Back
2022 MarsdenLR 178
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
WEI HONG PING – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: B-05-165-04/2021]
The court exercised discretion under the Dangerous Drugs Act to impose life imprisonment instead of a mandatory death sentence for trafficking, affirming the conviction based on clear evidence of knowledge.
Headnote:(A) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 – Section 39B – Accused charged with drug trafficking – Convicted of trafficking in methamphetamine without reasonable doubt – Appeals on conviction were dismissed; sentence was reduced from death to life imprisonment due to discretion under new section allowing such sentences. (Paras 1, 24, 41, 44)
(B) The principle of willful blindness applies where the accused fails to investigate obvious circumstances suggesting knowledge of crime. (Paras 33, 49)
Facts of the case: Accused arrested at KLIA 2 for possessing 1457.8 grams of methamphetamine, claiming ignorance about drugs concealed in your bag. (Paras 1, 3, 12)
Findings of Court: The High Court judge found the accused had knowledge, rejecting defense of innocent carrier and deemed Yaya a fictitious character. (Paras 18, 40)
Issues: The existence of Yaya and the basis for the accused's defense as an innocent carrier. (Paras 24, 25)
Ratio Decidendi: The evidence of the accused's actions indicated knowledge of trafficking, not merely of possessing drugs. The court affirmed that the conviction was safe based on established drug laws. (Paras 41, 42)
Result: Conviction upheld; death sentence substituted with life imprisonment.
JUDGMENT
Introduction
[1] The accused/appellant was charged as follows:
"Bahawa kamu pada 13 November 2014 lebih kurang 1.30 pagi di Balai Ketibaan Antarabangsa, KLIA 2 Sepang, Dalam Daerah Sepang, di dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan, didapati mengedar dadah berbahaya jenis methamphetamine seberat 1457.8 gram. Oleh yang demikian itu, kamu telah melakukan kesalahan di bawah s 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 dan boleh dihukum di bawah s 39B(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952."
At the conclusion of trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced to death by the High Court.
[2] The accused appealed against the conviction and sentence. We dismissed the appeal on conviction but allowed that on sentence where we set aside the death sentence and substituted it with life imprisonment. We now give our reasons.
Prosecution Case
[3] On 13 November 2014 at around 1.30am, Sergeant Mohd Ghazali bin Idris (PW2) and his team were on duty monitoring the KLIA 2 international arrival hall at the area between the carousel and customs inspection. He saw the accused with a handbag walking towards the door, and pulling a brown bag ("the bag"/P12). The accused appeared suspicious and was looking left and right while stopping to look around.
[4] PW2 approached the accused, introduced himself as a policeman and asked for her passport. The particulars revealed her as Wei Hong Ping, a Chinese national. The luggage tag on the bag indicated the accused travelled from Hong Kong to Kuala Lumpur on flight AK131.
[5] The bag was scanned at the customs scanning machine where no suspicious image was detected. The accused appeared agitated and was then ordered to the Narcotics Office at KLIA. A female Lance Corporal did a physical examination on the accused and found nothing.
[6] PW2 then opened the bag witnessed by police personnel and the accused. Women's clothes, a few pair of shoes and an orange plastic bag containing women's underwear were found. When the items were removed, PW2 lifted the bag and found it heavy. He then lifted the bottom cover of the bag and it was zipped. It was then opened and under the cover was another cover with a black plastic (P19A) containing crystal coloured substances suspected to be drugs. This was shown to the accused and it was explained to her in simple English what was found. The accused did not say anything and appeared panicky. The handbag (P13) was inspected and there was a small flowery wallet. There was also a boarding pass in the name of the accused and a Nokia and Samsung handphone. PW2 arrested the accused and all the items were seized. The accused and the seized items were brought to the Selangor IPD and handed over to the Investigating Officer, Inspector Amri bin Mohd Arif (PW4).
[7] The crystalline substance was sent to the Chemist for analysis and confirmed to be 1457.8 grams of methamphetamine.
Finding At The Close Of The Prosecution Case
[8] The High Court Judge (HCJ) found that the crystalline substance found in the bag carried by the accused was confirmed by the Chemist (PW3) to be 1457.8 grams of methamphetamine. This was not challenged by the defence. Methamphetamine is a scheduled drug under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ( DDA ).
[9] The HCJ found that the accused had ownership and control of the drugs as she was walking alone while pulling the bag and there was no one else with her. Some of the clothes in the bag fitted and matched the body of the accused. This was proved by way of "uji pakai" done by PW4. The bag tag with the serial number 080717482 in the name of the accused with flight number AK131 matched that of the boarding pass and luggage claim found in the handbag.
[10] The manner and condition of the drugs found in the bag by modifying the space and concealing it, showed knowledge. The agitation and panic state of the accused showed knowledge too. Teh Hock Leong v. PP , [2010] 1 MLJ 741 and Ali Hosseinzadeh Bashir v. Public Prosecutor ; were cited for the proposition that the drugs being hidden f
