In the latest development regarding the case of 50-year-old Singaporean Mohan Rajangam who was “extradited” to Malaysia to face charges relating to a murder in Penang five years ago, it appears that the Singapore State Court has lost the notes of evidence of Mr Mohan’s hearing which took place in Singapore on 23 March 2015.

On 21 March 2015, Mr Mohan was arrested by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) after the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP) allegedly sought assistance to his arrest because he was believed to be involved in a gang’s drug activities and harbouring members of the gang which is involved in a lethal shootout that transpired in Penang.

Two days later, Mr Mohan was brought to the State Court, where the charge for the murder in Penang was read out to him.

Mr Mohan had raised in court that he was not present in Malaysia at the time of the murder in Penang, pointing to his passport as proof that he was actually in Singapore during that time. However, the judge granted permission for him to be “extradited” anyway.

Mr Mohan was subsequently “extradited” to Malaysia where he was left there for four months, allegedly without any follow-up from either the SPF or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. While in Malaysia, Mr Mohan was detained by the local authorities without being charged for anything. He noted that no charges were read against him in Penang court.

Later, when he was finally released from the custody of the Malaysian police in July 2015, Mr Mohan had to resort to buying his own flight ticket back to Singapore and was even made to pay a fine for purportedly overstaying in Malaysia, though he was detained the entire time.

After his return, Mr Mohan had to recuperate from the health condition suffered due to the four-month-long detention in Malaysia and took time to settle down in life as a result of losing his day job.

Mr Mohan said in an interview with TOC earlier this year that his wife, Kasthuri, went to the Singapore State Court to request for a copy of the charge sheet while her husband was being detained by the Malaysian police in Penang in 2015. However, she was told that there were no charges against her husband in the system for the year 2015, therefore she could not write in.

On the second attempt at obtaining the records, Mr Mohan claimed that he had made a request to the State Court for his charge sheet himself following his return to Singapore. He was advised to make an appeal via email. However, his appeal was rejected.

“What is happening? Why am I not given the same charge sheet which was read out to me in court on 23 March 2015?” he questioned in an earlier interview with TOC.

TOC had reached out to the State Court to find out the reason it rejected both requests, but never receive a reply.

Five years since the above events, Mr Mohan filed an application to the Singapore High Court for a criminal revision. He was represented by human rights lawyer M Ravi in his bid to obtain and examine court records pertaining to his extradition to Penang “to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety” of the proceedings including an alleged charge sheet that Mr Mohan has thus far been unable to obtain. This is based on a petition filed by M Ravi on 10 January and seen by TOC the same day.

A reply from the Attorney General’s Chamber which TOC saw, dated 28 February, said that the State Court has been “unable to trace the notes of evidence for the hearing”.

According to Mr Mohan, the State Court said that the records may have been lost during the move from the old State Courts building to the new State Courts Tower.

TOC has reached out to the State Court to confirm this and inquire about how many documents were lost in that shift.

Criminal revision to be withdrawn

According to the Singapore Police Force’s guidelines, an accused person must be given a copy of the charge relating to the alleged crime, a notice of warning and the accused’s statement in answer to the charge.

Once an accused person is charged in Court, the accused or his lawyer can request for copies of certain reports from the Investigation Officer prior to the commencement of criminal proceedings in line with the law.

However, in the case of Mr Mohan, there had been no extradition under the Extradition Act but a transfer of suspects under Section 121 CPC reciprocal arrangement between Singapore and Malaysia as revealed in the Singapore Police’s statement in response to TOC’s story of Mr Mohan.

We understand from Mr Mohan that the application for criminal revision will be withdrawn in light of new information that was revealed after the application was filed — It was originally made under the assumption that Mr Mohan was transferred to Malaysian authorities under the Extradition Act.

We also note that in the AGC’s reply to Mr Mohan’s lawyer, they were warned that if Mr Mohan decides to continue pursuing the matter, the AGC would claims costs against them.

Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

情义之家新报告:外籍女佣仍面对强迫劳动问题

新加坡客工组织情义之家(HOME)与香港反人口走私组织Liberty Shared合作,于本月15日发布了一份报告,揭露在我国的外籍女佣面对三大问题:过度劳动、面对言语羞辱和薪资纠纷。 根据国际劳工组织定义,若以任何惩罚相威胁,强迫任何人从事违反其意愿的一切劳动或服务且不能随意离职,即是强迫劳动,其中包括限制劳工行动‘克扣工资、恐吓和心理压迫等等。 雇主为女佣申请工作准证,有责任确保女佣遵守准证条例,包括婚姻限制、强制医疗检查并确保女佣不涉及任何非法活动,雇主还得缴交五千元的保证金。 报告指出,正因为这些条例,反而鼓励雇主严厉地监控女佣的生活起居,有者甚至面对暴力、禁食、被辱骂和过度劳动的威胁。 对此报告呼吁人力部应把就业法令(EA)对基本劳动权利,例如工时、病假、加班等规定和保障,延伸保障外籍女佣群体。 女佣Indah被雇主克扣四万元工资 在报告发布会上,情义之家也引用数个真实面对强迫劳动的女佣个案。例如在本地工作十年的Indah(化名),被雇主克扣超过四万元工资,也不被允许使用手机,几乎七年没和家人联系。 另一女佣Ella每日工作17小时,每月只有一日休假,即使向雇主申诉手痛,仍被迫每日用手清洗雇主一家的衣物,还遭受言语霸凌。 Myaing则遭雇主长期言语霸凌、曾被禁食和被令睡在朱家阳台。 Rosa则每日工作19小时无休,她不满工作环境要求转换,却被雇主威胁甚至禁止他离开家门。Rosa试图爬窗户逃走结果摔断腿。但是住院期间还要上手铐。警员甚至没告知他雇主是否又被调查,还对她企图自杀的行为发出严厉警告。 在一些个案中,人力部裁定女佣投诉无效,坚持要把女佣送返代理公司,结果遭索讨费用才能返回自己的国家。…

降低公交路线对武吉班让居民影响 交通部调整繁忙时段路线

日前报导,民众对公共巴士服务做出的部分调整表达不满,为此陆路交通管理局将保留972号路线,把971E号的快捷路线在繁忙时段改为主干路线,并增加973号路线的巴士班次。 交通部高级政务部长徐芳达今早(8月13日)在脸书上公布以上消息,并指这是和武吉班让基层顾问连荣华及谢秉辉会面后,以降低巴士路线调整对居民带来的影响,而同交通部及陆交局达成的共识。 首先,原定将改道至纽顿地铁站的972号巴士路线,将会保持原有的往返武吉班让和乌节路的路线,改为另外推出972M服务路线,将部分巴士改道途经杜尼安路杜尼安路(Dunearn Road)和史各士路(Scotts Road)。 而在繁忙时段,当局也会增加972号及972M号巴士的服务趟次。 基于有关调整,候车时间将会延长,当局希望民众能够理解,并使用巴士服务应用程序规划行程,减短候车时间。 当局将现有的971E号的快捷巴士路线,在繁忙时段调整为主干路线,会途经柏堤路后,前往武吉知马高速公路和泛岛高速公路。 繁忙时段将会有所延长,即从原本的早上7时10分至50分、傍晚6时05分至6时30分,延长到早上6时30分至8时30分、傍晚6时05分至7时35分,这也将延长乘客通勤时间。 惟,971E的车程和车费都和700号路线相似,每趟巴士费将削减6角,沿途可停靠的巴士站会更多。 除了971E和972号路线在繁忙时段有所调整,973路线也会在相关时段,增加通往山景地铁站的班次。当局将会在两个月后,再次评估有关的调整。 30日起缩短路线及暂停服务…

何晶:不应下定论群聚拥挤 造成客工宿舍疫情扩散

总理夫人何晶又发表“伟论”!她在周六(5月30日)发文,指出我们不应武断地定论,客工宿舍“群聚、拥挤”的情况,就是造成客工宿舍疫情爆发的主因之一。 何晶也是淡马锡首席执行长。淡马锡控股在疫情爆发后,也与盛裕控股集团寻找并确认博览中心,设立为社区护理设施。 何晶在贴文中解释,例如豪华游轮即便乘客都有独立的客房,但还是造成了疫情爆发;疗养院也不拥挤,监狱同样把囚犯区隔开来,但这些地方都出现了疫情。 社区护理设施(CCF)分为红黄绿区。一些隔离设施的“黄区”仍转变为感染群。她指出,在经过调查后,当局发现这可能是因为他们习惯把食物集中在一起,集体进食的社交习惯。 何晶提及分享食物的社交习惯存在于不同文化,也指她也认为防疫应着重在防止飞沫传播。 故此,她认为在大家反对拥挤客工宿舍、在仓促落实应对疫情的改变前,应先理解病毒的传播途径,以及人们社交习惯的本能。 “听起来像精英口气?” 不过,也有网民留言对何晶这番言论嗤之以鼻,“听起来像精英居高临下的口气,客工群体对我国经济社会作出重大贡献,这种论述似乎严重缺乏同情心。” 网民认为,即便客工的习俗可能造成疫情传播,但暗示这就是主要原因是谬误的,也缺乏基于事实的证明,反而促成分化我者与他者(因文化等)的区别。 杨莉明曾指工地共用工具也可能是传播途径 事实上,人力部长杨莉明在4月25日接受《联合早报》直播访谈, 曾提及专家研究也得知客工之间感染不仅是宿舍问题,他们也有共同工作场所如建筑工地等,而工地中工友间共用工具也可能是传染渠道之一。

M’sia: DAP chief Lim Guan Eng to be charged in KL on Friday over alleged corruption regarding Penang tunnel project

KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA — Democratic Action Party (DAP) chief and former Finance…