Liabliti Jenayah Korporat di Malaysia Mengikut Perspektif Tadbir Urus Korporat

ABSTRAK Syarikat sebagai personaliti undang-undang yang berasingan adalah bertanggungan dalam kes-kes jenayah selain daripada kes-kes sivil seperti melibatkan perlanggaran kontrak atau terbuka kepada liabiliti yang bersifat tort. Diakui masih terdapat masalah bersifat konseptual dan amalan dalam penerimaan pakai konsep ini. Terdapat dua kaedah utama liabiliti boleh disabitkan kepada syarikat; melalui liabiliti vikarius dan prinsip identifikasi. Selain itu, statut juga boleh mengenakan liabiliti secara terus ke atas syarikat tanpa bersandarkan prinsip-prinsip common law ini. Liabiliti jenayah korporat akan menjadikan syarikat lebih berhati-hati dalam menjalankan urusan seharian mereka untuk mengelakkan risiko pendakwaan. Malahan, terdapat liabiliti tertentu yang hanya boleh dikenakan kepada syarikat sebagai sebuah organisasi tanpa mengaitkan dengan mana-mana pengarahnya. Berdasarkan kupasan kes dan amalannya di Malaysia, dan perbandingan dengan kedudukan di United Kingdom dan Australia, adalah disarankan agar konsep liabiliti korporat diberikan perhatian serius untuk dikembangkan menjadi lebih berperanan demi meningkatkan tadbir urus korporat yang baik di Malaysia. Kata kunci: Tanggungan jenayah; tadbir urus korporat; prisip identifikasi; vikarius liabiliti; tanggujawab korporat ABSTRACT A company as a separate legal personality is liable in criminal cases as well as civil cases such as breach of contract or open to tort liability. It is acknowledged that there are still conceptual and practical issues in adopting this concept. There are two main methods of liability where company may be convicted ; through vicarious liability and identification principles. In addition, statutes may also impose liability directly to a company without applying the common law principles. Corporate criminal liability will make the company more cautious in conducting their daily business to avoid the risk of prosecution. In fact, there are certain liabilities that can only be imposed on the company as an organisation without associating with any of its directors. Based on the case study and practice in Malaysia, and comparisons with the position in the United Kingdom and Australia; it is recommended that the concept of corporate liability be taken seriously to be developed in enhancing its role to increase good corporate governance in Malaysia. Keywords: Criminal liability; corporate governance; identification principle; vicarious liability; corporate responsibility