The defence of Israeli man, Avitan Shalom, had contended that his client’s name on the charge sheet should be the other way around. - NSTP/ASWADI ALIAS
The defence of Israeli man, Avitan Shalom, had contended that his client’s name on the charge sheet should be the other way around. - NSTP/ASWADI ALIAS

KUALA LUMPUR: The defence of Israeli man, Avitan Shalom, had contended that his client's name on the charge sheet should be the other way around.

Defence counsel Navinjit Singh said his client's name should be Shalom Avitan as stated on a French passport he had used to enter Malaysia.

"He is Shalom Avitan on the French passport. Avitan Shalom could be someone else.

"This issue was raised at the previous proceedings," he told Sessions Court judge Norina Zainol Abidin.

To this, deputy public prosecutor Mohamad Mustaffa P. Kunyalam, referring to the French passport used by the accused, said it was stated clearly that his surname was Avitan and given name was Shalom.

"I do not see any issue in this because at the end of the day, we are referring to the same document which states his surname is Avitan and given name is Shalom.

"In some jurisdictions, they may refer to the surname as first name and given name as second name.

"In some instances in other jurisdictions, they may want the given name to be mentioned first before the surname.

"It's just a matter of style but we are referring to the same document. Are you disputing the identity of the accused?

"The prosecution does not wish to amend the name on the two charges at this juncture," he said.

Navinjit, however, maintained his stance and continued to argue on the name, adding that they were not objecting to the charges.

"I understand the different jurisdictions. But this is Malaysia. In our jurisdiction, normally the surname is at the back.

"For example, my name is Navinjit Singh. You cannot call me Singh Navinjit.

"It is better to make amendments to Shalom Avitan. We are afraid that a small mistake might influence the court," she said.

Judge Norina then asked both parties to make submissions on the matter at the end of the trial.

Shalom, from Bnei-Brak, Israel, claimed trial to two amended charges framed under the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971 and the Arms Act 1960.

He is facing two charges of possession of bullets and trafficking in firearms and will go to trial in September.