Page:Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009.pdf/56

56 (5) No statement made by an accused person in answer to a written notice served on him pursuant to subsection (3) shall be construed as a statement caused by any inducement, threat or promise as is described in subsection (2), if it is otherwise voluntary.

(6) Where in any criminal proceedings against a person for an offence under this Act, evidence is given that the accused, on being informed that he might be prosecuted for it, failed to mention any such fact, being a fact which in the circumstances existing at the time he could reasonably have been expected to mention when so informed, the court, in determining whether the prosecution has made out a prima facie case against the accused and in determining whether the accused is guilty of the offence charged, may draw such inferences from the failure as appear proper; and the failure may, on the basis of those inferences, be treated as, or as capable of amounting to, corroboration of any evidence given against the accused in relation to which the failure is material.

(7) Nothing in subsection (6) shall in any criminal proceedings—
 * (a) prejudice the admissibility in evidence of the silence or other reaction of the accused in the face of anything said in his presence relating to the conduct in respect of which he is charged, in so far as evidence thereof would be admissible apart from that subsection; or
 * (b) be taken to preclude the drawing of any inference from any such silence or other reaction of the accused which could be drawn apart from that subsection.

Admissibility of statements and documents of persons who are dead or cannot be traced, etc.

54. Notwithstanding any written law to the contrary, in any proceedings against any person for an offence under this Act—
 * (a) any statement made by any person to an officer of the Commission in the course of an investigation under this Act; and