The requirement for a witness statement to be read aloud in court is directory, not mandatory, allowing for judicial discretion in its application.

[1] The appellant, was charged before the High Court at Alor Setar in the State of Kedah with an offence under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ("the Act") for trafficking in 16841 grams of cannabis ("the said drugs"), an offence punishable under subsection 39B(2) of the same Act. The appellant was tried and convicted by the High Court on the charge and sentenced to death. The appellant's appeal to the Court of Appeal was heard and dismissed. The appellant now appeals to this Court against the decision of the Court of Appeal in dismissing her appeal.

[2] The relevant facts of the prosecution's case are as follows:

"On 9 December 2011, about 7.00 pm, Inspector Samsualan bin Samsudin (SP2) received information of drug trafficking by a foreign national in the vicinity of the Shabab Perdana Bus Terminal in Alor Setar. Based on the said information, SP2 led a raiding party to the said Bus Terminal. Whilst carrying out observation at the Bus Terminal, about 8.00pm, SP2 noticed the appellant walking along lane 6 of the said Bus Terminal. She was carrying one bag in each hand (P29 and P30) and had a handbag (P31) slung over her right shoulder. SP2 and his party then proceeded to approach the appellant and detained her. SP2 identified to the appellant that he and his party were police officers from the narcotics division. The appellant appeared to be "cemas dan resah" according to SP2 whereupon she immediately dropped the two bags P29 and P30 to the floor. SP2 found the said two bags to be locked and ordered the appellant to open the bags. At first the appellant refused but when instructed again to do so she produced a set of keys (P33A-E) from her handbag (P31) and proceeded to open the two bags with the keys. SP2 then examined the contents of the two bags. Inside bag P29, SP2 found 8 slabs of compressed dried leaves (P10A-P17A). Inside bag P30, he found 10 slabs of compressed dried leaves (P19A-P28A). SP2 suspected the slabs of compressed dried leaves to be cannabis. The appellant was arrested and the said exhibits were sent to the Chemistry Department for analysis. Upon analysis by the chemist, Norleen binti Abdul Manaf (SP1), the dried leaves in the 18 slabs were confirmed to be cannabis as defined in s 2 of the Act."

[3] After evaluating all the evidence presented before the Court, the learned trial judge at the conclusion of the trial held that the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt, and convicted the appellant.

[4] On appeal to the Court of Appeal, the Court of Appeal unanimously held, on the totality of the evidence adduced, that the conviction by the trial Court was safe as the evidence was cogent. As such, the appeal was dismissed and the conviction and sentence were affirmed.