Federal Court Rejects Review Application by Former Tronoh Assemblyman Paul Yong Choo Kiong
PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court today dismissed an application by former Tronoh state assemblyman Paul Yong Choo Kiong to review its earlier decision upholding his conviction and eight-year prison sentence in a rape case dating back to 2019.
A three-judge panel, led by Chief Justice of Malaya Hashim Hamzah, ruled that the application failed to meet the high threshold required under Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules 1995.
The court found that no breach of natural justice had occurred and that the applicant had been given sufficient opportunity to present his case.
“We are satisfied that the parties were fully heard. There was no violation of fundamental justice, and therefore the application is dismissed,” Hashim said in a unanimous decision.
The other judges on the panel were Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali and Collin Lawrence Sequerah.
Defence Arguments Rejected
During the hearing, Yong’s counsel, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, argued that his client had suffered serious injustice because his right to be heard had been inadvertently compromised.
He also claimed that Yong’s statement to the police under Section 112 was not adequately considered as evidence during the trial.
However, Deputy Public Prosecutor Yusaini Amer Abdul Karim countered that all relevant factual and legal issues had been thoroughly addressed during previous appeal proceedings.
He stressed that reopening the same arguments would undermine the finality of judicial decisions.
The prosecution team also included Mohd Amril Johari.
Case Background and Sentence
In July 2022, the High Court sentenced Yong to 13 years in prison and two strokes of the cane after finding him guilty of raping a 23-year-old Indonesian domestic helper at his residence in Ipoh.
The Court of Appeal later reduced the jail term to eight years in March 2024 while maintaining the corporal punishment.
In October 2025, the Federal Court dismissed Yong’s final appeal, confirming both his conviction and sentence.
In its latest ruling, the court reaffirmed that the victim was a credible and reliable witness whose testimony justified the conviction.
The judges concluded that the High Court had not erred in law when accepting the victim’s evidence as the basis for its decision.
-wilayah.com.my
