PUTRAJAYA, Aug 3 — The Court of Appeal has heard that the rape conviction of celebrity preacher Syed Shah Iqmal Syed Mohammad Shaiful, also known as Da’i Syed, was unsafe and should not be upheld due to several flaws in the prosecution’s case concerning the issue of consent.
Lawyer Datuk M.M. Athimulan, representing Syed, submitted that the prosecution’s own evidence disclosed numerous circumstances indicating that the sexual intercourse between the appellant and the victim was consensual.
He told a three-member bench comprising Justices Datuk Azman Abdullah, Datuk Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid, and Datuk Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid that the first Sessions Court judge had found that the victim had consented to the sexual intercourse based on her actions before and after the incident.
Athimulan added that the Sessions Court had subsequently acquitted and discharged Syed at the close of the prosecution’s case without calling for his defence.
However, the decision was later overturned by the High Court, which found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case and ordered Syed to enter his defence. The appellant was later convicted by another Sessions Court judge.
He argued that the second Sessions Court judge had erred by failing to conduct a maximum evaluation of the evidence from both the prosecution and the defence, resulting in a miscarriage of justice against the appellant.
Athimulan said that Syed had never forced the victim to go to his house, that she could have declined to follow him, and had opportunities to leave but chose not to do so.
He also submitted that subsequent Instagram conversations initiated by the victim after the incident contained no accusation of rape, but showed that she wanted to meet the appellant again while he repeatedly said he was busy.
Syed, 31, is appealing against his conviction, a 10-year prison sentence and three strokes of the cane imposed by the second Sessions Court for raping a 23-year-old woman (now 29) at a condominium in Shah Alam, at 1.35am on September 11, 2019.
On January 23 this year, the High Court dismissed his appeal and upheld the second Sessions Court’s decision, prompting him to bring the matter to the Court of Appeal. The prosecution has also filed a cross-appeal against the sentence.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Iznina Hanim Hashim, representing the prosecution, submitted that witness testimony supported the victim’s account that she was raped, alongside circumstantial evidence showing the victim experienced depression and changes in behaviour following the incident.
The victim had received hospital treatment and a medical report stated that one of the contributing factors to her depression was the alleged sexual assault.
Iznina noted that the victim’s decision to follow the appellant to his house, not leave after discovering no one else was present, or the delay in lodging a police report did not mean she had consented to the sexual intercourse.
She said it was not easy for the victim to lodge a police report against the appellant, who was publicly known as a preacher.
The Court of Appeal reserved judgment on the appeal and fixed August 17 for case management to determine the decision date.
Lawyer Mohamed Baharudeen Mohamed Ariff, who also represents Syed, told the media that the court would decide on the next date whether to uphold the conviction and, if so, both the defence and the prosecution would submit on the sentence.
