court also held that it would be
an abuse of process of court if the prosecution proceed with the said charges against the
respondents by invoking the provisions in SOSMA. Thus, the trial court quashed the charges
against the respondent and the prosecution appeal to Appeal Court.

HELD: Court of Appeal’s judges ruled that the offences which is the act of terrorism is
committed within Malaysia. They also held that the learned judge had mistakenly holding
that it would be an abuse of process of the court to invoke the provision in SOSMA. Thus, the
court allowed the appeal by the Public Prosecutors and set aside all the orders from the High

In our opinion, we do agree with the decisions of Court of Appeal to set aside all the orders
made by the High Court. Since the act of terrorism is a phenomenon that extended to the
national boundaries, SOSMA is applicable since one of its purpose is to prevent Malaysia
from being used as a terrorist haven.