Public Prosecutor v Chum Tat Suan

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Choo Han Teck J
• Judgment Date: 07 March 2016
• Neutral Citation: [2016] SGHC 27
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Criminal Case No 1 of 2012
• Published date: 10 March 2016
• Year: 2016
• Hearing Date: 12 February 2016,07 March 2016
• Defendant Counsel: Mohamed Faizal and Chan Yi Cheng (Attorney-General's Chambers)
• Subject Matter: Criminal Law,Statutory offences,Misuse of Drugs Act,Discretion of court not to impose sentence of death in certain circumstances
• Citation: [2016] SGHC 27

Choo Han Teck J:

Chum Tat Suan (“Chum”) was 65 years old when he was convicted before this court on 5 August 2013 on a charge under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) (“the Act”), for importing not less than 94.96g of diamorphine into Singapore. Prior to 1 January 2013, an offence such as his carried the mandatory death penalty, pursuant to s 33 of the Act read with the Second Schedule. After 1 January 2013, convicted persons such as Chum may be spared the death penalty and be imprisoned for life instead if the conditions set out in the newly introduced s 33B of the Act are met.

The first condition under s 33B is that the trial judge must be satisfied that the person convicted committed the offence merely as a courier. His involvement must be restricted to the activities listed in s 33B(2)(a) and duplicated in s 33B(3)(a) of the Act, namely transporting, sending or delivering drugs and/or offering to transport, send or deliver drugs and/or doing or offering to do any act preparatory to or for the purpose of transporting, sending or delivering drugs. The second condition is that the Public Prosecutor certifies that the person convicted had rendered substantive assistance to the Central Narcotics Bureau (“CNB”) in disrupting drug trafficking activities within or outside Singapore, or alternatively, that the person convicted proves that he was suffering from an abnormality of mind that substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his criminal act. The words in s 33B(1) – (3) of the Act are:

33B.— (1) Where a person commits or attempts to commit an offence under section 5(1) or 7, being an offence punishable with death under the sixth column of the Second Schedule, and he is convicted thereof, the court — (a) may, if the person satisfies the requirements of subsection (2), instead of imposing the death penalty, sentence the person to imprisonment for life and, if the person is sentenced to life imprisonment, he shall also be sentenced to caning of not less than 15 strokes; or (b) shall, if the person satisfies the requirements of subsection (3), instead of imposing the death penalty, sentence the person to imprisonment for life.

(2) The requirements referred to in subsection (1)(a) are as follows: (a) the person convicted proves, on a balance of probabilities, that his involvement in the offence under section 5(1) or 7 was restricted — (i) to transporting, sending or delivering a controlled drug; (ii) to offering to transport, send or deliver a controlled drug; (iii) to doing or offering to do any act preparatory to or for the purpose of his transporting, sending or delivering a controlled drug; or (iv) to any combination of activities in sub-paragraph (i), (ii) and (iii); and (b) the Public Prosecutor certifies to any court that, in his determination, the person has substantively assisted the Central Narcotics Bureau in disrupting drug trafficking activities within or outside Singapore. (3) The requirements referred to in subsection (1)(b) are that the person convicted proves, on a balance of probabilities, that — (a) his involvement in the offence under section 5(1) or 7 was restricted — (i) to transporting, sending or delivering a controlled drug; (ii) to offering to transport, send or deliver a controlled drug; (iii) to doing or offering to do any act preparatory to or for the purpose of his transporting, sending or delivering a controlled drug; or (iv) to any combination of activities in sub-paragraphs (i), (ii) and (iii); and (b) he was suffering from such abnormality of mind (whether arising from a condition of arrested or retarded development of mind or any inherent causes or induced by disease or injury) as substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in relation to the offence under section 5(1) or 7. If any of the conditions in s 33B are not met, the alternative sentencing option under s 33B is not available and the court is bound to impose the death penalty pursuant to s 33 read with the Second Schedule of the Act. On the other hand, as noted by the Court of Appeal in PP v Chum Tat Suan [2015] 1 SLR 834 (“Chum Tat Suan (Criminal References)”) at [3], even if a person convicted is determined to be merely a courier and the Public Prosecutor...