Almost Anyone Can Be Subpoenaed in Sabah — Even Ministers

 

For educational purposes.

This is an interesting find.

In Sabah, Malaysia (under the Rules of Court 2012 and related laws), a subpoena can generally be issued against almost anyone within Malaysia who has relevant evidence or documents that can assist the court. This applies to civil proceedings in the High Court and Subordinate Courts; the Rules of Court 2012 apply in Sabah.

Who can be subpoenaed

    Ordinary individuals, eyewitnesses, family members, friends, employees, professionals (doctors, etc.), company officers or representatives, and custodians of records (banks, hospitals, government departments, companies, etc.).

    Even government ministers or high officials — case law has confirmed that a subpoena may be issued against “anybody, be he a Minister of the Government or a nonentity,” with no special privilege over ordinary members of the public.

 

The main requirement is that the person must be able to give evidence on facts relevant and material to the issues in the case. A party does not need the court’s leave simply to issue a subpoena, but the court has inherent power to control the process and prevent abuse.⁠

 

Key limitations and protections

 

    Relevance and non-abuse: Courts can set aside a subpoena (under Order 38 rule 14(4) of the Rules of Court 2012) if it is irrelevant, oppressive, vexatious, issued for an improper motive, or an abuse of process. The party issuing it generally bears the burden of showing the witness’s evidence is material.⁠

    Privileges under the Evidence Act 1950:

        Legal professional privilege (section 126): Protects confidential communications with a lawyer, but does not cover communications made in furtherance of an illegal purpose, crime, or fraud.

            Self-incrimination: Unlike the strong Fifth Amendment protection in the US, section 132 of the Evidence Act provides that a witness is generally not excused from answering a relevant question merely because the answer may tend to incriminate them. The court can compel the answer after explaining that the answer cannot later be used against the witness in a criminal proceeding (except for a prosecution for giving false evidence).

    Criminal proceedings: Under the Criminal Procedure Code, courts can issue summonses (or orders) compelling witnesses to attend or produce documents for investigations, inquiries, or trials. Relevance and non-abuse principles still apply; the accused person is not a compellable witness in their own defence.

This opens up a lot of possibilities. I can subpoena the house owners who have refused to cooperate. But then again I could ask for discovery documents, so why drag these guys to court.

I could subpoena officers who signed the 2018 development plan and ask them on what basis they signed the plan when there are multiple discrepancies that even a simple layman like me can point out. But then again the court needs expert opinion and not an opinion from a lay person. 

I could.... the possibilities.... I am going to take a few days off to think about this. No posts for a week or two.