Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor: Selective Prosecution & Constitutional Right to Equal Protection
In Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore dismissed Yong Vui Kong's criminal motion on April 4, 2012. Yong sought to reopen his conviction for a capital drug trafficking offence, arguing that the selective prosecution between him and his alleged boss, Chia Choon Leng, violated his right to equal protection under Article 12(1) of the Constitution. The court, presided over by Chan Sek Keong CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, and V K Rajah JA, found no breach of Yong's constitutional rights, emphasizing that the Attorney-General's decision to discontinue charges against Chia did not amount to an acquittal and was based on evidentiary difficulties.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Motion dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal dismissed Yong Vui Kong's motion, finding no breach of his constitutional right to equal protection in his drug trafficking case, despite his alleged boss receiving a discontinuance not amounting to acquittal.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Motion dismissed | Won | Teo Guan Siew of Attorney-General’s Chambers Mavis Chionh of Attorney-General’s Chambers Kok Shu-En of Attorney-General’s Chambers Kow Weijie Kelvin of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Yong Vui Kong | Applicant | Individual | Motion 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 |
|---|---|
| Teo Guan Siew | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Mavis Chionh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Kok Shu-En | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Kow Weijie Kelvin | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| M Ravi | L F Violet Netto |
4. Facts
- Yong was arrested for trafficking 47.27g of diamorphine.
- Yong identified Chia as the person who asked him to deliver drugs.
- Yong expressed fear for his safety and his family's safety if he testified against Chia.
- Chia was arrested and charged with instigating Yong to transport drugs.
- The Prosecution applied for a discontinuance not amounting to an acquittal (DNAQ) for the charges against Chia due to evidentiary difficulties.
- Chia was detained under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act.
- Yong argued that the selective prosecution between him and Chia violated his constitutional rights.
5. Formal Citations
- Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Motion No 2 of 2012, [2012] SGCA 23
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Yong Vui Kong arrested near Meritus Mandarin Hotel. | |
| Yong Vui Kong's police statement recorded. | |
| Yong Vui Kong shown photograph of Chia Choon Leng. | |
| Yong Vui Kong confirmed Chia Choon Leng's identity in colour photograph. | |
| Chia Choon Leng charged with instigating Yong to transport diamorphine. | |
| Capital charge against Chia Choon Leng amended. | |
| Yong's defence counsel made representations to reduce capital charge. | |
| Yong Vui Kong's trial in the High Court began. | |
| Trial Judge queried Prosecution about Chia Choon Leng. | |
| Trial Judge queried Prosecution about Chia Choon Leng again. | |
| Yong Vui Kong convicted of trafficking diamorphine and sentenced to death. | |
| Yong Vui Kong withdrew appeal against conviction and sentence. | |
| Yong Vui Kong's petition for clemency rejected. | |
| Yong Vui Kong applied for extension of time to appeal against sentence. | |
| Yong Vui Kong's appeal against High Court's decision dismissed. | |
| Yong Vui Kong applied to the President a second time for clemency. | |
| Mr Ravi wrote to Prosecution about Chia Choon Leng not being a witness. | |
| Prosecution replied to Mr Ravi regarding Chia Choon Leng. | |
| Mr Ravi wrote to Prosecution requesting particulars of drug syndicate. | |
| Court delivered judgment in Ramalingam Ravinthran v Attorney-General. | |
| Yong Vui Kong filed criminal motion. | |
| Prosecution replied to Mr Ravi regarding charges against Chia Choon Leng. | |
| Hearing of Yong Vui Kong's motion. | |
| Court of Appeal dismissed Yong Vui Kong's motion. |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Article 12(1) of the Constitution
- Outcome: The court found no breach of Article 12(1) of the Constitution.
- Category: Constitutional
- Sub-Issues:
- Selective prosecution
- Unequal treatment under the law
- Prosecutorial Discretion
- Outcome: The court held that the Attorney-General's prosecutorial discretion was not improperly exercised.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Abuse of power
- Unbiased consideration of offenders
- Abetment under the Misuse of Drugs Act
- Outcome: The court determined that Chia's alleged instigation of Yong in Johor Baru did not constitute an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Extra-territorial effect of statute
- Instigation outside Singapore
8. Remedies Sought
- Quashing of conviction
- Remittal to Attorney-General
- Amendment of capital charge
- Non-capital sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Breach of Constitutional Rights
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Constitutional Litigation
11. Industries
- Law Enforcement
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ramalingam Ravinthran v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] SGCA 2 | Singapore | Established principles governing prosecutorial discretion under Art 35(8) and the right to equal protection under Art 12(1) of the Constitution. |
| Law Society of Singapore v Tan Guat Neo Phyllis | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 2 SLR(R) 239 | Singapore | Approved in Ramalingam for the principle that the exercise of prosecutorial discretion is subject to judicial review on grounds of abuse of power and breach of constitutional rights. |
| Teh Cheng Poh v Public Prosecutor | Privy Council | Yes | [1979] 1 MLJ 50 | Malaysia | Applied in Ramalingam for the principle that Article 12(1) entails that the Prosecution must give unbiased consideration to every offender and must avoid taking into account any irrelevant considerations. |
| Sim Min Teck v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1987] SLR(R) 65 | Singapore | Court of Appeal decision which dealt with allegations of breach of Art 12(1) of the Constitution vis-à-vis prosecutorial decisions made in relation to two co-offenders involved in the same criminal enterprise. |
| Thiruselvam s/o Nagaratnam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2001] 1 SLR(R) 362 | Singapore | Court of Appeal decision which dealt with allegations of breach of Art 12(1) of the Constitution vis-à-vis prosecutorial decisions made in relation to two co-offenders involved in the same criminal enterprise. |
| Public Prosecutor v Yong Vui Kong | High Court | Yes | [2009] SGHC 4 | Singapore | Yong Vui Kong's initial conviction of trafficking in 47.27g of diamorphine and was sentenced to suffer death pursuant to s 33 of the MDA read with the Second Schedule thereto. |
| Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 2 SLR 192 | Singapore | Court granted Yong's application for an extension of time to pursue an appeal on the ground that the mandatory death penalty was unconstitutional. |
| Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 3 SLR 489 | Singapore | Court dismissed Yong's constitutional challenge to the mandatory death penalty. |
| Yong Vui Kong v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2011] 1 SLR 1 | Singapore | High Court dismissed Yong's application for leave to bring judicial review proceedings in respect of the integrity of the clemency process. |
| Yong Vui Kong v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 1189 | Singapore | Court of Appeal dismissed Yong's appeal against the High Court's decision. |
| Public Prosecutor v Pong Tek Yin | High Court | Yes | [1990] 1 SLR(R) 543 | Singapore | Cited for the rule of statutory interpretation that a domestic statute has no extra-territorial effect unless it is expressed to have such effect. |
| Public Prosecutor v Taw Cheng Kong | High Court | Yes | [1998] 2 SLR(R) 489 | Singapore | Cited for the rule of statutory interpretation that a domestic statute has no extra-territorial effect unless it is expressed to have such effect. |
| Dorai Manickam alias Davis v Rex | Straits Settlements Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1936] MLJ 209 | Singapore | Cited to differentiate between an order of mere “discharge” and one of “acquittal” under the Criminal Procedure Code. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (Cap 67, 2000 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (Act 15 of 2010) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 (Act 5 of 1973) | Singapore |
| Deleterious Drugs Ordinance (No 124) | Singapore |
| Deleterious Drugs Amendment Ordinance 1925 (No 6 of 1925) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Selective prosecution
- Equal protection
- Prosecutorial discretion
- Discontinuance not amounting to an acquittal
- Mandatory death penalty
- Abetment
- Drug trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Constitution
- Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act
15.2 Keywords
- Selective prosecution
- Equal protection
- Drug trafficking
- Singapore
- Constitutional law
- Criminal law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 90 |
| Drug Crimes | 85 |
| Constitutional Law | 80 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
| Criminal Revision | 60 |
| Administrative Law | 60 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Constitutional Law
- Criminal Law
- Human Rights
- Criminal Procedure