The Alaska State Constitution is the fundamental governing document of the State of Alaska, serving as the supreme law of Alaska, subordinate only to the U.S. Constitution and federal law. It establishes the framework of state government, defines the powers and responsibilities of its legislative, executive, and judicial branches, secures individual rights through a Declaration of Rights, and sets rules for resource management, local government, and public finance.
In the case Lai Hen Beng v Public Prosecutor [2024], the appellant was charged in the magistrate’s court under section 498 of the Penal Code, which criminalized enticing or taking away another man’s wife for illicit sexual intercourse. He argued that section 498 was unconstitutional for violating Articles 8(1) and 8(2) of the Federal Constitution, as it treated women as the property of their husbands and denied wives equal legal recourse if their husbands were enticed away.
In the case Pendakwa Raya lwn Wong Ah Kean [2010], a clinic assistant performed an abortion on a woman who was over three months pregnant, agreeing to carry out the procedure for RM700 (seven hundred ringgit). The victim suffered severe blood loss during the procedure, was given pills to stop the bleeding.
Section 372 of the Malaysia Penal Code makes it a crime to sell, let for hire, or otherwise dispose of any person for the purpose of prostitution. It also criminalizes bringing a person into or taking a person out of Malaysia with the intention that the person will be used for prostitution. A conviction carries a maximum penalty of fifteen years in prison, whipping, and a fine. Section 372B extends the framework by prohibiting solicitation for prostitution or any “immoral purpose” in any place.
Section 375 of the Penal Code (Act 574) defines the offence of rape.
Malaysia operates a dual legal system, combining civil law for non-Muslims with Islamic family law for Muslims.
Article 8 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia establishes the constitutional guarantee of equality. Article 8(1) provides that "all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law." Article 8(2) specifies that "there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the grounds of religion, race, descent, place of birth, or gender in any law or in the appointment to office or employment under a public authority."
The Employment Act 1955 is Malaysia’s principal labor statute and provides the framework for regulating employment conditions as well as addressing workplace discrimination and harassment. Section 69F authorizes the Director General of Labor to inquire into and decide disputes between employees and employers relating to discriminatory practices. This provision ensures that employees have a statutory avenue to challenge unfair treatment in the workplace. Sections 81A through 81H establish procedures for preventing and addressing sexual harassment at work.
Under the Penal Code of Malaysia (Act 574, Chapter XVI, sections 312–316), abortion is generally criminalized except under limited statutory exceptions. Section 312 makes it an offense for any person, including a pregnant person themself, to voluntarily cause a miscarriage. The punishment is up to ten years in prison, a fine, or both.
Can a court punish a criminal defendant with two sentences for a single act in violation of both 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and (j), according to the Double Jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment?
This case asks the Supreme Court to consider whether the language of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and § 924(j) allow for cumulative punishments for a singular criminal act that violates both provisions of this statute. Sections 924(c) and (j) punish the use of a firearm during the commission of a violent crime or drug trafficking. Dwayne Barrett contends that § 924(c) and (j) are not separate crimes because they punish the same underlying singular act, and Congress has authorized cumulative sentences for the same act. Charles L. McCloud, as court-appointed amicus curiae, argues that § 924(c) and (j) are two separate crimes, and Congress intended to allow for cumulative punishments for a single act that violates both statutes. The Supreme Court’s decision in this case raises concerns regarding the justice of sentencing to punish multiple violations involving a singular act and the duties of the legislative and judicial branches in determining the scope of criminal punishment.
Whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment permits two sentences for an act that violates 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and (j).
From August 2011 to January 2012, Petitioner Dwayne Barrett belonged to a group that committed several robberies. United States v.
