LLB40103

EVIDENCE LAW 1
OPINION EVIDENCE
◦ Expert Evidence

◦ Section 45 EA defines the situations in which expert opinion evidence is admissible. The opinions of 3rd
person though generally inadmissible, becomes relevant in instances enumerated in this section to enable
the court to arrive to proper decisions namely in the areas of foreign law, science/arts, handwriting and
finger impressions.

◦ Expert opinion evidence is evidence

◦ WHO IS AN EXPERT?

◦ Seseorang yang mempunyai pengetahuan (knowledge) atau Kemahiran (skill) tentang sesuatu bidang
secara khusus (specific). He may have acquired the skill by special study/ experience or training. (PP v
Lee Ee Tong)
The Queen v Silverlock
◦ Seseorang pakar mempunyai pengetahuan yang tidak ada pada orang biasa
◦ Berdasarkan S.45, pakar merupakan seorang yang mempunyai kemahiran khusus dan pengalaman dalam
undang-undang negara asing, sains atau seni yang diperoleh melalui pengamalan, pemerhatian atau
penyelidikan
WHEN THE NEED FOR EXPERT ARISES?

◦ Expert evidence is only admissible to furnish the court with information which is likely to be outside the
experience and knowledge of the judge.
◦ Case Syed Abu Bakar bin Ahmad v PP – Abdul Hamid J
◦ Cases in which the court is not in a position to form a correct judgement without help of persons who
have acquired special skill or experience in the particular matter
◦ E.g : When question involves beyond the range of common experience or
◦ common knowledge when special study/ training / experience therein necessary. In those cases, expert
evidence may be admitted to enable court to come to a proper decision.
Chou Kooi Pang & Anor v PP

◦ Expert opinion is only admissible to furnish court with information outside experience/ knowledge of
judge. IF the judge can form his own conclusion without help based on proven facts, the opinion of
expert is unnecessary.
◦ Followed case of R v Turner where a psychiatrist evidence was held inadmissible where his purpose was
to tell the jury how an ordinary person (not suffering from mental illness) would react to strains and
stresses in life.
Junaidi Abdullah v PP – the test for need of expert
1. See if expert is needed/ special skill/ technical matter
2. Whether saksi dipanggil acquire necessary skill

R v Abbey
a) Furnish court with scientific info
b) Outside the experience and knowledge when issue beyond common knowledge of judge
IF EXPERT(PAKAR) GIVES OPINION, ARE WE BOUND
TO FOLLOW?

Kulaisingam v Thambipillai
◦ Expert witness may give opinion evidence but court is free to draw its own conclusion.

Law Society of India v Fertilzer & Chemical Travancore

◦ The court is not bound to follow blindly expert opinion

Ong Chan Tow v R

◦ Expert should not be asked to give conclusion on matters which eminently matters for the court to decide
TYPES OF EXPERT

There are 2 types

PP v Saad bin Mat Takraw- Vincent Ng J :

1. Gazetted Experts (Pakar diwartakan)

2. Experts within purview of S.45-49 EA

CATEGORIES OF EXPERT EVIDENCE

◦ 1. Foreign law
◦ 2. Science or arts
◦ 3. Handwriting
◦ 4. Finger Impressions
Foreign Law

Sivagami Achi v Ramanathan Chettiar- This case may be used for judicial notice
 
“ I cannot take judicial notice of Hindu Law when there’s no expert opinion”.

Therefore Hindu Law (Mitakshara System) is foreign law and an expert opinion is required to give evidence to assist
court in coming to a decision

Mak Sik Kwong v Minister of Home Affairs Malaysia

An opinion upon foreign law can be proved by evidence of expert (s.45) and in this connection statement to any law of
a foreign country contained in law books/ printed and published authority of the government of the foreign country.
Science/arts

Chandrasekaran v PP [1971] Raja Azlan Shah J

 
The term science/arts be given liberal interpretation. Typewritting falls under the arts category. Typewriting is not specifically mentioned
in S.45. Case is about whether a document had been typed on a certain typewriter. Expert evidence on this issue was allowed.
Court has discretion to decide whether an issue is one of science or arts and consequently whether expert evidence is admissible

Leong Wing Kong v PP

S.45 provides for evidence covering area of science or arts. The court has discretion to decide whether issue involve science or arts and
consequently whether expert evidence is admissible. In this case it was difficult to distinguish whether drug dealers fall in which
category- science/arts. Drug dealers in this case was difficult for court to distinguish whether arts/ science.
To admit the evidence by ASP Lim by virtue of s.45 which requires us to strain meaning of science/arts. Instead the court preferred to
base admissibility of ASP Lim’s evidence on s.49(a) EA :
‘ where court has to form an opinion as to the usage and tenets of any body of men or family, the opinions of persons having special
means of knowledge thereon are relevant facts’
PP v Lee EE Tong
Accused was charged with assisting in carrying out public lottery.
In cases as such prosecution frequently rely on evidence of detectives and other persons by experience
have special knowledge of methods of gambling. This sort of evidence is not evidence of expert under s.45
but s.49

Harilal Gordhan v Emperor

The court found it impossible to categorise gambling under science or arts. Ct admitted evidence of police
officer on gambling methods by virtue of s.49.
HOW AN EXPERT GIVE
EXPLANATION IN THE COURT?
Wong Chop Saow v PP

1. Expert must establish his expertise by stating his qualification as an expert

2. Whether he has given evidence in other cases and whether his evidence was accepted by the court. This
is however not the primary consideration for an otherwise qualified person. If he has given before and has
been accepted, ct may take judicial notice
3. The expert must give reasons for his opinion
4. Not necessary for the expert to produce data and materials upon which his opinion is based
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF EXPERTISE

◦ In certain instances, ct may take judicial notice of the fact that an expert has previously given (PP v Lin
Lian Chen)
BOMOH IS EXPERT OPINION?
◦ Kemahiran yang diperlukan oleh saksi pakar di bawah seksyen 45 Akta Keterangan 1950 adalah
bergantung kepada betapa saintifik dan kompleksnya keterangan yang perlu dibuktikan dan sekiranya isu
itu amat rumit dan kompleks, mahkamah akan meneliti perkara tersebut dengan lebih mendalam melalui
keterangan-keterangan yang diberikan oleh saksi pakar tersebut

◦ However in instant case it is not complex because it is a common belief of the society.. and if its not
complex it does not require academic qualification. The experience in the field would suffice be a skill.
Again referring back to s.45, if its difficult to categorise under science or arts, use s.49. In my opinion,
the court should take judicial notice on the matter because it is a common belief.
◦ Suffian LP di dalam kes Pendakwa Raya v Muhamed Bin Sulaiman iaitu seorang pakar itu mestilah
mahir tidak kiralah sama ada beliau memperoleh kemahiran tersebut melalui suatu medium khas
misalnya kursus-kursus tertentu mahupun melalui pengalaman di dalam bidang tersebut. Hence pakar
must establish method in obtaining his knowledge in the first place pertaining this particular field
because it will affect probative value
◦ Kesimpulannya, untuk menentukan seseorang bomoh adalah saksi pakar beliau haruslah kompeten atau
cekap sama ada melalui kelayakan professional ataupun pengalaman berkait secara spesifik kepada isu.

◦ Syarat –syarat penerimaan keterangan saksi pakar

1. Perlu pengetahuan yang jelas dan kukuh tentang bidang itu.

2. Mereka yang telah memperoleh pengetahuan khusus melayakkan mereka dianggap sebagai pakar
dalam bidang tersebut.
3. Fakta yang menjadi asas keterangan saksi pakar mestilah dibuktikan oleh pihak yang memanggil
beliau. Tanpa fakta-fakta yang asal dan kukuh untuk mengekalkan serta menyokong pendapat saksi pakar
tersebut keterangan itu tidak bermakna.