1.

Compare and contrast between admission and confession in the context of Malaysian
Evidence Act 1950.

Ans: Admission
The voluntary assertion of a fact's veracity might be referred to as an admission. It can
make inferences about a disputed truth or a crucial fact and can be presented orally, in
writing, or electronically. Documentary evidence includes things like letters, receipts,
maps, bills, and other similar things.
Any potential party to the litigation, a party's predecessor-in-interest, an agent, or any
other person with a stake in the matter may make an admission.
Except where it is untrue and made under circumstances that do not bind the party
making it, an admission is viewed as the strongest evidence against that party. Thus, it
must be distinct, certain, and accurate.
Legal Principles
 According to S. 17(1), an admission is any statement, whether oral or written,
that raises a potential inference about a pertinent fact or a fact at issue.
(relevant to both civil and criminal trials) 
 S. 17(2) states that a confession is any acknowledgment made by a person who
is accused of committing an offense, expressing or implying that he did so. (This
is applicable exclusively in criminal cases.) Although every confession is an
admission, not every admission is a confession.
 S. 18(1) defines a party to a proceeding as either the prosecution, the defense,
or a representative of each.
 According to S. 18(2), "parties to a suit" refers to either the plaintiff or the
defendant, or their representatives.
 S. 18(3): Persons with a property or financial interest in the subject matter, as
well as individuals who are related to the parties in some way.
 S. 21: Admissions are important and may be used as evidence against the
maker, but they may not be used as evidence for the maker unless they come
within the scope of paragraphs (a) through (c) of the section.
 According to Section 31, an admission is not definitive proof of the matter
stated, and the person who made it is free to justify it.
 When we use the term "confession," we refer to a written declaration given by
the accused in which he or she admits guilt. In contrast, admittance denotes the
acknowledgment of the truth, a fact, or crucial fact in a legal or criminal case.
 Only during criminal procedures is the confession given. Conversely, admission
is relevant to both criminal and civil actions.
 For the confession to be considered, it must be made voluntarily. On the other
hand, for the admission to become material, it is not necessary for voluntary
expression. It does, however, affect its weight.
 While it is simple to withdraw a made confession, an admission that has already
been made cannot be done so.
 The accused, or person charged with a crime, confesses. Unlike admission,
which can be made by anyone, even the agent and complete strangers.
 Confessions are never received favourably by the confessor. Admission, on the
other hand, is made on behalf of the maker.
R v. Anandagoda
  The objective test based on how a reasonable man will interpret that statement
is used to establish if the admission amounts to a confession.
 Not all statements that imply any connection to the relevant fact are
confessions. Only words made by the accused in which he admits guilt or in
which it may be inferred that he committed the crime constitute a confession.
Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim v. PP 
 Admissions are important and can be used against the person who makes them,
according to S. 21. 
 The hearsay rule is broken by an admission, making it admissible. The
reasoning for this law is that making an admission, or a confession is not self-
serving because it goes against the maker's best interests. 
 As a result, it is assumed to be accurate.
Elements
 Admissions may be used to prove a maker's guilt.
 It cannot be used to support the maker of them in court.

Exceptions to the rule regarding using admissions on behalf of the maker

include: 
 If the maker was deceased and fell under section 32. 
 A declaration of the mind or body made at or around the time the condition
existed and supported by actions that make the possibility of a lie slim. 
 Is pertinent in other contexts besides an admission.
Admissions in civil case
 As an exception to hearsay, admissions may be used against the creator in
court.
 S. 58(1) does not need proof of acknowledged facts. (Only relevant in civil
cases)
 According to s. 58(1), admissions may be made in a civil case orally at the
hearing, in writing prior to the hearing, or in a pleading.
Confession
A confession is a type of admission that the accused makes indicating that they are
guilty of the crime. It is regarded as the strongest proof against both the manufacturer
and the co-accused, or the person who collaborated with the accused to do the crime.
It must therefore either acknowledge the crime or significantly all the facts that
constitute the offence. Confessions fall into one of two categories:
1. Judicial Confession: A confession that is made in front of the court or that the
magistrate records is referred to as a judicial confession.
2. Extra-Judicial Confession: A confession made in front of law enforcement or
anyone else other than judges and magistrates.
Two forms of confession are contained in our EA 1950's s.17(2): 
1. Plenary confession - declaring that he committed the crime and
2. Non-plenary confession - insinuating that he committed the wrongdoing. The
word "plenary" denotes "full," "complete," or "wholly."
Legal Principles
 A confession is defined in S.17(2).
 S. 24: If a confession was obtained through threat, intimidation, or promise, it is
not applicable (TIP). This indicates that inducement, intimidation, or promise
turns a confession into something it wasn't willing to do, which makes it illegal. If
the confession falls under section 24, it is not admissible due to involuntariness.
A trial within a trial must be performed to assess the voluntariness of the
confession if the defendant claims that the confession was made involuntarily.
Holding the trial inside the trial can be fatal. The side who claimed that the
confession was forced had the burden of proof. Beyond a reasonable doubt is
the required threshold of proof.
 Subject to any provisions in any written legislation, no confession given by an
accused to a police officer with a lower level than an inspector may be utilised to
establish the accused's guilt. implies that the only confessions to be utilised to
prove a maker's guilt are those made to a police officer higher than an inspector.
means that, subject to the terms of any other written law, s. 25 is superseded by
other laws.
 Under S.25, a police officer with a lower level than an inspector may not be
established to have made a confession. S.25 (1): No confession made by a
person suspected of any crime to a police officer who is below the level of
Inspector shall be utilised as evidence against that person, subject to any
express provisions included in any written legislation.Whilst section 25 of the Act
relates to a confession made to a police officer, this section is concerned with a
confession made by anyone to a third person while he is in the custody of a
police officer. In order to be admissible it must have been made in the
immediate presence of a sessions court or magistrate. This section also applies
to all categories of police officers. 
 According to S.26, an accused person's confession made while in police
custody cannot be used against him.S.26 (1): No confession made by any
person while he or she is in the custody of a police officer, unless it is made in
the immediate presence of a Sessions Court Judge or Magistrate, shall be
proven as against that person, subject to any express provision included in any
written law.
 S. 27: Any fact may be proven if it is learned as a result of information from a
person who has been accused of a crime while they are in the custody of a
police officer. Meaning: Section 27 permits an accused person's information
statement to be presented as evidence.S.27 of the Act addresses facts found as
a result of information received. Section 30 governs the confession of a co-
accused.
 According to Section 28, confessions made after the impression left by an
incentive, threat, or promise are still significant. S.28(1): A confession as
described in section 24 that is made after the court believes that the impression
left by any such incentive, threat, or promise has been completely eliminated is
relevant.
 Section 29 provides “Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant
because of promise of secrecy, etc.”S.29(1): If a confession as described in
section 24 is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant just because it
was made under a promise of secrecy, as a result of deception used against the
accused to obtain it, when he was intoxicated, in response to questions he did
not have to answer, regardless of their form, or because he was not warned that
he was not legally bound.
  When two or more defendants are jointly prosecuted for the same crime, one
defendant's confession may be used against the other defendants (Section 30).
However, a confession made by one of the many defendants in a lawsuit does
not constitute evidence against the others.
 According to Section 31, an admission is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt
of the matter confessed, and the maker of the admission is free to refute it.
Othman A. Aziz v. PP
 The suspect was accused of murder. When she declined to marry him, he killed
her in a fit of rage. The accused admitted what he did to his boss, who
suggested he contact the police.
 Held: Because the confession to the employer was made voluntarily and without
opposition, it was admissible. Additionally, the defence did not cross-examine
the employer. Failure to engage in cross-examination was interpreted by the
defence as an acceptance of the witness' testimony and confession.
PP v. Junaidi Bambang
 Due to an argument with his wife, the accused killed his three children and
made an attempt on his own life. At the scene of the crime, certain letters were
discovered close to him. The accused admitted to the murder in the letters. The
letters were written by the accused, according to expert testimony. He did,
however, deny killing the person during the trial.
 Held: The confession was truthful and dependable, and it was admissible.
Elements
1. The accused confesses.
2. Result of TIP.
3. Making mention of the charge.
4. Coming from an authority figure.
5. There are plausible explanations to believe that by confessing, he would obtain
a benefit or avert a temporal wrong.
When is it appropriate to confess?
 According to S. 17(2), it may be made at any moment.
 Either before or after arrest, it can be made.
 The statement may be made both before and throughout the course of an
inquiry by the police.
Exceptions 
 In R v. Wong Ah Kin, all confessions are relevant and admissible as evidence
against the maker unless they are disallowed by another provision of the EA or
another rule not mentioned there.
 Confessions are only admissible if made voluntarily (Section 24) and in
accordance with the correct procedures.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it may be claimed that the admission has a broader range than the
confession because the latter falls within the former's purview. As a result, every
admission is a confession, yet the opposite is untrue.
The fundamental distinction between the two is that while additional evidence is
needed to support the conviction in the case of admission, it is not necessary in the
case of confession, when the conviction is based solely on the statement.