Dr Rajesh Jacob1, Ms Jerrie Tan2, Ms June Fong3, Dr Lynette Rama4, Dr Munidasa Winslow5
1Promises Healthcare, Singapore, 2Eugene Thuraisingam LLP, Singapore, 3Promises Healthcare, Singapore, 4Promises Healthcare, Singapore, 5Promises Healthcare, Singapore
Biography:
Jerrie Tan is an experienced litigator who has acted in high-profile commercial disputes and high stakes criminal matters.
Jerrie regularly acts for accused persons facing death penalty charges on a pro bono basis. She is one of the youngest female lawyers that have been appointed to the Lead Counsel panel under the Legal Assistance Scheme for Capital Offences (LASCO) administered by the Supreme Court of Singapore. She teaches the Advocacy course for law students undergoing the bar exam and is an Adjunct Fellow with the National University of Singapore, Centre for Pro Bono and Clinical Legal Education.
Abstract:
Singapore Misuse of Drugs Act adopts several presumptions – of possession, of knowledge and of trafficking. Trafficking controlled drugs above a particular quantum would attract the mandatory death sentence. Since 2012, a new section was added to the MDA to give judges the powers to impose a life sentence, not death. The accused persons had to demonstrate that they were merely a “courier” AND:
A. the Prosecution certifies that they “substantively assisted” the drug enforcement agency in disrupting drug trafficking activities inside or outside Singapore, OR
B. were suffering from such abnormality of mind so as to substantially impair their mental responsibility for their acts and omissions in relation to the offence.
The issue on mental disability not only features in the accused persons’ sentencing but can also affect their conviction. One significant area relates to the admissibility and/or weight to be placed on statements taken of accused persons that suffer from such disability.
While Singapore has an Appropriate Adult Scheme to support accused persons suffering from mental disability during their statement recording with law enforcement, some cases fall through the cracks. Such was the case for SKM, where I acted as defence counsel. SKM was not accompanied by an appropriate adult during his statement recording as his intellectual deficits were not apparent at first instance. His statements were found inadmissible after a lengthy “trial within a trial”. Further details about this case as well as the legal principles in drug trafficking cases will be discussed