COURT MONITORING TOOL FOR HUMAN TRAFFICKING CASES

Date: ______3 Nov 2023____________ Name of Court Monitor: ___Nadia, Arjun_________________________

SECTION A: GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Court case no. BL-63-11-08/2021

2. Court location Klang

3. Name of Judge Rihaida bt Rafie

I. Details of Parties

4. Was the Prosecutor

/ Yes. Name: Azmin
present?
⬜ Defense counsel mentioned on behalf of Prosecutor (MOB)

⬜ No. Reason:

5. No. of defendant(s) Al Hirah Holdings

6. Background information of defendant(s)

Name Age Gender Nationality
(a) Company selling tainted cooking oil, about 2 tons

(b)

(c)

7. Was the defendant

/ Yes
represented by a lawyer?
⬜ No (Skip to Question 9)

8. Was the Defense / Yes. Name and law firm: Edwin Navis and Assc
Counsel present?
⬜ Prosecutor mentioned on behalf of Defense Counsel (MOB)

⬜ No. Reason:

9. Was the
defendant(s) / Yes
present? ⬜ Absconded. Was a warrant of

⬜ No. Reason:
arrest issued?

II. Details of Victim(s)

10. No. of victim(s)

11. Background information of victim(s)
Name Age Gender Nationality
(a)

(b)

(c)

12. Was an Interim

Protection Order (IPO) ⬜ Yes ⬜ No (Skip to Question 15)
granted?
13. Was a Protection
Order (PO) granted? ⬜ Yes ⬜ No. Reason:

⬜ Yes. Reason: ⬜ No
14. Was the PO revoked?

III. Details of Case

15. Type of trafficking case

⬜ Labor trafficking. Period of employment: _______ year(s) _______ month(s)
_______ day(s)
⬜ Not labor trafficking. Type of trafficking:
(e.g., sex trafficking, child trafficking)

16. If this is a labor

trafficking case, what labor ⬜ Non-payment of wages. Outstanding
violations were ⬜ Withholding of passport
committed by the
employer / agent? amount:
⬜ Required to work at more than
one place
⬜ Wages fall below minimum wage rate.

⬜ Deception regarding place of

Monthly wage rate:
work
⬜ Poor living condition

⬜ Abuse. Form of abuse:

⬜ Excessive overtime
(e.g., physical, emotional)

⬜ Restriction of movement

⬜ Other. Specify:

⬜ Restriction of access to communication

 17. Criminal charge(s) 1. s21(1) Peraturan Peraturan Kawalan Bekalan 1974
(State section and statute
under which the
defendant(s) are charged)
2.

3.

18. Was the court

activity adjourned? / Yes. Reason: ⬜ No

Next court date and 20 and 21 November 2023

proceeding

2
SECTION B: PRE-TRIAL
B1. DETAILS OF COURT ACTIVITY

1. Type of court
⬜ Administrative / mention / CM
activity (tick all that apply)
⬜ Bail application

⬜ Interim / interlocutory application

/Other. Specify: Examination in Chief
(i.e., application for certain Court orders /
directions before trial)

B2. OUTCOME OF COURT ACTIVITY (Note down all information that helps others understand what is happening in the case)

2. What were the Examination in Chief of police witness

updates / applications /
arguments of the
Prosecutor?

3. What were the

updates / application /
arguments
of the defendant or
Defense counsel?
 4. What were the Continue case on 20 and 21 November
instructions / decision
of the Court?

5. Other observations

3
SECTION C: TRIAL
C1. DETAILS OF TRIAL

1. Type of court
⬜ Opening submissions
activity (tick all that apply)
⬜ Defendant witness testimony

⬜ Survivor testimony

⬜ Closing submissions

/ Prosecution witness testimony

⬜ Others. Specify:

2. No. of witnesses Produced by Prosecution:1 Produced by Defense:

3. Background information of witness(es)

Name Role
Purpose of testimony
(e.g., doctor, neighbor)
Cor
(a) Officer Zainnuddin, SP13. Police officer. Was examined in chief by prosecutor

(b)

(c)

C2. SURVIVOR (Complete for survivor testimony only)

 1. Was the survivor accompanied
to court by a Protection Officer? ⬜ Yes ⬜ No

2. Did the survivor appear to

be physically unwell? ⬜ Yes. Explain: ⬜ No

3. Were there signs of physical

harm on the survivor? ⬜ Yes. Explain: ⬜ No

4. Did the survivor appear to

be mentally unwell? ⬜ Yes. Explain: ⬜ No

5. Was the survivor able to provide

his/her testimony in a clear ⬜ Yes ⬜ No. Explain:
manner?

6. What was the survivor’s testimony?

C3. PROSECUTION

I. Prosecutor’s Preparedness (Complete for all trial stages)

1. Did it appear that the Prosecutor had

organized, reviewed and ⬜ Yes. Explain:
familiarized him/herself with all / No : prosecutor had to adjourn the examination in chief twice and
documents and/or evidence before
the trial? came late. The judge scolded him and said the next round she would
not be so lenient.
⬜ Not able to assess

2. Did the Prosecutor fail to produce / Yes. Explain: The witness stammered a lot and seemed unsure. The
any relevant document and/or prosecutor did not seem to ask relevant questions or had disorganised
evidence at the trial? papers as even the judge was getting irritated.
⬜ No

⬜ Not able to assess

3. Were there any issues with how
the documents and items of ⬜ Yes. Explain:
evidence were obtained? ⬜ No
/ Not able to assess

II. Prosecutor’s Objection to Defense Tactics (Complete for all trial stages)

1. Which of these tactics (if any) did

the Defense use? ⬜ Deliberately misleading the Court

⬜ Using abusive / inappropriate language toward survivor /

witnesses ⬜ Using intimidating body language toward survivor /
witnesses ⬜ Using inadmissible evidence

⬜ Breaking other rules of evidence or criminal

procedure ⬜ Deliberately confusing the proceedings

⬜ Causing unnecessary delays

/ None of the above (Skip to Section III)
2. Did the Prosecutor object to
these Defense tactics? ⬜ Yes, effectively and in a timely manner on each
occasion ⬜ Yes, adequately

⬜ Usually, but missed some objections

⬜ No, missed most objections or failed to object at all

Not applicable in this scenario, the examination in chief was done by

prosecution
3. How much external support did
the Prosecutor require to object to, ⬜ None
refute, or oppose inappropriate ⬜ Moderately
to Defense tactics?
⬜ Limited

⬜ Significantly

III. Examination in Chief of Prosecution Witness

(Complete for Prosecutor’s questioning of survivor and Prosecution Witness(es) only)

1. Did it appear as though the

survivor / Prosecution witness(es) ⬜ Yes, thoroughly
had been prepared for trial? ⬜ Yes, adequately

⬜ Yes, but insufficiently

/ No preparation or preparation was poor

2. Did the Prosecutor ask the

survivor / Prosecution witness(es) ⬜ Yes, all the time
relevant, non-leading and open-ended ⬜ Yes, most of the time
questions?
 / Made regular mistakes but did ask some questions well ⬜ No,
asked irrelevant, inappropriate or leading questions; and/or asked
the witness(es) to provide inadmissible evidence; and/or had
objections to questions frequently upheld
3. Did the Prosecutor request available
special assistance when the ⬜ Yes, on all occasions
survivor / Prosecution witness(es) ⬜ No, failed to request special assistance on one or more occasions
needed it?

5
(e.g., interpreter, screen, disability amenities)
⬜ Not applicable (witness(es) did not require special assistance
or required special assistance was not available)
4. Did the Prosecutor take steps
to refresh the survivor’s / Yes, on all occasions
memory or
⬜ No, failed to provide assistance on one or more
respond in a way to reduce the
survivor’s distress, if the survivor occasions ⬜ Not applicable (survivor did not require
seemed forgetful or distressed assistance)
during the survivor testimony?
5. Did the Prosecutor deal
effectively with sensitive or difficult ⬜ Yes, showed a high level of skill, poise and
survivor / Prosecution witness(es)? sensitivity ⬜ Yes, mostly responded effectively and
(e.g., using appropriate techniques and
behavior management, effective treatment appropriately
⬜ Responded somewhat effectively
of hostile witnesses)

⬜ No, did not respond effectively or appropriately

/ Not applicable (no sensitive / difficult witnesses)

6. How much external support did the

Prosecutor require in questioning the ⬜ None
survivor / Prosecution witnesses? / Moderately
⬜ Limited

⬜ Significantly

IV. Cross Examination of Defense Witness

(Complete for Prosecutor’s questioning of defendant and Defense Witness(es) only)

1. Did the Prosecutor effectively

challenge the defendant / ⬜ Yes, all the time
Defense witness(es) with ⬜ Yes, most of the time
relevant, closed or leading
questions? ⬜ Made regular mistakes but did ask some questions well ⬜ No,
asked irrelevant, inappropriate or open-ended questions; and/or
asked the witness to provide inadmissible evidence; and/or had
objections to questions frequently upheld
 2. Did the Prosecutor display
sound judgement in challenging ⬜ Yes, showed a high level of skill and excellent judgment ⬜ Yes,
the challenged the witness(es) on all key assertions and showed
defendant / Defense witness(es) sound judgment
on all key defense assertion and ⬜ Showed some good judgment, but missed key points
knowing when to move on or stop
and/or misjudged some aspects of the cross-examination
the cross examination?
⬜ No, did not challenge significant assertions and/or displayed
poor judgment
3. Did the Prosecutor deal effectively
with sensitive or difficult defendant / ⬜ Yes, all the time
Defense witnesses (e.g., using ⬜ No, failed to establish rapport,
appropriate techniques,
behavior management, ⬜ Yes, most of the time
professional
language)? used inappropriate and/or
⬜ Some rapport established and
insensitive language
usually but not always used
⬜ Not applicable (no sensitive /
appropriate language
difficult witnesses)
4. How much external support did
the Prosecutor require in ⬜ None
questioning defendant / Defense ⬜ Moderately
witnesses?
⬜ Limited

⬜ Significantly

C4. COURT (Complete for survivor testimony only)

Questions Assessment Notes / Examples

1. Did the Court ensure that
the survivor was in a safe ⬜ Yes
environment and kept ⬜ Somewhat
separate from the
defendant(s)? ⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable

2. When it was the survivor’s turn

to testify, did the Court ensure that ⬜ Yes
the survivor was informed why the ⬜ Somewhat
survivor testimony was
necessary and what to expect? ⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable
 3. Did the Court ensure that
the survivor understands all ⬜ Yes
the ⬜ Somewhat
information and questions
during the survivor testimony? ⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable

4. Did the Judge demonstrate to

the survivor that the Judge is ⬜ Yes
actively listening to the ⬜ Somewhat
survivor
testimony? ⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable

5. Did the Court respond in a way

to reduce the survivor’s ⬜ Yes
distress, if the survivor seemed ⬜ Somewhat
distressed during the trial?
⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable

⬜ Yes
6. Did the Court prevent the
survivor from experiencing
any type of abusive ⬜ Somewhat
behavior or
mistreatment during the trial? ⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable

7. Did the Court limit the use of

irrelevant questions, repetitive ⬜ Yes
questions, high-pressure ⬜ Somewhat
techniques and asking for
unnecessary details against ⬜ No
the survivor?
⬜ Not applicable

8. If media was present, did

the Court warn the media ⬜ Yes
not to ⬜ Somewhat
reveal the identity of the
survivor in media reports? ⬜ No

⬜ Not applicable

9. How was the Judge’s

demeanor towards the survivor?
(e.g., respectful, accommodating,
patient, aggressive, rude, sexist /
racist comments made)

10. Rate the Judge’s impartiality

in treatment towards all parties. ⬜ Very poor
 ⬜ Neutral

⬜ Very good

⬜ Poor

⬜ Good

11. Did it appear that the Judge

had reviewed and familiarized ⬜ Yes, thoroughly
him/herself with all documents ⬜ Yes, adequately
and/or evidence before the trial?
⬜ Some organization, review and familiarization conducted
⬜ Little to no organization, review or familiarization
conducted

C5. COURT INTERPRETER (Complete for survivor testimony only)

1. Was interpretation required for

the survivor testimony? ⬜ Yes

⬜ No, the survivor could understand Malay / English (Skip to Section C6)

2. Was interpretation service provided to

the survivor for the survivor ⬜ Yes. Language of interpretation:

⬜ No. Did the Court request for an interpreter?

testimony?

3. Was the interpretation carried out

by the court interpreter? ⬜ Yes

⬜ No, an independent interpreter was engaged (Skip to Section C6)

4. Did the court interpreter ensure

that the survivor understands all the ⬜ Yes
information and questions during ⬜ No
the survivor testimony?

5. Did the court interpreter speak at a

pace understandable for the ⬜ Yes
survivor? ⬜ No

6. How was the court interpreter’s

demeanor towards the
survivor?
(e.g., patient, aggressive, rude)
 C6. OUTCOME OF TRIAL
(Note down all information that helps others understand what is happening in the case, including the issues to be tried, the counsel’s
line of argument, the evidence produced by counsel, and the gist of the witness testimonies)

This case concerned the sale of tainted cooking oil, approximately 2 tons. The company is being charged under
s21(1) Peraturan Peraturan Kawalan Bekalan 197. The maximum sentence to be passed is RM2 million.

The case itself seem disorganised. The prosecutor was late, the hearing was adjourned twice so he could sort out
his paperwork. The judge scolded him and said she would not be so lenient the next round. The witness seemed
confused, disorganised too and had to be prodded many times to answer the questions. It seemed like he did not
understand why he was there.

The main takeaway for Nadia and I is how more due process is given over cooking oil than the lives of migrants or
poor drug consumers. The judge was willing to adjourn the case twice and let the prosecutor off with a stern
warning, when we have seen ATIP cases where heavy penalties (5 years in prison) are passed within 1 hour of a
hearing and defense counsel are scolded more severely if their arguments are not in perfect order. It is a very sad
state of affairs.

8
SECTION D: CONVICTION / SENTENCING
D1. DETAILS OF COURT ACTIVITY

⬜ Conviction
1. Type of court activity
(tick all that apply)

⬜ Submissions on sentencing

⬜ Sentencing

⬜ Others. Specify:

⬜ Yes ⬜ No
2. Did the defendant plead guilty?

D2. OUTCOME OF COURT ACTIVITY

(Note down all information that helps others understand what is happening in the case, including the counsel’s line of argument, the
mitigating / aggravating factors for sentencing, the grounds of decision, and any indication of appeal)

1. What were the n/a

updates / arguments of
the
Prosecutor?
 2. What were the n/a
updates / arguments of
the
defendant or Defense
counsel?

3. What were the Hearing to resume 20 and 21 November 2023

instructions / decision
of the Court?

4. Other observations

D3. COURT

Questions Assessment Notes / Examples

1. Did the Judge consider
the effect of trauma on the ⬜ Yes
survivor’s memory of ⬜ Somewhat
events?
⬜ No

/ Not applicable

2. Did the Judge reach a

decision consistent ⬜ Yes
with ⬜ Somewhat
the facts / evidence?
⬜ No
/ Not applicable
3. Did the Judge clearly
explain the reasons for ⬜ Yes
the decision?
 ⬜ Somewhat

⬜ No

/ Not applicable

4. Did the Judge consider

the impact of the crime on ⬜ Yes
the victim(s) as a factor in ⬜ Somewhat
sentencing?
⬜ No

/ Not applicable

Feedback on Toolkit:

10