SEPTEMBER 22 — Part IV of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 (Act 792) makes provision for the offences relating to sexual assault.
Section 14 provides for the offence of physical sexual assault on a child while Section 15 provides for the offence of non-physical sexual assault.
Section 14 states as follows:
Any person who, for sexual purposes —
(a) touches any part of the body of a child;
(b) makes a child touch any part of the body of such person or of any other person;
(c) makes a child touch any part of the child’s own body; or
(d) does any other acts that involve physical contact with a child without sexual intercourse,
commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 20 years and shall also be liable to whipping.
Explanation 1 — The act of touching may involve the act of touching with any part of the body or with an object and may be done through anything including anything worn by the person touching or by the child touched.
Explanation 2 — In determining what constitutes sexual purposes, the court may take into consideration, among others, the part of the body that is touched, the nature and extent of the act of touching or the physical contact and all other circumstances surrounding the conduct.
The following facts from a reported case show how an offence under Section 14(a) can be committed:
The accused was alleged to have groped the victim’s entire body and touched the victim’s genitals. The victim was an 11-year-old child. The incident, which happened at about 8.30pm, was witnessed by the child’s father’s nephew who related it to the child’s father on the same night.
When asked by his father, the victim confirmed that the accused had groped his entire body, including his genitals.
Later at about 12.20am, the child’s father apprehended the accused and handed him to police officers on patrol in the area. The child’s father informed the police that the accused had groped the body and touched the genitals of the victim.
The accused was arrested by the police and taken to the district police station. At about 2am, the child’s father lodged a police report.
Police investigations found that the accused had in fact groped the victim’s body, including his genitals, for sexual purposes.
The accused was charged for an offence under Section 14(a). The charge read as follows:
That you on 22.11.2018 at approximately 8.30pm, in the storeroom of Medan Selera Jaya 223, Jalan 51A/223, Seksyen 51A, 46100 Petaling Jaya, within the State of Selangor, did commit the offence of physical sexual assault on a11 year-old child named XXX by groping his body and touching his genitals for sexual purposes. As such, you have committed an offence punishable under Section 14(a) of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017.
The accused pleaded guilty to the charge. He was accordingly convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Court judge (SCJ) to six years imprisonment from the date of his arrest and two strokes of whipping.
In imposing the sentence, the SCJ took into consideration factors such as the public interest and thus, the need to uphold and promote the deterrence principle within the society; the seriousness of the offence; the psychological and emotional impact left on the victim following the incident; and the rampancy of sexual offences against children.
On appeal, High Court Judge Mohd Nazlan (as he then was) said:
“The sentence of six years’ imprisonment and two strokes of whipping in the case before me is within the range of punishment for cases under Section 14 of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017.
“In my view the learned [SCJ] had taken into consideration all relevant factors when meting out the sentence. From the grounds of judgment, it is clear that the seriousness of the crime committed by the [accused] was taken into account, including the rampancy of such offences. And these have been weighed against mitigating factors raised by the [accused].
“It is also plain that the learned [SCJ] was especially mindful of considerations of public interest — particularly on the need to send a signal that this sexual crime against children, in this case involving a young boy — is downright abhorrent, with emphasis on the sentencing principle of deterrence.
“I am satisfied that the learned [SCJ] had evaluated all relevant considerations in seeking to achieve a sentence that as closely as possible reflect the key sentencing objectives of retribution and reformation but also especially prevention and deterrence (see Public Prosecutor v Teh Ah Cheng [1976] 2 MLJ 186).
“In my judgment, the sentence meted out against the [accused] ... is in consonance with a careful attempt to strike a balanced determination of the most proportionate, fair and appropriate punishment for the [accused] for having pleaded guilty to the commission of the offence under Section 14(a) of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017.”
“Don’t play play” is a phrase popularised by 1990s Singapore sitcom character Phua Chu Kang. With apologies to all English teachers, I say this: “Don’t touch touch the body of a child.”
Respect the child.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
