JUDGMENT

Azmi Abdullah J:

[1] The applicants are facing 3 charges at the Klang Sessions Court under s 12 of Atipsom. The prosecution delivered on the applicants as part of the evidence for the prosecution pursuant to s 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) the depositions made by three persons mentioned as the victims in the 3 charges being Anmuni Maria, Yani Tri Anda and Fransisaka.

[2] The challenge mounted in this Motion is against the constitutionality of s 61A of Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 (Atipsom) with the impugned provision being argued to be against arts 121(1), 8(1) and 5(1) of the Federal Constitution ( FC ). The learned Sessions Court Judge exercising the provision of s 30(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, stayed the proceedings and transmitted the matter to the High Court to determine the constitutional challenge against s 61A of Atipsom.

[3] Section 61A of Atipsom essentially provides that the deposition of trafficked persons or smuggled migrants who cannot be found would be accepted as prima facie evidence without the evidence being tested under cross-examination at the trial for the charges under s 12 of Atipsom bein