Chin Siong Kian v PP: Drug Trafficking, Common Intention, and Amendment of Charges

In Chin Siong Kian v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal by Chin Siong Kian against his conviction and death sentence for drug trafficking. The High Court had convicted Chin Siong Kian and Wan Yue Kong under a joint charge of drug trafficking, after amending the charge at the close of the prosecution's case. The Court of Appeal dismissed Chin Siong Kian's appeal, finding that the prosecution had established a prima facie case of common intention to traffic drugs and that the trial judge did not err in allowing the amendment of the charge.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Chin Siong Kian was convicted of drug trafficking under a joint charge. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, addressing issues of common intention and charge amendment.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Chin Siong KianAppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLostHo Meng Hee, Eugene Lee
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyConviction and Sentence UpheldWonLow Cheong Yeow

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Chao Hick TinJustice of AppealYes
Tan Lee MengJudgeNo
L P TheanJustice of AppealNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Ho Meng HeeHo Meng Hee & Co
Eugene LeeChris Chong & CT Ho Partnership
Low Cheong YeowDeputy Public Prosecutor

4. Facts

  1. Appellant was charged with trafficking diamorphine by giving it to Wan Yue Kong.
  2. The High Court amended the charge to a joint charge against the appellant and Wan.
  3. CNB officers were surveilling Wan at Block 403, Clementi Avenue 1.
  4. Appellant arrived in a Malaysian-registered car and took out a red plastic bag.
  5. Wan received a phone call and went to the ground floor lift landing of Block 106.
  6. Appellant passed a red plastic bag to Wan at the lift landing.
  7. The red plastic bag contained not less than 122.9 grams of diamorphine.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Chin Siong Kian v Public Prosecutor, Cr App 21/1999, [2000] SGCA 8

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Appellant gave packets of diamorphine to Wan Yue Kong.
Appellant and Wan Yue Kong convicted and sentenced to death.
Appeal dismissed.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Complicity in Drug Trafficking
    • Outcome: The court found that the appellant acted in concert with Wan Yue Kong with the common intention to traffic drugs.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Common intention
      • Joint trafficking
  2. Amendment of Charge
    • Outcome: The court held that the trial judge did not err in allowing the prosecution to amend the charge at the close of the prosecution's case.
    • Category: Procedural
  3. Use of Co-Accused's Confession
    • Outcome: The court held that the confessions of Wan Yue Kong could be used to incriminate the appellant.
    • Category: Evidentiary
  4. Establishment of Prima Facie Case
    • Outcome: The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the appellant.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Appeal against conviction and sentence

9. Cause of Actions

  • Drug Trafficking

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Appeals

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Chin Seow Noi v PPHigh CourtYes[1994] 1 SLR 135SingaporeCited to support the use of a co-accused's confession to secure a conviction.
Lee Ngin Kiat v PPHigh CourtYes[1993] 2 SLR 511SingaporeCited to contend that the court must exercise its power to allow an amendment judiciously and must bear in mind the possibility of prejudice to the accused.
Lew Cheok Hin v RMagistrate's CourtYes[1956] MLJ 131MalaysiaCited for the principle that an amendment of a charge may be made at any stage of the trial.
PP v Jorge Enrique Pellon TellonCourt of AppealYes[1998] 4 MLJ 183MalaysiaCited for applying the principle in Lew Cheok Hin v R regarding the amendment of charges.
Haw Tua Tau v PPPrivy CouncilYes[1980-1981] SLR 73SingaporeCited for the test to be applied at the close of the prosecution's case.
Tan Siew Chay v PPHigh CourtYes[1993] 2 SLR 14SingaporeCited for summarizing the test in Haw Tua Tau v PP and distinguishing it from the test in Ang Sunny v PP.
Ang Sunny v PPHigh CourtYes[1965-1968] SLR 67SingaporeCited for the test applicable at the close of the trial regarding circumstantial evidence.
PP v Oh Laye KohHigh CourtYes[1994] 2 SLR 385SingaporeCited for affirming the distinction drawn in Tan Siew Chay regarding the test applicable at the close of the prosecution's case.
Tan Chuan Ten v PPHigh CourtYes[1997] 2 SLR 348SingaporeCited for the definition of a reasonable inference.
Foong Seow Ngui v PPHigh CourtYes[1995] 3 SLR 785SingaporeCited as a similar case to the present one.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185)Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224)Singapore
Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Ed)Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68)Singapore
s 5(1)(a) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 1998 Ed)Singapore
s 5(2) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 1998 Ed)Singapore
s 34 Penal Code (Cap 224)Singapore
s 30 Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Ed)Singapore
s 17 Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 1998 Ed)Singapore
s 163(1) Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Diamorphine
  • Drug trafficking
  • Common intention
  • Joint charge
  • Prima facie case
  • Confession
  • Circumstantial evidence

15.2 Keywords

  • Drug trafficking
  • Common intention
  • Amendment of charge
  • Singapore
  • Criminal law

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Evidence
  • Criminal Procedure

17. Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Criminal Procedure
  • Evidence Law