Raja Azlan Shah CJ (MALAYA) (delivering the judgments of the Court) :

The appellant, who was at all relevant times and still is a Member of Parliament and the Leader of the Opposition, was charged with being in possession of information relating to the Federal Government's purchase of four fast-strike craft (FSC) for the use of the Royal Malaysian Navy. The details of this information were alleged in the charges to be the identities of the four shortlisted tenderers and of the successful tenderer, the original and consolidated prices submitted by the successful tenderer, the mode of payment and the cost of the four FSC, the make of the fire control system and the make and types of engines to be installed in the FSC and the capability of the craft. The information was and is secret.

Arising from the possession of that information, the appellant was in Criminal Trial No. 13/78 charged with receiving such secret official information having reasonable ground to believe that it was communicated to him in contravention of the Official Secrets Act, 1972, (the Act), an offence punishable under s. 8(2) of the Act (the first charge).

A second charge was preferred against him under s. 11(1)(a)(aa) with failure to disclose the source of that information to a duly authorised police officer above the rank of Inspector when required to do so under the Act.

In Criminal Trial No. 14/78, he faced the amended charge under s. 8(1)(iv) of the Act with failing to take reasonable care of the information so as to prevent the publication of the same information in the November 1976 issue of the Rocket under the title "Expose in Parliament - Hanky-Panky in Royal Malaysian Navy" (the third charge).

In Criminal Trial No. 15/78, he faced two charges as amended, both under s. 8(1)(i) of the Act, the first with communicating such information to unauthorised persons at a luncheon given by the Selangor Graduates' Association at the Horizon Restaurant, Damansara, Kuala Lumpur, and the other with communicating the same information in a letter published in the Far Eastern Economic Review of 24 September 1976 under the caption "Prototype Craft may Prove Costly" (the fourth and fifth charges).

There was a joint trial. At the conclusion of the hearing which occupied a total of 15 days, the appellant was convicted on all five charges and sentenced to fines of various sums. No sentence of imprisonment was imposed.

It will make for ready understanding if reference is made to the events leading up to the prosecution, trial and conviction of the appellant. They were largely undisputed by the appellant.

Following the decision of the Government to purchase four FSC for the use of the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN), the process of selecting the craft was started. This process is given very explicitly by the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Defence in his letter published in the Far Eastern Economic Review. In the words of the Secretary-General, it is as follows:

First, all specifications in this tender exercise from the ten submissions were first studied by a professional and technical evaluation committee of the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) appointed by the chief of the naval staff (CNS). The committee, headed by the deputy chief of the naval staff, comprised seven Senior naval officers of various specialisations. The report produced by the committee was submitted to the CNS, who in turn forwarded it along with his own comments to the chairman of the Ministry of defence's tenders board. This tenders board is a standing board appointed by and responsible to the Federal Treasury. There is no naval tenders board as stated in one of the articles.

The tenders board, after its first deliberation, appointed a working committee of two senior naval officers and four senior civilian officers, including two representatives from the Federal Treasury, to look into all aspects and provisions of the four tender submissions which were short-listed and declared acceptable