Public Prosecutor v Lee Kwee Siong: Drug Trafficking & Knowledge of Controlled Drugs
In Public Prosecutor v Lee Kwee Siong and Lee Siaw Foo, the High Court of Singapore convicted Lee Kwee Siong and Lee Siaw Foo on charges of drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Lee Kwee Siong was found in possession of diamorphine, and Lee Siaw Foo was alleged to have delivered the drugs. The court considered the presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act, the accused's knowledge of the drugs, and ultimately found both accused guilty, sentencing them to the mandatory death penalty.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Convicted on their charges and sentenced to suffer the mandatory death penalty.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Lee Kwee Siong and Lee Siaw Foo were convicted of drug trafficking. The court examined presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act and knowledge.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Conviction | Won | Hay Hung Chun, Karen Ang |
| Lee Kwee Siong | Defendant | Individual | Convicted | Lost | Ahmad Nizam Abbas, Jeeva Joethy Arul |
| Lee Siaw Foo | Defendant | Individual | Convicted | Lost | Cheong Aik Chye, Chong Thian Choy Gregory |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Hay Hung Chun | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Karen Ang | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Ahmad Nizam Abbas | Straits Law Practice LLC |
| Jeeva Joethy Arul | Bernard & Rada Law Corporation |
| Cheong Aik Chye | A C Cheong & Co |
| Chong Thian Choy Gregory | Loo & Chong |
4. Facts
- First accused was found in possession of 38.49 grams of diamorphine.
- Second accused handed two packets of granular substance to the first accused.
- The substance was later found to contain not less than 38.49 grams of diamorphine.
- The first accused claimed the drugs were for his own consumption.
- The second accused claimed he did not know the contents of the pink plastic bag.
- The second accused admitted to suspicions of illegal activity.
- The first accused had a history of drug consumption.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Lee Kwee Siong and Another, CC 10/2008, [2008] SGHC 117
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Drug transaction occurred at Block 181 Jelebu Road. | |
| Second accused passed a pink plastic bag to the first accused. | |
| First accused was arrested by CNB officers. | |
| Second accused and Yong were arrested by CNB officers. | |
| IO recorded a cautioned statement from the second accused. | |
| IO recorded an investigation statement from the second accused. | |
| IO recorded a cautioned statement from the first accused. | |
| IO recorded a further investigation statement from the second accused. | |
| IO recorded an investigation statement from the first accused. | |
| IO recorded a second further investigation statement from the second accused. | |
| IO recorded a third further investigation statement from the second accused. | |
| IO recorded a further investigation statement from the first accused. | |
| IO recorded a fourth further investigation statement from the second accused. | |
| Judgment Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Drug Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found both accused guilty of drug trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Possession of controlled drugs
- Possession for the purpose of trafficking
- Knowledge of the nature of the drug
- Rebuttal of Statutory Presumptions
- Outcome: The court found that the first accused failed to rebut the presumption of possession for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Sufficiency of evidence to rebut presumption of trafficking
- Burden of proof on accused
- Wilful Blindness
- Outcome: The court found that the second accused was wilfully blind to the presence of heroin in the pink plastic bag.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Suspicion warranting further investigation
- Deliberate decision to turn a blind eye
- Knowledge of Controlled Drugs
- Outcome: The court found that the second accused failed to rebut the presumption that he knew the nature of the drug.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Actual knowledge
- Wilful blindness
- Presumption of knowledge
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Mandatory Death Penalty
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wong Soon Lee v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1999] SGCA 42 | Singapore | Cited for the principles regarding the presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act and the burden of proof on the accused to rebut those presumptions. |
| Van Damme Johannes v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 1 SLR 246 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the onus is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, but the court must have regard to the presumptions provided to the prosecution under the Misuse of Drugs Act. |
| PP v Virat Kaewnern | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1993] 2 SLR 9 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a person having possession of a controlled drug is presumed to know the nature of it, and the burden is on the respondent to prove on a balance of probabilities that he did not know that it was a controlled drug that he had in his possession. |
| Khalid Bin Abdul Rashid v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] SGCA 64 | Singapore | Cited for the principles regarding rebutting the presumption of trafficking and establishing that a portion of the drugs in possession was for consumption and not for trafficking. |
| Jusri bin Mohamed Hussain v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [1996] 3 SLR 29 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a mere casual declaration by the accused would not suffice to rebut the presumption of trafficking. |
| Fung Choon Kay v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR 564 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a mere casual declaration by the accused would not suffice to rebut the presumption of trafficking. |
| Public Prosecutor v Dahalan bin Ladaewa | N/A | No | [1996] 1 SLR 783 | Singapore | Cited for the factor which would weigh in the mind of the court is the financial means or the ability of the accused to pay for the drugs. |
| Tan Kiam Peng v PP | N/A | Yes | [2008] 1 SLR 1 | Singapore | Cited for the ways in which knowledge of drugs for the purpose of the offence of trafficking may be established by the prosecution. |
| Manifest Shipping Co Ltd v Uni-Polaris Insurance Co Ltd | N/A | Yes | [2003] 1 AC 469 | N/A | Cited for the principle that suspicion is legally sufficient to ground a finding of wilful blindness provided the relevant factual matrix warrants such a finding and the accused deliberately decides to turn a blind eye. |
| Iwuchukwu Amara Tochi v PP | N/A | Yes | [2006] 2 SLR 503 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the question of whether or not the presumption is rebutted depends on the facts of each case and the fact that an accused failed to inspect what he was carrying may strongly disincline a Court from believing an absence of knowledge defence. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2004 Rev Ed) s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2004 Rev Ed) s 5(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 33 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 17(c) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 18(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 18(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 85, 1985 Rev Ed) s 122(6) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug Trafficking
- Wilful Blindness
- Presumption of Trafficking
- Controlled Drug
- CNB
- Jelebu Road
- Drug Consumption
- Pink Plastic Bag
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Evidence
- Presumption of Trafficking
- Wilful Blindness
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Statutory Interpretation
- Evidence Law
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Evidence
- Drug Trafficking Law