Sentencing Discrimination and Disparities in Bribery Cases in Malaysia: an Assessment

Abstract

Sentencing differences can arise from discriminatory sentences and sentence disparities. Only the former has been examined in Malaysia. This study addresses the gap using data on convicted bribe offenders between 2010 and 2021. Results show that while discriminatory sentencing arising from non-legal considerations exists, their effects on fines and imprisonment were not always uniform or in the same direction. Only being male unequivocally disadvantaged the offender. Professionals and whitecollar offenders paid higher fines, government servants and bribe solicitors served longer jail sentences, Malay judges handed out longer jail terms than their non-Malay counterparts, and the year 2021 was characterized by shorter jail terms relative to other periods. In the case of sentencing disparities, all differences are attributable to judicial discretion, exercised correctly or otherwise. Of greater concern, however, is the significant negative association between the severity of penalties imposed (fines and imprisonment) and the amount of corrupt money misappropriated. This seriously undermines the deterrent effect and fairness of the judicial system. Findings also suggest that the conclusion of a previous study that bribery offenders in Malaysia receive preferential treatment based on their social, political, and personal characteristics is not only sweeping but inaccurate and has to be modified.