Kwek Seow Hock v PP: Drug Trafficking, Misuse of Drugs Act, Defence of Consumption
Kwek Seow Hock appealed to the Court of Appeal of Singapore against his conviction in the High Court for trafficking in not less than 25.91g of diamorphine, a capital offense under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The High Court Judge rejected Kwek's defense that he intended to consume half of the drugs himself. The Court of Appeal, comprising Chan Sek Keong CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, and V K Rajah JA, dismissed the appeal, finding the defense of consumption unconvincing and upholding the original conviction.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Kwek Seow Hock appeals drug trafficking conviction. The court dismissed the appeal, finding the defense of consumption unconvincing.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Gordon Oh of Attorney-General’s Chambers Eugene Lee of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Kwek Seow Hock | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chan Sek Keong | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| V K Rajah | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Gordon Oh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Eugene Lee | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Eugene Thuraisingam | Stamford Law Corporation |
| Mervyn Cheong | Stamford Law Corporation |
| Raymond Lim | Raymond Lim & Co |
4. Facts
- Appellant was arrested for possession of 25.91g of diamorphine.
- Appellant admitted the drugs were for selling, except for a small amount for personal use.
- Appellant claimed he intended to retain half of the drugs for his own consumption.
- Appellant had S$2,409.15 in cash on him at the time of arrest.
- Appellant was to hand over S$6,650 to Jackie.
- Appellant received an average of one consignment of drugs from Ah Long every two months.
5. Formal Citations
- Kwek Seow Hock v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 19 of 2009, [2011] SGCA 12
- Public Prosecutor v Kwek Seow Hock, , [2009] SGHC 202
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant instructed to receive drugs from Ah Seng. | |
| Appellant stated in long statement that Ah Long instructed him to pass the drugs to someone. | |
| Appellant made admission in long statement that drugs were for selling. | |
| Long statement recorded from Appellant. | |
| Appellant arrested by CNB officers. | |
| Appellant found in possession of diamorphine. | |
| Further statement recorded from Appellant. | |
| Further statement recorded from Appellant. | |
| Criminal Case No 8 of 2008 in the High Court. | |
| High Court decision in [2009] SGHC 202. | |
| Criminal Appeal No 19 of 2009 filed. | |
| Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Rebuttal of Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court held that the Appellant failed to rebut the presumption of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Defence of consumption
- Adverse inference for failure to disclose defence in statements
- Adverse Inference
- Outcome: The court found that an adverse inference could be drawn against the Appellant for failing to state the defence of consumption in his long statements.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to mention material facts in statements
- Right against self-incrimination
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Kwek Seow Hock | High Court | Yes | [2009] SGHC 202 | Singapore | The appeal was against the judgment of the High Court judge in this case. |
| Lim Lye Huat Benny v Public Prosecution | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 689 | Singapore | Cited regarding drawing adverse inferences from failure to mention defense in long statement. |
| Chou Kooi Pang and another v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 205 | Singapore | Cited regarding failure to mention a material part of the defense at an earlier stage. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 17 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) s 121 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) s 122(6) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) s 123(1) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug trafficking
- Defence of consumption
- Adverse inference
- Long statement
- Cautioned statement
- Presumption of trafficking
15.2 Keywords
- Drug trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Appeal
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Adverse Inference
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 60 |
| Criminal Procedure | 50 |
| Evidence | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Evidence