Challenges in Prosecuting Human Trafficking Cases: The Role of Expert Witness

Zuraini Ab Hamid; Rahmawati Mohd Yusoff; Maizatun Mustafa

doi:10.47405/mjssh.v7i3.1356

Zuraini Ab Hamid Department of Legal Practice, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia, P. O. Box 10, 50728 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Rahmawati Mohd Yusoff Department of Law, Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM), Cawangan Johor, Kampus Segamat, 85000 Segamat, Johor, Malaysia.
Maizatun Mustafa Department of Legal Practice, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia, P. O. Box 10, 50728 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v7i3.1356

Keywords: Human trafficking, Expert, Exploitation, Refugee, TIP

Abstract

To be ranked at Tier 1 in the Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report, Section 108 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act requires the state parties to comply with its minimum standards in combating human trafficking. Unfortunately, some states parties, including Malaysia failed to meet the minimum standards in curbing the monstrous crime fully. Their failure to be in Tier 1 is contributed by a few reasons, including the lack of success in prosecution. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the low number of convictions of traffickers is due to the absence of anti-legislation, lack of trained law enforcers and prosecutors and corruption among the stakeholders. In 2021, the U.S State Department has downgraded Malaysia's ranking in TIP report from Tier 2 to Tier 3. The main reason for the decline was that the government did not adequately address credible allegations from multiple sources alleging labour trafficking involving refugees, migrants, and domestic workers. To be in Tier 1, Malaysia should consider having expert testimony to secure convictions. Using qualitative research method, this paper examines the relevance of expert witness in human trafficking cases from Islamic, Malaysia and international perspectives. This paper further recommends its use in court to secure conviction against traffickers and protect the victims.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmad, A. A., et al. (2016). The Refugee Crisis in Southeast Asia: The Malaysian Experience. IJNRHSS, 3, 80-90.

Al-Quran al-Karim. (2014). Telaga Biru.

Anderson et al. (2004). Task Force 5: Expert Testimony and Opinions. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 44(8), 1747.

Beran, R.G. (2009). The role of the expert witness in the adversarial legal system. Journal of Law and Medicine, 13, 136.

Burn, S. (2005). Successful Use of Expert Witnesses in Civil Disputes. n.p: Shaw & Sons Ltd.

Chaleby, K. S. (1996). Issues in Forensic Psychiatry in Islamic Jurisprudence. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law, 24(1).

Chandrasekaran & Ors v PP [1971] 1 MLJ 153.

Dato Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim v Pendakwaraya & Rayuan Lain [2015] 2 MLJ 293.

Farrell v United States, 563 F.3d 364 (2009).

Hammond v Commonwealth of Kentucky, Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 12, 2019.

Holmes, L. (2010). Introduction: The issue of human trafficking. In Trafficking and Human Rights: European and Asia-Pasific Perspectives, Holmes L. (Ed.). UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

Ibrahim, N. (2007). 3L Journal of Language Teaching. Linguistics and Literature, 13, 4-5.

Ismail, W. A. F. W., et al. (2015). Document forensic, the fiqh and the Syariah Courts. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space. 11(4), 132-139.

Ismail, W. A. F. W. I. (2017). The Legal Forensic Model in Determining the Genuineness of Islamic Banking Documents and Their Application in Shariah Courts. GJAT, 7(2), 115.

Miers, S. (2003). Slavery in the Twentieth Century; The Evolution of a Global Problem. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Mohammed b Abdul Rahman v PP [1979] 1 MLJ 252.

Moreno, K. T. (2019). Expert Witness of Human Trafficking. Paper Presentation on The Expert and Witness Training Program at Malaysia, U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development Assistance and Training (OPDAT).

Muhamad, M. M. & Rahamanickam, R. (2016). The Sodomy II Trial: Does the Federal Court Set A New Precedent When Dealing with Government Expert Witness? Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 400.

Muslim. (1997). Sahih Muslim. Al-Qaherah: Dar al-Hadith.

Notley, R.G. (2000). The Medical Expert Witness. British Journal of Urology International, 86, 294.

Pathmanabhan a/l Nalliannen & Others v PP [2013] 5 MLJ 867.

People of the Philippines v. Jeffrey Hirang y Rodriguez, Criminal Case No. 135682, Regional Trial Court of Pasig City, National Capital Judicial Region, 25 June 2011.

People of the Philippines v Rose Magroy Pisaryt, Case no:11-281876, Republic of the Philippines, Regional Trial Court, National Capital Jurisdiction Region Branch 48 Manila.

PP v Mohamed Sulaiman (1982) 2 MLJ 320.

PP v Roslee bin Tamrin (2007) MLJU 645.

Rajamanickam, R. & Rahim, A. A. (2014). The position of psychological expert evidence under the Malaysian Evidence Act 1950. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(14), 128.

Ranjan, P. S. (1999). Slavery: A Continuing Evil. Malayan Law Journals, 4(10), 2.

R v Broomfield [2010] ONSC 3808.

R v Mullins-Johnson [2007] ONCA 720.

Sarkar, S. C. (2018). Law of Evidence. Selangor: Lexis-Nexis.

Seet, M. (2013). Can Islam and "Islamization" be a Force for Refugee Rights in Malaysia? PBLJ, 31(1).

Sim Ah Song & Anor v. Rex [1951] MLJ 150.

Siti Rashidah binti Razali & Ors v PP [2011] 6 MLJ 417.

Stygall, G. (1994). Trial Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co.

Syed Abu Bakar bin Ahmad v PP [1984] 2 MLJ 19.

Syiniur, A. N. M. (2006). Al-Ithbat bi al-Khibrah baina al-Qadha’ al-Islamiyy wa al-Qanun al Dawliyy wa Tadbiqiha al-Muasirah. Amman: Dar al-Nafa’is.

United States v Cook, 782F.3d 983 (8th Cir. 2015)

UNODC. (2017). Evidential Issues in Trafficking in Persons Cases: Case Digest. Vienna: United Nations.

U.S Department of State. (2021). Trafficking in Persons Report June 2021. Retrieved from https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/TIP_Report_Final_ 20210701.pdf

The State v Mabuza and Chauke, Regional Court for the Regional Division of Mpumalanga, 21 November 2014, case no: SHG 9/13.

The State v Onyekachi Okechukwu Eze, The Regional Division of Gauteng, Pretoria, 27 November 2017, case no: 14/546/2013.

Yong Szee Fatt v Pengkalan Securities Sdn Bhd, Civil Appeal No: W-02-398-2006, Unreported case.

Zheng, T. (2010). Sex Trafficking, Human Rights and Social Justice. London: Routledge.