JUDGMENT

Suffian LP:

Lau Kee Hoo ("the respondent") was charged with having under his control in a security area without lawful excuse or authority ammunition contrary to s. 57(1)of the Internal Security Act 1960 ('ISA'), which carries a mandatory death sentence.

At the commencement of the trial, his Counsel Mr. Karpal Singh raised a preliminary point, contending that the mandatory death penalty was unconstitutional.

The learned Deputy Public Prosecutor was taken by surprise and on his application the case was adjourned to the following morning to enable him to "consult his seniors".

On the following morning the learned Attorney-General himself appeared with the learned Deputy. The Attorney-General suggested that this matter be referred to the Federal Court and that was how the Public Prosecutor came to be designated in these proceedings as the "applicant". The learned trial Judge agreeing stayed the proceedings, and acting under s. 48(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act No. 7 of 1964, referred the following question for our decision:

Whether or not the mandatory death sentence provided under s. 57(1) of theInternal Security Act 1960 is ultra vires and violates Article 5(1), 8(1) an