法律转帖：114A 和114a 都是恶法呼？

声明: 此文章乃麻辣大状周本兴律师在面子书发表的，请广传让更多人知道。
【114A 和114a都是恶法呼？】

Ian Anderson Wong 老板问：
請問你有針對過114A寫文章分析過嗎？
如有可否分享？如沒，可否請您寫一篇？

麻辣大状大方慷慨回答：

依稀记得有写过
不过人老了忘了存档在哪里
再写也无妨
114A是证据法律的新条文
114A. Presumption of fact in publication
(1) A person whose name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting himself as the owner, host, administrator, editor or sub-editor, or who in any manner facilitates to publish or re-publish the publication is presumed to have published or re-published the contents of the publication unless the contrary is proved.
(2) A person who is registered with a network service provider as a subscriber of a network service on which any publication originates from is presumed to be the person who published or re-published the publication unless the contrary is proved.
(3) Any person who has in his custody or control any computer on which any publication originates from is presumed to have published or re-published the content of the publication unless the contrary is proved.
(4) For the purpose of this section-
(a) "network service" and "network service provider" have the meaning assigned to them in section 6 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 [Act 588]; and
(b) "publication" means a statement or a representation, whether in written, printed, pictorial, film, graphical, acoustic or other form displayed on the screen of a computer."
这样的法律条文
肯定让你看得满头雾水
读完后面
忘记前面

不过
法律没有“不知者无罪”的说法
不单是违法的人
照捉照罚照坐牢
不知法的人
也照捉照罚照坐牢

114A的条文就是假设性的条文
其实大马还有一些条文也充满假设性
只是人民不知道而已
就例如同样的法令下
114（a）条文
The court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct, and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case.
ILLUSTRATIONS
The court may presume:-
(a) that a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession;
114（a）假设一人在偷窃案发生后拥有赃物，此条文就假定他是偷窃者或知道得到的东西是赃物，除非他能解释得到的东西的来源。

同理
114A的条文也是如此
粗俗的解释
今天有人在你的脸书倒大便
如撒播不实言论（谣言）
煽动的话语文字或图片
挑起种族仇恨
破坏种族和平和团结
虽然这些大便不是你“大”的
不过如果这个倒大便的责任就要归咎于你
在“假设性的事实”下，责任归咎于：
（一） 拥有、管理、或编辑对公众开放言论空间的网页
如各类论坛或部落格的相关人士；
（二） 提供网络伺服器或上网服务的相关人士及
（三） 用以发布相关内容的电脑或仪器的持有人

哇，不得了
谁都不放过
除非你知道谁是到处到大便者
看到这里
你是不是要清理一下自己脸书的“朋友”
那些可疑的用假照片的无人头照的风景照卡通照的
通通都要过滤
不然以后你被吃死猫
而且是死猫的大便
叫麻辣大状清理
可要征收清理费
袋袋平安
噢噢噢 — with Ian Anderson Wong.