Wong Tiew Yong v PP: Auxiliary Police Officers' Conduct & Sentencing Appeal

Wong Tiew Yong and Karuppiah Subramaniam appealed to the High Court of Singapore against their conviction and sentence for violating Regulation 6(c) of the Auxiliary Police Regulations. They were found guilty by the District Judge of exhibiting conduct prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the Changi Airport Services Auxiliary Police Force. Yong Pung How CJ dismissed the appeals against conviction but allowed the appeals against the sentence, reducing it to a fine.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeals against sentence allowed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal by Wong Tiew Yong and Karuppiah Subramaniam against conviction and sentence for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. Conviction upheld, sentence reduced to fine.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyPartial LossPartial
Edwin San of Deputy Public Prosecutor
Wong Tiew YongAppellantIndividualAppeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowedPartial
Karuppiah SubramaniamAppellantIndividualAppeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowedPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Yong Pung HowChief JusticeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Edwin SanDeputy Public Prosecutor
Melanie HoHarry Elias Partnership
Subhas AnandanHarry Elias Partnership
K SivaratnamS Ratnam & Associates

4. Facts

  1. Wong and Subramaniam were convicted of conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline as members of the CIAS Auxiliary Police.
  2. Wong, as Director, and Subramaniam, as Inspector, instigated Kong Keng Shiong to absent himself from duty without leave.
  3. Kong accompanied Wong on three unofficial trips to China.
  4. Kong was instructed to falsely record his duties in his pocket book during the trips.
  5. The District Judge found Kong's evidence cogent and inherently plausible.
  6. The District Judge found that Wong and Subramaniam had abused their authority.
  7. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction but allowed the appeals against sentence, imposing a fine instead of imprisonment.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Wong Tiew Yong and Another v Public Prosecutor, MA 77/2003, 78/2003, [2003] SGHC 191

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Wong Tiew Yong made an unofficial trip to China with Kong Keng Shiong.
Wong Tiew Yong made an unofficial trip to China with Kong Keng Shiong from 30 June 1998 to 18 July 1998.
Wong Tiew Yong made an unofficial trip to China with Kong Keng Shiong from 30 July 1998 to 9 August 1998.
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Appeal Against Findings of Fact
    • Outcome: The court affirmed the principle that an appellate court would generally defer to the conclusion of the trial judge who had the opportunity to see and assess the credibility of the witnesses.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [1998] 2 SLR 704
  2. Application of 'Clang of the Prison Gates' Principle
    • Outcome: The court held that the benefit of the ‘clang of the prison gates’ principle must not be weighed in Wong’s favour because he had abused his position of eminence to commit the offences.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2000] 1 SLR 439
  3. Sentencing - Taking Account of Contributions of Appellant
    • Outcome: The court found that the district judge had considered Wong’s position, seniority and contributions when deciding on the sentence.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [1980] 2 MLJ 56

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Appeal against Conviction
  2. Appeal against Sentence

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Auxiliary Police Regulations

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Appeals

11. Industries

  • Security

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Davis v DPPUnknownYes[1954] AC 378England and WalesCited to define the class of ‘accomplices’.
PP v Azman bin AbdullahUnknownYes[1998] 2 SLR 704SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will generally defer to the trial judge's assessment of witnesses' credibility.
Khoo Kwoon Hain v PPUnknownYes[1995] 2 SLR 767SingaporeCited regarding the allocation of the burden of proof.
Harry Lee Wee v PPUnknownYes[1980] 2 MLJ 56MalaysiaCited to argue that significant contributions should be taken into account in sentencing.
Tan Sai Tiang v PPUnknownYes[2000] 1 SLR 439SingaporeCited to argue that the fact that this was his first offence should be a factor to be taken into account and for the ‘clang of the prison gates’ principle.
Chen Weixiong Jerriek v Public ProsecutorHigh Court of SingaporeYes[2003] SGHC 103SingaporeCited for the principle that the court retains the discretion to refuse to consider someone as a first time offender if he has been charged with multiple offences.
Public Prosecutor v Ong Teck HuatUnknownYes[1993] 2 SLR 645SingaporeCited as an analogy to affirm the sentence that was imposed by the district judge.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Auxiliary Police Regulations (Cap 235) Regulation 6(c)Singapore
Auxiliary Police Regulations (Cap 235) Regulation 10Singapore
Police Force Act (Cap. 235) Section 27(1)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Auxiliary Police Regulations
  • Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline
  • Instigation
  • Absent without leave
  • Pocket book entries
  • Clang of the prison gates principle
  • Mitigating factors
  • Aggravating factors

15.2 Keywords

  • Auxiliary Police
  • Conduct prejudicial
  • Appeal
  • Conviction
  • Sentence
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Sentencing90
Criminal Procedure90
Auxiliary Police Regulations80
Offences70
Administrative Law60

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure
  • Sentencing