The MMC is expected to review Amirul’s case and determine the appropriate disciplinary action.
SHAH ALAM - The conviction of a Malaysian child psychiatrist Amirul Arif Mohd Yunos, in Ireland for grooming and sexually abusing a teenage girl has raised significant legal and ethical questions about his future in the medical profession.
Former Bar Council Child Rights Committee chairman Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo highlighted the potential disciplinary actions the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC) might take and the limitations it faced in addressing such cases.
The case background
Earlier this month, Amirul, 38, a former psychiatrist who worked with the Child and Adolescent Mental Health service (CAMHS) in Ireland, was sentenced to eight and a half years in prison for grooming and sexually abusing a 14-year-old girl.
According to The Irish Times, he pleaded guilty to six counts of engaging in a sexual act with a child under 17, one count of sexual exploitation of a child and one count of meeting a child for the purpose of sexual exploitation.
The victim was 15 years old when most of the incidents occurred between May and June 2023. She was 16 when the final incident occured in September 2023.
The court heard harrowing accounts of how he manipulated and exploited his victim, leading to her severe psychological trauma.
Amirul’s crimes, committed under the guise of professional care, triggered outrage in both Ireland and Malaysia.
The victim's family described the ordeal as "unimaginable" and criticised Amirul’s behaviour as a betrayal of trust.
Despite the conviction occurring overseas, the question remained: can the MMC permanently revoke Amirul’s medical licence and can the Malaysian government prevent him from practicing medicine in the country?
Legal basis for revoking a medical licence
Kokila explained that under Section 29(2)(a) of the Medical Act 1971, the MMC has the authority to take disciplinary action against registered medical practitioners convicted of crimes punishable with imprisonment, whether the conviction occurred in Malaysia or elsewhere.
"Being struck off the register is one of the disciplinary actions under Section 30(1)(e) of the Act.
"The MMC must evaluate whether the conviction reflects conduct that compromises public trust in the medical profession, irrespective of where the offence took place," she said.
Challenges in revocation
Despite its authority, Kokila highlighted that the MMC may face several limitations in permanently revoking Amirul’s license.
Can the government restrict his practice in Malaysia?
Even if Amirul retained his medical licence, Kokila said the Malaysian government and MMC could enforce restrictions under Section 30(1)(b)(ii) of the Medical Act 1971.
This provision allows the MMC to impose conditions on a medical practitioner’s practice as deemed appropriate.
However, Kokila pointed out that such restrictions must be legally justified.
"While the MMC has broad and flexible authority to impose restrictions, any limitations on Amirul's practice must have a solid legal foundation as unjustified restrictions could open the door to legal challenges from him," she added.
Can Amirul be prosecuted in Malaysia for crimes committed in Ireland?
Kokila said Malaysian law provides for extraterritorial jurisdiction in cases involving sexual offences against children.
Under Section 3 of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017, Malaysians can be prosecuted for such crimes committed abroad.
However, two key legal principles come into play:
Rule of dual criminality: Both Malaysia and Ireland must recognise the offence and impose similar penalties for the crime.Kokila highlighted the principle of dual criminality citing the case of Home Ministry, Malaysia and Anor v Seyed Ramin Paknejad as an example.
In this case, she said the judge explained the concept that the rule of dual or double criminality in extradition law required that, for an offence to be extraditable, the act constituting the offence must be recognised as a crime in both the requesting and requested states.
Kokila added that in Amirul’s case, both countries classified sexual offences against children as criminal acts punishable by imprisonment, satisfying this requirement.
Rule against double jeopardy: Article 7(2) of the Federal Constitution prohibits an individual from being tried twice for the same offence.
"A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence except where the conviction or acquittal has been quashed and a retrial ordered by a court superior to that by which he was acquitted or convicted.
"Therefore, if Amirul has already been convicted and sentenced in Ireland, Malaysian courts cannot prosecute him for the same offence, as doing so would violate his constitutional rights under Article 7(2).
"However, he may still face prosecution for other distinct offences," Kokila added.
What happens next?
The MMC is expected to review Amirul’s case and determine the appropriate disciplinary action.
At the same time, any additional legal proceedings in Malaysia must align with constitutional protections and established legal principles.
This case has raised broader concerns about protecting public trust in the medical profession and ensuring robust mechanisms for accountability, even when crimes occurred outside Malaysia.
