Attorney General v Ling How Doong

• Court: Federal Court (Singapore)
• Judge: Chua F A J
• Judgment Date: 23 January 1969
• Neutral Citation: [1969] SGFC 1
• Citation: [1969] SGFC 1
• Defendant Counsel: JB Jeyaretnam(JB Jeyaretnam & Co)
• Plaintiff Counsel: Ho Thian Cheh (Senior State Counsel)
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No Y42 of 1968
• Date: 23 January 1969
• Subject Matter: Natural justice,Commission hearing appeal from decision of disciplinary board of the Police – Whether Commission empowered to enhance punishment given by disciplinary board,Public service commission,Public Service Commission hearing appeal from decision of disciplinary board of the Police Public Service,Administrative Law,Commission considering enhancing punishment – Whether right to know enhancement under consideration and be heard on question of enhancement

The respondent Ling How Doong was an inspector in the Singapore Police Force. On 23 February 1966 a letter or dismissal was addressed to him by the Commissioner of Police in the following terms:

23 February 1966

Inspector Ling How Doong,

Police Training School.

Through: AC `Training & Personnel`.

(Sd)

Assistant Commissioner,

`Training & Personnel`

Commandant, Police Training

School.

I have to refer to your letter of 5 November 1965 forwarding your grounds of appeal against the finding and punishment imposed by the Commissioner of Police.

2. Your appeal had been submitted for the consideration of the Public Service Commission. The Public Service Commission after consideration of your appeal has decided that you should be dismissed from the service.

3. This letter then is to serve as a notice to you of your dismissal from the service. Your dismissal from the service will take effect from the day immediately following that on which you receive this notice. Your last day of service will therefore be the day you receive this notice.

4. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter on the attached duplicate copy thereof.

(Sd J Le Cain)

Commissioner of Police,

Singapore.

The facts and circumstances which resulted in Inspector Ling`s dismissal from the Singapore Police Force by the Public Service Commission were as follows:

On 14 June 1965 four charges under s 27 of the Police Force Ordinance were preferred against Inspector Ling. In accordance with reg 8 of the Police Regulations, 1959 which were made under the Police Force Ordinance 1958 (No 32 of 1958) a board consisting of two officers senior in rank to Inspector Ling was duly appointed to conduct a disciplinary enquiry into these four charges. One charge alleged that Inspector Ling was guilty of the offence of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline, another charge alleged that he was guilty of the offence of neglect of orders and the remaining two charges alleged that he was guilty of the offence of excess of duty resulting in injury to two persons.

These offences were punishable under s 28(1) by dismissal or retirement from the Police Force, or by any of the following punishments:

(i) reduction in seniority;

(ii) deferment or stoppage of increment;

(iii) reprimand;

(iv) caution,

and in lieu of or in addition to any other punishment by a fine not exceeding two hundred dollars.

In due course the board conducted a disciplinary enquiry in accordance with the procedure laid down in the said Police Regulations 1959. During the course of the enquiry two of the four charges were amended by the board and after the conclusion of the enquiry the board on 8 September 1965 found Inspector Ling guilty on the two amended charges (i) of the offence of excess of duty resulting in injury to two persons and (ii) of the offence of neglect of orders.

The board recommended the punishment of a reprimand and a fine of $100 of the offence of excess of duty and the punishment of a reprimand for the offence of neglect of orders. The Commissioner of Police, on receipt of the findings and recommendations of the board, accepted the board`s findings and imposed a fine of $50 in respect of the offence of excess of duty and a reprimand in respect of the offence of neglect of orders. The Commissioner of Police`s award was communicated to Inspector Ling by a letter dated 14 September 1965.

On 2 October 1965 Inspector Ling by a letter addressed to the Commissioner of Police gave notice of appeal against the conviction and the sentences. Section 28(2) of the Police Force Ordinance, 1958 provides for a right of appeal against any finding or sentence, other than an order of dismissal or retirement from the police force.

On 4 November 1965 Inspector Ling submitted, with an accompanying letter, his grounds of appeal addressed to the Head of State. As Inspector Ling was on that date attached to the Police Training School, his letter to the Head of State and the accompanying grounds of appeal were handed to the Commandant of the Police Training School, in accordance with proper administrative procedure, for transmission. The commandant, however, returned Inspector Ling`s...