Sim Yeow Kee & Loi Wenda v Public Prosecutor: Corrective Training, Mandatory Aftercare Scheme & Sentencing
Sim Yeow Kee and Loi Wenda appealed to the High Court of the Republic of Singapore against their sentences of corrective training for theft and drug-related offenses. The court, comprising Sundaresh Menon CJ, Chao Hick Tin JA, and See Kee Oon JC, considered the interaction between the corrective training regime and the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme. The court allowed Sim's appeal, replacing his corrective training sentence with a term of regular imprisonment, but dismissed Loi's appeal.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal in MA 9135/2015 allowed; appeal in MA 9140/2015 dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeals against corrective training sentences for theft and drug offenses. The court considers the impact of the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sim Yeow Kee | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | Irving Choh, Melissa Kor |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Partially Lost | Partial | Mohamed Faizal, Zhuo Wenzhao, Tan Wee Hao, Randeep Singh |
| Loi Wenda | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Irving Choh, Melissa Kor |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Chao Hick Tin | Judge of Appeal | No |
| See Kee Oon | Judicial Commissioner | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Irving Choh | Optimus Chambers LLC |
| Melissa Kor | Optimus Chambers LLC |
| Mohamed Faizal | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Zhuo Wenzhao | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Wee Hao | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Randeep Singh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Jerald Foo | Cavenagh Law LLP |
| Alina Chia | Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP |
4. Facts
- Sim stole two pairs of shorts from Royal Sporting House.
- Sim previously stole a bottle of perfume from Isetan.
- Sim consumed heroin in a male toilet at Tampines Mall.
- Loi abetted harassment of debtors on behalf of an unlicensed moneylender.
- Loi splashed red paint and diluted soya sauce on debtors' doors.
- Loi failed to report for urine tests while under a drug supervision order.
- Loi consumed methamphetamine.
5. Formal Citations
- Sim Yeow Kee v Public Prosecutor and another appeal, , [2016] SGHC 209
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Sim stole perfume from Isetan store. | |
| Loi abetted harassment of debtors. | |
| Sim convicted of two counts of theft-in-dwelling. | |
| Loi committed harassment on behalf of an unlicensed moneylender. | |
| Loi committed harassment on behalf of an unlicensed moneylender and failed to report for a urine test. | |
| Loi committed harassment on behalf of an unlicensed moneylender. | |
| Loi arrested at Lavender Mass Rapid Transit station. | |
| Sim arrested at Royal Sporting House for theft and admitted to consuming heroin. | |
| Sim pleaded guilty to three charges. | |
| Loi pleaded guilty to seven charges. | |
| Sim sentenced to seven years’ corrective training. | |
| Loi sentenced to five years’ corrective training and 12 strokes of the cane. | |
| Hearing of appeals. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- Manifest Excessiveness of Sentence
- Outcome: The court found Sim's sentence to be manifestly excessive and replaced it with a shorter term of imprisonment. The court found Loi's sentence was not manifestly excessive.
- Category: Substantive
- Interaction between Corrective Training and Mandatory Aftercare Scheme
- Outcome: The court considered how the introduction of the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme (MAS) should affect the sentencing approach towards corrective training, given that the MAS caters to regular prison inmates who have committed drug and/or property offenses and are regarded as having a higher risk of reoffending.
- Category: Substantive
- Proportionality in Sentencing
- Outcome: The court considered the role of proportionality in determining whether to impose corrective training instead of regular imprisonment.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Theft
- Drug Consumption
- Harassment
- Abetting Harassment
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Sentencing Guidelines
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Sim Yeow Kee | District Court | Yes | [2015] SGDC 245 | Singapore | The written decision of the District Judge in Sim's case, which the High Court is reviewing on appeal. |
| Public Prosecutor v Loi Wenda | District Court | Yes | [2015] SGDC 252 | Singapore | The written decision of the District Judge in Loi's case, which the High Court is reviewing on appeal. |
| R v Ledger | English Criminal Court of Appeal | Yes | [1950] 1 All ER 1104 | England | Cited for the Prison Commissioners' view that corrective training was qualitatively different from regular imprisonment. |
| Practice Direction (Corrective Training: Preventive Detention) | N/A | Yes | [1962] 1 WLR 402 | England | Cited for the view that corrective training was imposed to enable a general training to be given to a prisoner whom the court considers to be in need of it. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ng Kim Hong | High Court | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 245 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that time spent in remand is generally not taken into account by means of backdating the commencement date of an offender’s corrective training sentence. |
| Kua Hoon Chua v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [1995] 2 SLR(R) 1 | Singapore | Cited for the principal aim of corrective training is to turn an offender away from the easy allure of crime by putting him through a regime of discipline and by providing him with certain work skills. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mahat bin Salim | N/A | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR(R) 104 | Singapore | Cited for the court's opinion that corrective training was imposed to turn an offender away from the easy allure of crime by putting him through a regime of discipline and by teaching him certain work skills. |
| G Ravichander v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2002] 2 SLR(R) 665 | Singapore | Cited for the court's consideration that the principal aim of corrective training was to reform the prisoner who is sentenced to undergo that regime. |
| Duport Steels Ltd and others v Sirs and others | N/A | Yes | [1980] 1 WLR 142 | England | Cited for the maxim that Parliament makes, and un-makes, the law: the judge’s duty is to interpret and apply the law. |
| Public Prosecutor v Koh Wen Jie Boaz | N/A | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 334 | Singapore | Cited for the aim of reformative training is aimed at rehabilitating young offenders within a rigorous and structured environment. |
| Public Prosecutor v Saiful Rizam bin Assim and other appeals | N/A | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 495 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that even though rehabilitation is a valuable sentencing goal and, often, a paramount consideration in the context of young offenders, it is imperative that there remains a measure of proportionality in making reformative training orders so that these offenders are not unduly punished. |
| Public Prosecutor v Adith s/o Sarvotham | N/A | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 649 | Singapore | Cited for the same considerations prompted the High Court to dismiss the Prosecution’s appeal against sentence. |
| Tan Ngin Hai v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2001] 2 SLR(R) 152 | Singapore | Cited for the offender was sentenced to eight years’ preventive detention for stealing coins amounting to $1.10 from a van. |
| Tan Kay Beng v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 10 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of escalation could justify a longer imprisonment term being imposed on a persistent offender in light of his antecedents. |
| Public Prosecutor v Fernando Payagala Waduge Malitha Kumar | N/A | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 334 | Singapore | Cited for a subsequent sentence for an offender who has already committed the same sort of offence needs to be escalated in order to specifically deter him from committing further offences of that nature. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ng Bee Ling Lana | N/A | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR(R) 448 | Singapore | Cited for a subsequent sentence for an offender who has already committed the same sort of offence needs to be escalated in order to specifically deter him from committing further offences of that nature. |
| Mohamed Shouffee bin Adam v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 998 | Singapore | Cited for in respect of an offender who is convicted of and sentenced to imprisonment for two or more distinct offences at the same trial, the court should, in exceptional cases, consider whether more than two sentences should be ordered to run consecutively. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohamad Rizuan bin Ibrahim | District Court | Yes | [2015] SGDC 248 | Singapore | Cited for the court took into account the period of time spent by the offender in remand in calibrating the length of his corrective training sentence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Teo Ziqi | District Court | Yes | [2014] SGDC 291 | Singapore | Cited for the court took into account the period of time spent by the offender in remand in calibrating the length of his corrective training sentence. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 380 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 8(b)(ii) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33(4) | Singapore |
| Moneylenders Act (Cap 188, 2010 Rev Ed) s 28(1)(b) | Singapore |
| Moneylenders Act (Cap 188, 2010 Rev Ed) ss 28(2)(a) | Singapore |
| Moneylenders Act (Cap 188, 2010 Rev Ed) ss 28(3)(b)(i) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 109 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 304(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 304(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 304(3) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50I | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50I(1)(a)(i) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50S(1) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50T(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50U | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50U(1)(b) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50U(1)(c) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50U(1)(d) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50V(1) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50V(2)(b) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50V(3) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50X(1) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50X(4) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50Y(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50Y(3) | Singapore |
| Prisons Act (Cap 247, 2000 Rev Ed) s 50Y(3)(b) | Singapore |
| Criminal Justice Act 1948 (c 58) (UK) s 21(1) | England |
| Criminal Justice Act 1948 (c 58) (UK) s 21(2) | England |
| Criminal Justice Act 1967 (c 80) (UK) s 37(1) | England |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Corrective Training
- Mandatory Aftercare Scheme
- Release on Licence
- Remission
- Sentencing Guidelines
- Proportionality
- Recalcitrant Offender
- Habitual Offender
15.2 Keywords
- Corrective Training
- Mandatory Aftercare Scheme
- Sentencing
- Criminal Law
- Singapore
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Criminal Procedure
- Corrective Training
- Mandatory Aftercare Scheme
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Criminal Procedure
- Drug Offences
- Theft