Yap Keng Ho v PP: Revision of Proceedings & Witness Presence During Trial
Yap Keng Ho and two others were charged under s 19(1)(a) of the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act. Yap Keng Ho filed a criminal motion in the High Court of Singapore seeking a mistrial, alleging a violation of constitutional rights and impropriety due to the investigating officer's presence in court during the testimony of other witnesses. Choo Han Teck J dismissed the application on 8 November 2006, finding it premature as the trial was ongoing and no final decision had been made.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Criminal motion for mistrial due to witness presence during trial. The High Court dismissed the application, finding it premature.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yap Keng Ho | Applicant | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost | |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Application dismissed | Won | Jennifer Marie, Han Ming Kuang |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jennifer Marie | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Han Ming Kuang | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
4. Facts
- The applicant was charged under s 19(1)(a) of the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act.
- The applicant sought a mistrial due to the investigating officer's presence in court during witness testimony.
- The trial judge dismissed the application to abort the trial.
- The applicant alleged violations of constitutional rights and impropriety by the Attorney-General.
- The applicant claimed the trial was politically motivated and the judge was biased.
5. Formal Citations
- Yap Keng Ho v Public Prosecutor, Cr M 29/2006, [2006] SGHC 201
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Trial commenced | |
| Criminal motion filed for order declaring a mistrial | |
| Application to abort trial dismissed | |
| Hearing before Choo Han Teck J | |
| Application dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Revision of Proceedings
- Outcome: The court found no basis to invoke its revisionary jurisdiction to interrupt the trial.
- Category: Procedural
- Witness Remaining in Court Before Testifying
- Outcome: The court held that it has discretion to allow a witness to remain in court before testifying, especially if needed to assist the prosecutor, absent a valid objection and demonstration of prejudice.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Order declaring a mistrial
- Direct the State Council to convene a Constitutional Court
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence, Advocacy and the Litigation Process | N/A | Yes | Jeffrey Pinsler, Evidence, Advocacy and the Litigation Process (LexisNexis, 2nd Ed, 2003) at p 460 | N/A | Cited for the general rule that witnesses are required to remain outside the courtroom before giving evidence. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Public Entertainments and Meetings Act, (Cap 257, 2001 Rev Ed) s 19(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1999 Rev Ed) Arts 9 (1)–9(3), 12 and 14 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore Article 100 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Mistrial
- Revision of proceedings
- Witness presence in court
- Investigating officer
- Public Entertainments and Meetings Act
- Constitutional rights
15.2 Keywords
- Criminal
- Mistrial
- Witness
- Procedure
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Sentencing