Wong Yuh Lan v Public Prosecutor: Extradition, Conspiracy to Defraud the US, Export Regulations

1. Case Overview

2. Parties and Outcomes

3. Judges

4. Counsels

4. Facts

1. The US sought extradition of the Applicants for conspiracy to defraud the US and violating export regulations.
2. Wong and Nam were accused of being part of a network exporting radio frequency modules from the US to Iran via Singapore.
3. Seng and Hia were accused of conspiring to export antennae classified as 'defense articles' without a license.
4. The US alleged that the Applicants made false declarations to circumvent export restrictions.
5. The acts in question took place before 1 February 2008, when s 108B of the Penal Code came into force.
6. The US alleged that Corezing caused Company A to make false representations to the US government.
7. The US alleged that Seng and Hia knew that the 2010-1 antennae and 3120 antennae required a license for export.

5. Formal Citations

1. Wong Yuh Lan v Public Prosecutor and other matters, Criminal Motions No 63, 65, 66 and 67 of 2012, [2012] SGHC 161
2. Wong Yuh Lan v Public Prosecutor and other matters, Criminal Motion Nos 76, 78, 79 and 99 of 2012, [2013] SGCA 40

6. Timeline

7. Legal Issues

1. Extradition
   • Outcome: The court allowed the applications of Wong and Nam, finding that their alleged conduct would not constitute a criminal offense in Singapore, and dismissed the applications of Seng and Hia, as their actions could be considered a crime in Singapore.
   • Category: Substantive
   • Sub-Issues:
     • Fugitive Status
     • Double Criminality
     • Extraditable Offence
   • Related Cases:
     • [1992] SGHC 72
     • [1990] 1 WLR 277
     • [2002] 1 AC 556
     • [1991] 2 SLR(R) 180
     • 1 QB 509
     • [1990] 1 AC 579
     • [1984] 1 AC 606
     • [1984] 1 WLR 867
     • [1999] 1 AC 54
     • [2008] 1 AC 920
     • [1998] 2 SLR(R) 489
     • [1991] 1 AC 225
     • [2012] SGCA 23
     • [1972] 1 QB 1
     • [1993] 2 SLR(R) 848
     • [1990] 1 AC 500
     • [1998] 2 WLR 618
2. Conspiracy to Defraud
   • Outcome: The court found that the alleged conspiracy to defraud the US by Wong and Nam did not constitute a criminal offense in Singapore, as it related to the breach of US trade sanctions not adopted in Singapore.
   • Category: Substantive
   • Sub-Issues:
     • Breach of US Trade Sanctions
     • False Declarations
3. Double Criminality
   • Outcome: The court adopted the 'conduct test' for determining double criminality, requiring the conduct alleged against the fugitive to be criminal had it been committed within the jurisdiction of the requested state.
   • Category: Substantive
   • Sub-Issues:
     • Ingredients Test
     • Conduct Test
   • Related Cases:
     • 1 QB 509
     • [1990] 1 AC 579
     • [1984] 1 AC 606
     • [1984] 1 WLR 867
     • [1999] 1 AC 54
     • [2008] 1 AC 920
4. Extraterritoriality
   • Outcome: The court adhered to a strict territorial approach for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction, requiring acts of abetment to have taken place in Singapore prior to the enactment of s 108B of the Penal Code.
   • Category: Jurisdictional
   • Sub-Issues:
     • Territorial Principle
     • Effects Doctrine
   • Related Cases:
     • [1998] 2 SLR(R) 489
     • [1991] 1 AC 225
     • [2012] SGCA 23

8. Remedies Sought

1. Order for Review of Detention
2. Release from Custody

9. Cause of Actions

• Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
• Violation of Export Regulations
• Abetment by Conspiracy to Cheat

10. Practice Areas

• Criminal Litigation
• Extradition Proceedings

11. Industries

• Telecommunications
• Defense

12. Cited Cases

13. Applicable Rules

14. Applicable Statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

• Extradition
• Criminal Law
• International Law
• Sanctions
• Export Control