Professor Walter Woon argued it was the defence's job to prove the claims they used to plead for a lighter sentence.
But all three judges of the Court of Appeal disagreed, saying the onus should be on the prosecution to challenge information put forth which it was not prepared to accept.
Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong said that if the defence had to prove its mitigation, it would create a huge problem for the court as 'the whole family will have to go into the witness box' to testify. 'When the prosecution keeps quiet on everything, it will be very difficult for the court to take it upon itself to say I don't accept this or that,' said CJ Chan.
Judge of Appeal V.K. Rajah said the prosecution at the trial had not raised issues with the veracity of these claims which Prof Woon now raised.
When the A-G asked for a structure to be put in place so that it is clear whose duty it is to question such claims, CJ Chan said: 'We already have a structure for a long time.'
Mr Noor Marican, Aniza's lawyer, said he had shown his mitigation to the prosecution before presenting it to the court. The prosecutor asked for several changes and he had made them. The prosecutor had not disputed the parts about the abuse and the suicide attempts.
'They cannot now come and question it,' Mr Marican said.
SELINA LUM