WHEN lawyers present legal arguments and judges write grounds of decision, they cite authority. They are so taught in law schools to present legal arguments with legal authorities – that is, the laws that support the legal argument.

Legal authorities are of two types – primary and secondary.

Primary authority is the set of laws that are binding, the main ones being legislation (law passed by parliament) and case law (judge-made law).

Accordingly, when one argues that cash handouts during elections are bribery, they must be able to cite primary authority.

The first primary authority must be section 10(a) of the Election Offences Act 1954 (Act 5), which clearly states that the act of giving or lending or offering to procure, money or valuable consideration to induce a voter to vote or refrain from voting is bribery.

Accordingly, cash handouts, not only during but before or after an election, given by any person by himself or by any other person on his behalf are bribery.

The second primary authority is the case of Manogaran Marimuthu v Sivaraj a/l Chandran [2018] MLJU 1973.

The case showed how the corrupt practice of bribery under section 10(a) of the Act was committed and how it was proven or established beyond reasonable doubt.

Civil society should therefore support calls for the authorities, be it police or the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, to investigate, and the attorney-general as the public prosecutor, to charge the offenders with bribery and other corrupt practices. – January 27, 2023.

* Hafiz Hassan reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.