Wong Sin Yee v Minister for Home Affairs: Judicial Review of Detention Order under Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act
In Wong Sin Yee's application for judicial review before the High Court of Singapore on 2007-09-19, Justice Tan Lee Meng addressed the legality of Wong's detention under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act. Wong challenged the Minister for Home Affairs' decision, alleging illegality, procedural impropriety, and irrationality. The court dismissed the application, finding no grounds to order Wong's release, emphasizing that the court's role was not to determine guilt but to assess the legality of the detention order.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed; no grounds for ordering release from detention.
1.3 Case Type
Judicial Review
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Judicial review of Wong Sin Yee's detention order under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act, challenging the Minister's discretion based on illegality, procedural impropriety, and irrationality.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WONG SIN YEE | Applicant | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tan Lee Meng | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jimmy Yim | Independent Practitioner |
| Darrell Low | Dennis Chua & Co |
| Dennis Chua | Dennis Chua & Co |
4. Facts
- The applicant was arrested on suspicion of consuming a controlled drug.
- A urine test confirmed the applicant had consumed a controlled drug.
- The Minister for Home Affairs issued a Detention Order for 12 months.
- The applicant was alleged to be involved in activities relating to or connected with trafficking of ketamine.
- The applicant was alleged to be a syndicate leader smuggling ketamine from Malaysia to Taiwan and from Malaysia to China via Hong Kong.
- The Advisory Committee heard the applicant’s case and the Detention Order was confirmed by the President.
- The Review Committee recommended extending the Detention Order, which the President approved.
5. Formal Citations
- Re Wong Sin Yee, OS 537/2007, [2007] SGHC 147
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Arrest made by Central Narcotics Bureau under Misuse of Drugs Act | |
| Detained pursuant to s 44(1) of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act | |
| Detained for another 24 hours by order of an Assistant Director of the CNB | |
| Detained for an additional 14 days by a Deputy Director of the CNB | |
| Detention Order issued by the Minister for Home Affairs | |
| Case referred to the Advisory Committee | |
| Applicant notified of Advisory Committee hearing | |
| Advisory Committee heard the applicant’s case | |
| Advisory Committee heard the applicant’s case | |
| Advisory Committee heard the applicant’s case | |
| Detention Order confirmed by the President | |
| Review Committee met to consider whether or not the applicant’s Detention Order should be extended | |
| President ordered that the applicant’s Detention Order be extended for another 12 months | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Administrative Detention
- Outcome: The court found no grounds to fault the exercise of discretion in issuing and extending the Detention Order based on illegality, procedural impropriety, or irrationality.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Illegality of detention
- Procedural impropriety in detention
- Irrationality of detention
- Related Cases:
- [1988] SLR 132
8. Remedies Sought
- Release from detention
9. Cause of Actions
- Judicial Review
10. Practice Areas
- Judicial Review
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chng Suan Tze v Minister of Home Affairs | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1988] SLR 132 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the scope of judicial review depends on whether the discretion granted to an authority depended on the establishment of an objective jurisdictional or precedent fact. |
| Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corp | King's Bench | Yes | [1948] 1 KB 223 | England and Wales | Cited to define irrationality in the Wednesbury sense. |
| Council of Civil Service Unions and others v Minister for the Civil Service | House of Lords | Yes | [1985] AC 374 | England and Wales | Cited to define irrationality in the Wednesbury sense. |
| Kamal Jit Singh v Minister for Home Affairs | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR 24 | Singapore | Cited to explain the true nature of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act and the requirements for detention under s 30. |
| PP v Taw Cheng Kong | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 2 SLR 410 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a criminal law statute generally operates within the territorial limits of the country enacting it. |
| R v Jameson | Queen's Bench | Yes | [1896] 2 QB 425 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a statute will be taken to apply only to the United Kingdom if there is nothing which points to a contrary intention. |
| Air-India v Wiggins | House of Lords | Yes | [1980] 1 WLR 815 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that an offence-creating section of an Act of Parliament was not intended to make conduct taking place outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Crown an offence triable in an English criminal court. |
| Shamm bin Sulong v Minister for Home Affairs & Anor | High Court | Yes | [1996] 2 SLR 736 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an illegality in an arrest under s 44 of the CLTPA does not render unlawful the Minister’s Detention Order under s 30 of the Act. |
| Karam Singh v Menteri Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri (Minister of Home Affairs), Malaysia | High Court | Yes | [1969] 2 MLJ 129 | Malaysia | Cited to define want of good faith in the context of depriving a citizen of liberty without trial. |
| Yeap Hock Seng @ Ah Seng v Minister for Home Affairs, Malaysia & Ors | High Court | Yes | [1975] 2 MLJ 279 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that the onus of proving mala fides on the part of the detaining authority is on the applicant. |
| Tan Boon Aun v Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri, Malaysia & Another | High Court | Yes | [1991] 2 MLJ 55 | Malaysia | Cited regarding the calculation of the allowable period of detention. |
| Najar Singh v Government of Malaysia & Anor | Privy Council | Yes | [1976] 1 MLJ 203 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that the word “heard” does not invariably connote an oral hearing. |
| Local Government Board v Arlidge | House of Lords | Yes | [1915] AC 120 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that the omission to hear a party orally was not contrary to natural justice. |
| Teo Soh Lung v Minister of Home Affairs | High Court | Yes | [1988] SLR 676 | Singapore | Cited regarding irrationality as a ground for judicial review. |
| Attorney-General v Thomas D’arcy Ryan | Privy Council | Yes | [1980] AC 718 | Unknown | Cited for the principle that a person having legal authority to determine a question affecting the right of individuals is bound to observe the principles of natural justice when exercising that authority. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Order 54 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2006 Rev Ed) |
| rule 13 of the Criminal Law (Advisory Committee) Rules (Cap 67, R1, 1971 Ed) |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 30 of Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 31 of Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 39 of Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 44(1) of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act | Singapore |
| s 44(2) of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act | Singapore |
| s 44(3) of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act | Singapore |
| s 47(3) of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act | Singapore |
| s 38(1) of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act | Singapore |
| s 25 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 8(b)(i) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Administrative detention
- Judicial review
- Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act
- Detention Order
- Illegality
- Procedural impropriety
- Irrationality
- Public safety
- Advisory Committee
- Review Committee
15.2 Keywords
- Administrative detention
- Judicial review
- Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act
- Singapore
- Detention Order
- Illegality
- Procedural impropriety
- Irrationality
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law | 85 |
| Administrative Detention | 80 |
| Administrative Law | 75 |
| Judicial Review | 70 |
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Administrative Law
- Criminal Law
- Preventive Detention
- Judicial Review