Palace of Justice
(Source: http://www.putrajaya.gov.my)

In the realm of criminal trials, the presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle that guides the pursuit of justice. An accused person is deemed innocent until proven guilty, and it is the responsibility of the prosecution to present compelling evidence to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. Conversely, the accused is not obligated to prove their innocence, as the burden of proof rests with the prosecution.

To institute a case against the accused, the prosecution must demonstrate the truth of every element of the crime, including establishing the accused’s role as the perpetrator. This entails submitting relevant evidence related to the crime for examination by the judge. Both the prosecution and the defense then have an opportunity to assess the evidence presented before the court.

Crucial to the proceedings is the standard of evidence known as “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This standard is the threshold that the prosecution must meet to secure a conviction. The evidence must be so convincing that there is no reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. In this context, the term “reasonable doubt” refers to the judge’s uncertainty about the guilt of the accused after impartially evaluating all the evidence.

If the judge finds any reasonable doubt about the accused’s guilt, the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt and is acquitted of the crime. However, if the judge determines that there is no reasonable doubt as to every element of the crime, including the identity of the accused as the perpetrator, the accused may be found guilty and convicted of the offense.

The pivotal role of evidence in criminal trials cannot be overstated. It is the decisive factor that determines whether the accused is convicted or acquitted. Therefore, the prosecution must be meticulous in preparing and presenting evidence to support the charges against the accused.

One of the primary forms of evidence in a court of law is witness testimony. A witness is an individual who gives sworn statements, either written or spoken, in a court of law.

In any legal proceeding, every individual is presumed competent to testify unless the court finds that they are unable to comprehend the questions posed to them or provide coherent answers due to reasons such as tender years (being too young), extreme old age, physical or mental illness, or any other similar cause.

It is important to note that a person with a mental disorder or lunacy is not automatically considered incompetent to testify. Their competency depends on their ability to understand the questions put to them and respond rationally. If their condition hinders their comprehension and rationality, then they may be deemed incompetent to testify.

Witnesses are summoned to testify about various aspects of the case:

Witnesses are essential to ensuring fairness and due process in the legal system. Their truthful and reliable testimonies aid in uncovering the truth and provide the court with the information needed to reach informed decisions. During the trial, witnesses are required to swear an oath or affirmation, signifying their commitment to truthfulness, which is vital to the integrity of the criminal trial process.

Witnesses play a crucial role in criminal trials, offering firsthand accounts, expert opinions, and character assessments that contribute to the pursuit of justice. Their testimonies, combined with other forms of evidence, assist the court in making fair and impartial decisions. The presumption of innocence, the burden of proof on the prosecution, and the standard of evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” are all critical aspects that underscore the significance of witnesses in criminal trials.

Eyewitness Evidence

Eyewitnesses are individuals who have directly observed an event, such as a crime or an accident, and can provide valuable information about the incident. Typically, eyewitnesses are present at the scene or in proximity during the commission of a crime. When summoned to testify in court, their testimony can play a crucial role in uncovering the truth about the incident.

During criminal proceedings, eyewitnesses may be asked to describe both the physical and emotional appearance of the perpetrator. This can include details such as the perpetrator’s clothing, shoes, tattoos, scars, or whether they appeared intoxicated or sober. However, it is important to note that their testimony should be based solely on their personal knowledge or direct observation of the incident.

Eyewitnesses must avoid testifying about facts outside of their own direct knowledge. Their role is to provide evidence-based on their personal experience or firsthand observation. A truthful and confident eyewitness can be a highly valuable piece of evidence, shedding light on critical details that can aid the court in understanding what occurred during the incident.

Expert Evidence

Expert witnesses are individuals who are permitted to offer their professional opinion in a court of law due to their specialized knowledge or skill in a particular subject. Their testimony provides the court with insights into complex issues that may lie beyond the ordinary knowledge of judges or jurors. Experts offer statements of opinion on matters that require their expertise.

While there are no rigid rules on who may testify as an expert, expert witnesses must possess sufficient knowledge and practical experience in their relevant field. Their expertise can be acquired through education, training, or practical experience. Ultimately, it is up to the judge to determine whether a person qualifies as an expert witness, and the courts demand that expert witnesses uphold the highest standards of accuracy and objectivity.

Ordinary witnesses are generally prohibited from providing opinion evidence in court, as they are expected to testify to facts within their direct knowledge. However, expert witnesses are an exception to this rule. Their privilege to provide opinion evidence stems from their specialized knowledge or experience in the subject under investigation.

Expert opinion evidence is admissible when it provides the court with information that goes beyond its knowledge and experience. This could include matters related to unfamiliar machinery, complex medical conditions, or other fields requiring specialized knowledge. Experts aim to educate the court about aspects within their specialization, providing relevant insights to assist in the determination of facts in the case.

The main duty of an expert witness is to help the court understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue. This is achieved by offering reliable opinions and evaluations based on their expert analysis of the evidence. The testimony of expert witnesses enables the court to properly assess the evidence and avoid drawing incorrect conclusions.

However, experts must avoid misleading the court with their opinion evidence, irrespective of the impact it may have on the party they are assisting. If an expert witness has a significant conflict of interest, the court is likely to reject their evidence or permission for it to be presented (Law Commission, 2011, p. 14).

For expert evidence to be admissible, it must be derived from a reliable scientific basis. Their expertise should be part of a body of knowledge widely recognized as reliable in their field. The court will also consider the methods used in reaching the expert’s opinion, such as validated techniques and technologies, to ensure a solid scientific basis for their conclusion. Experts must provide the court with the necessary scientific criteria to test the accuracy of their conclusions.

Expert witnesses play a vital role in aiding the court in understanding complex issues and determining the guilt or innocence of the accused. Ultimately, it is the judge’s responsibility to assess the reliability, relevance, and weight of the expert’s testimony. It is essential to remember that expert opinion evidence is a tool to support a case, and the court is not bound by that opinion but can consider it in evaluating the facts at hand.

Character Evidence

Character witnesses are individuals who testify to another person’s good reputation in a court of law. They provide evidence about the accused individual’s character traits, such as being calm, careful, compassionate, considerate, generous, gentle, honest, sincere, and reliable. Character evidence is of utmost importance to the accused, as it can demonstrate whether the accused is likely to engage in misconduct or not.

Typically, it is the defense that introduces good character evidence in a criminal trial to grant the accused the benefit of the doubt. The defense calls character witnesses to testify about the positive attributes of the accused, suggesting that an individual of such character is unlikely to commit the alleged crime.

Good character evidence can raise reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused when considered alongside all other evidence in the case. This upholds the principle that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The prosecution, however, has the right to cross-examine the character witness to challenge the good reputation of the accused and prevent the creation of false impressions that may mislead the court.

Character evidence is just one aspect of evidence presented in a criminal trial. The weight of this evidence, like all others, lies with the court to decide. Nevertheless, if evidence of good character, when assessed with all other relevant evidence, raises a reasonable doubt about the accused’s culpability, the accused is entitled to an acquittal.

However, if the entirety of the evidence in the case, despite the good character, proves the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, the court must convict the accused.

Hearsay Evidence

In criminal proceedings, hearsay evidence refers to any assertion made by a person outside of the court while giving oral evidence. Such evidence is inadmissible as evidence of any fact or opinion asserted (as cited in Scottish Law Commission, 1995). Hearsay evidence is generally disallowed in the court of law.

Hearsay consists of statements that are not made in court during the proceedings but rather reports of other people’s words by a witness. This means that the witnesses testify about something they overheard, something someone has told them, or even something someone has written. Hearsay evidence can be problematic as the witnesses themselves have no personal knowledge of the events or incidents they are reporting.

The hearsay rule’s purpose is to prevent a witness from relaying a statement made by another person when the purpose of the evidence is to establish the truth of the statement. By relying on hearsay, witnesses are effectively asking the court to believe that they are telling the truth and that the person who originally made the statement was also telling the truth. This reliance on multiple layers of hearsay can compromise the reliability of the evidence.

Considering this, the courts insist on witnesses providing oral evidence in the courtroom. This requirement is essential as it allows witnesses to be cross-examined, ensuring they can be held accountable for their testimony. Additionally, witnesses must provide evidence based on their firsthand knowledge, avoiding reliance on information from others.

Overall, the exclusion of hearsay evidence ensures the integrity of the court proceedings and the fairness of the trial. Witnesses must provide evidence based on their direct experiences, promoting the pursuit of truth and justice in the legal system.

Cross-examination

Cross-examination is a crucial element of the legal process, as it allows the opposing party to test the consistency and credibility of the evidence provided by witnesses. The opportunity to cross-examine witnesses is essential in ascertaining the truthfulness of their statements. When the maker of a statement is unavailable for cross-examination, the court faces challenges in verifying the accuracy and reliability of the information presented. In such cases, the witness cannot be questioned about the intent behind their statement or the clarity of their observations regarding the event in question.

Subpoena

A subpoena is a formal legal document issued by a court that commands an individual to appear in court or produce specific documents. There are three main types of subpoenas:

The subpoena is served personally by hand, often by a police officer, but any other person designated by the court may serve it as well. It is crucial for the recipient of the subpoena to comply with its requirements and appear or produce evidence as requested at the specified date, time, and location. Failure to comply without a valid excuse may result in the court issuing a warrant for the person’s arrest to compel their attendance.

The subpoena remains in effect until one of the following events occurs:

Court Etiquette

Court proceedings are formal occasions that require appropriate behaviour and attire. When attending court as a witness, one must dress decently and respectfully. It is important to avoid wearing:

Document Required

When appearing in court as a witness, Malaysian citizens are required to bring their National Identity Card (MyKad) or birth certificate. Foreign citizens, on the other hand, must bring their international passports or any other relevant identification documents.

Contribution of Witness to the Criminal Justice System

Witnesses play a vital role in the criminal justice system, as their testimony becomes a crucial element of evidence in criminal trials. Evidence is essential in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, and witnesses are often called upon to provide testimony in court.

Witnesses may testify because they possess firsthand knowledge of the events related to a crime or because they can offer relevant information about a case or a disputed matter. Their testimony helps the court reach conclusions regarding the guilt or innocence of the accused.

Additionally, witnesses are crucial for the progression of criminal trials. The prosecution cannot proceed with the proceedings against the accused without the participation of witnesses. Therefore, witnesses coming forward to testify are pivotal to the justice system.

Finally, witnesses are required to swear an oath or affirmation before giving evidence. Taking the oath signifies that witnesses promise to be truthful. The truthfulness of witnesses is essential to ensuring the fairness of a criminal trial. The truth provided by witnesses leads to the conviction of the guilty and the exoneration of the innocent. Their testimonies uphold the integrity of the legal system and contribute significantly to the pursuit of justice.

References

Last Reviewed	:	February 2024
Writer / Reviewer	:	Nurazira bt. Azizan