{
  "id": 3178268,
  "title": "Federal Court narrows scope of duty for trial judges in drug trafficking cases",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/25/federal-court-narrows-scope-of-duty-for-trial-judges-in-drug",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-08-25T03:00:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Free Malaysia Today",
    "slug": "free-malaysia-today-freemalays",
    "url": "https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2026/08/25/federal-court-narrows-scope-of-duty-for-trial-judges-in-drug-trafficking-cases"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "The Federal Court has clarified the duties of trial judges in drug trafficking cases, narrowing the scope of their responsibilities. The majority decision, made up of Justices Nordin Hassan and Azmi Ariffin, stated that Section 180 of the Criminal Procedure Code only requires the judge to establish a prima facie case before allowing the accused to present their defense. This means the judge does not need to declare whether the prosecution relies on actual evidence or a statutory presumption under Section 37(da) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. The distinction is important, as the accused relying on the statutory presumption must prove their innocence by a balance of probabilities, while those using actual trafficking evidence only need to raise reasonable doubt. The Court of Appeal had previously held that the failure to identify the applicable route as fatal, but the Federal Court disagreed, stating that this would impose an obligation not found in legislation. The crucial question was whether the omission caused prejudice or a miscarriage of justice, which the majority found it did not in this case. In Julasiri Akilmara's instance, the majority did not find any prejudice. The prosecution had relied on evidence of possession, while the defense argued that the prosecution had not proven that Julasiri knew about the drugs, thus preventing them from relying on the statutory presumption. The High Court had convicted Julasiri and Aspal Hussam of trafficking 137.03g of methamphetamine and sentenced them to 30 years in prison and 15 strokes of the cane. Julasiri appealed, and the Court of Appeal reduced the charge to possession, sentencing him to 12 years in jail, but exempting him from whipping due to his age. The prosecution appealed, and the Federal Court reinstated Julasiri's conviction and 30-year prison term for trafficking. Deputy public prosecutor Amril Johari represented the prosecution, while Kamarudin Chinki represented Julasiri.",
  "summary": "Majority says the failure to state whether the trafficking case is based on actual evidence or statutory presumption does not, by itself, invalidate the conviction.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 3,
    "also_reported_by": [
      {
        "outlet": "Free Malaysia Today",
        "title": "Federal Court narrows scope of duty for trial judges in drug trafficking cases",
        "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/25/federal-court-narrows-scope-of-duty-for-trial-judges-in-drug-3183531",
        "published": "2026-08-25T03:00:00.000Z"
      },
      {
        "outlet": "SABC News",
        "title": "Court to rule on new cellphone records in Meyiwa murder Trial",
        "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/25/court-to-rule-on-new-cellphone-records-in-meyiwa-murder-trial",
        "published": "2026-08-25T04:19:53.000Z"
      }
    ]
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}