Public Prosecutor v Amir bin Jubir: Trafficking of Diamorphine

In Public Prosecutor v Amir bin Jubir, the High Court of Singapore heard the case against Amir bin Jubir, who was charged with trafficking in diamorphine. The court, presided over by Justice Woo Bih Li, found the defendant guilty, determining that the prosecution had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Amir bin Jubir knowingly possessed the diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Convicted

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Amir bin Jubir was charged with trafficking diamorphine. The High Court found him guilty, establishing his knowledge and intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyConvictionWon
Francis Ng of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Shawn Ho of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Amir bin JubirDefendantIndividualConvictedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Woo Bih LiJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Francis NgDeputy Public Prosecutors
Shawn HoDeputy Public Prosecutors
Johan bin IsmailJohan Ismail & Co
Ong Cheong WeiOng Cheong Wei & Co

4. Facts

  1. The Accused was found in possession of 76.07 grams of diamorphine.
  2. The Accused admitted to giving and receiving money in return for delivering packets.
  3. The Accused claimed he believed he was carrying sulphur, not heroin.
  4. The Accused made multiple trips to Johor Bahru to collect and deliver bundles.
  5. The Accused received payment for his delivery services.
  6. The Accused had notebooks with entries related to drug transactions.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Amir bin Jubir, CC 7/2008, [2008] SGHC 80

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accused trafficked in a controlled drug
CNB officers attended a briefing to look out for and arrest the Accused
The Vehicle was spotted entering the Woodlands Checkpoint
The Vehicle entered the car park of Block 543 to Block 547 Bedok North Street s3
Accused was arrested
Accused and the red paper bag were brought to the void deck of Block 543
Accused and the red paper bag and its contents were handed over to STF officers
Accused was escorted to one of the second floor staircase landings of Block 543
Loh was arrested
A statement was recorded from the Accused by Senior Staff Sergeant Ng Yeong Kok
Inspector Lim Wee Beng took over custody of the Accused and the red paper bag
The two bundles and the other contents were removed from the red paper bag in the presence of the Accused
The drug exhibits were removed from the safe and weighed in the presence of the Accused
The IO proceeded to record a cautioned statement from the Accused with the aid of an interpreter in the Malay language
Accused made eight long statements to the IO with the aid of an interpreter between 2 June 2007 and 6 June 2007
Accused made eight long statements to the IO with the aid of an interpreter between 2 June 2007 and 6 June 2007
The IO retrieved the drug exhibits from his safe
Ms Lim gave evidence that one lot of 60 packets contained not less than 37.77 grams of diamorphine
Ms Lim gave evidence that another lot of 60 packets contained not less than 38.30 grams of diamorphine
Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Trafficking of Controlled Drugs
    • Outcome: The court found the defendant guilty of trafficking diamorphine, establishing both possession and intent.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Possession of controlled drug for the purpose of trafficking
      • Knowledge of the nature of the drug
  2. Wilful Blindness
    • Outcome: The court determined that even if the defendant lacked actual knowledge, his wilful blindness to the nature of the drugs was sufficient for conviction.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to make sufficient inquiries
      • Suspicious circumstances

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction
  2. Sentencing according to the Misuse of Drugs Act

9. Cause of Actions

  • Trafficking in a Controlled Drug

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Tan Kiam Peng v PPCourt of AppealYes[2008] 1 SLR 1SingaporeCited for the principle of wilful blindness as being the legal equivalent of actual knowledge.
Ong Ah Chuan v Public ProsecutorN/AYes[1980-1981] SLR 48SingaporeCited regarding the inference of purpose for trafficking based on the quantity of drugs.
Cheng Heng Lee & Anor v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[1999] 1 SLR 504SingaporeCited with approval from Ong Ah Chuan v Public Prosecutor regarding the inference of purpose for trafficking.
Yeo Choon Huat v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[1998] 1 SLR 217SingaporeCited with approval from Ong Ah Chuan v Public Prosecutor regarding the inference of purpose for trafficking.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2001 Rev Ed)Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act, Chapter 185, section 5(1)(a)Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act, Chapter 185, section 5(2)Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act, Chapter 185, section 33Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act, section 18(2)Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act, section 17(c)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Diamorphine
  • Trafficking
  • Wilful Blindness
  • Controlled Drug
  • Maren
  • CNB
  • Sulphur
  • Street Jargon

15.2 Keywords

  • Diamorphine
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law
  • Wilful Blindness

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Misuse of Drugs Act95
Criminal Law90
Drug Trafficking90
Drug Offences80
Criminal Procedure60
Evidence Law50
Sentencing40
Theft10

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Offences
  • Trafficking