~by Atticus ~

The Government has proposed amendments to abolish certain mandatory provisions in the Misuse of Drugs Act.

The proposals will make drug trafficking offenses by drug mules no longer punishable with a mandatory death penalty, but will instead provide discretion for the courts to provide a term of life imprisonment with caning provided that the drug mule cooperates substantively with the Central Narcotics Bureau.

The exception will only apply if the drug mule is not involved in the supply or distribution of the drugs, but only acted as the courier.

The amendments will also provide for discretion in cases where the courier has a mental disability which substantively impairs his appreciation of the gravity of the act.

Under the current regime it is mandatory for Courts to sentence a drug courier caught with specified amounts of Class A drugs to death regardless of his personal circumstances.

This has been criticised by activists and opposition political parties as unduly binding the hands of the judiciary, and has been the subject of several constitutional challenges by constitutional lawyer M Ravi.

TOC has previously, in several editorials, called for the abolition of the mandatory death penalty and highlighted the case of young drug mule Yong Vui Kong.

In an editorial of 24 February 2010, we wrote:

The mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking is particularly egregious for several reasons.  First, it lacks a sense of proportionality. A young unwitting drug mule (a typical profile of those arrested for trafficking) caught with 30 grams of morphine, for example, gets no more sentencing consideration than a serial killer, while this does nothing to deter the real traffickers who put him up to it.  Second, the defendant is saddled with an unusually onerous burden of proof: if caught in possession of a drug, he is automatically presumed to be responsible for it and to know its nature, and if caught with a certain amount he is alleged to be trafficking.

Anti-death penalty activists TOC spoke to were happy but indicated that further dialogue on the issue of the death penalty was necessary.

Rachel Zeng of the Singapore anti-death Penalty Campaign told TOC:

“Whatever the reasons the government has, I thank them for making this step and would like to extend an invitation to the relevant authorities to consider engaging with us in dialogue or discussions over the possibilities of replacing the death penalty with alternative methods of persucution which may be more humane.”

Activist and film-maker Lynn Lee, who has extensively covered the case of Yong Vui Kong, said that she was pleased but many questions remained for the government to answer.

Once legislation has been put in place, all accused persons who meet the requirements can elect to be considered for resentencing under the new law. This will include accused persons in ongoing cases, as well as convicted persons who have already exhausted their appeals and are currently awaiting execution.

 

You May Also Like

The coming S$270 billion bailout

The following is an excerpt from Yawning Bread Alex Au/ Public housing…

李绳武上诉遭驳回 总检察署可境外递交法律文件

由大法官梅达顺、上诉庭法官郑永光和庄泓翔所组成的三司,于今午(4月1日)裁定驳回李显扬之子李绳武的上诉,总检察署获准在美国递交法律文件给李绳武。 李绳武也在个人脸书更新上诉进展。根据其贴文,总检察署无法引用2017年10月后的新法庭条例,应用在针对他藐视法庭的诉讼。 不过,上诉庭仍裁决允许总检察署,针对李绳武的脸书贴文涉嫌藐视法庭一案,在美国递交法律文件给后者。这是因为对于在境外涉嫌藐视法庭者,提交法律文件程序乃根据法庭条例的规范。 如今,案件审讯将转入实质的抗辩过程。 绳武:仍需证明我的贴文如何藐视法庭 李绳武透露对上诉裁决的失望,“不过,总检察署还是必须先拿出足够理据证明,我的私人脸书贴文何种程度上贬砥了新加坡的司法机构。” 李绳武也不忘抨击,在这长达1年又8个月的时间,政府又耗费了多少国家资源来对付他和他的母亲林学芬?“就我所知,我的伯伯李显龙似乎很满意现况,即便这让大家都想起了他在欧思礼路38号故居事件上的不齿行为。” 今年1月18日,大法官梅达顺和上诉庭法官郑永光和庄泓翔组成三司,受理李绳武的上诉,经三小时聆听双方陈词后,决定择日作裁决。 三司要求双方律师针对两个议题陈词,即:法院是否有行使实质管辖权的法律依据,来对付涉嫌在海外藐视法庭者? 以及,总检察署提出的新法庭条例,是否具有追溯力。 上诉庭曾指起诉绳武案出现“必然困难” 当时,大法官梅达顺在审讯时坦言,总检察署起诉李绳武一案,显现“必然的困难”(Inherent…

$500 fee to import a $10 medical device?

~ By Leong Sze Hian ~ I refer to the article “Has…

Singapore President on his nine-day State visit to Japan, commemorating 50 years of diplomatic relations

President Tony Tan Keng Yam has arrived at Japan for a nine-day…