Muhammad bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor: Misuse of Drugs Act Trafficking
The Singapore Court of Appeal heard appeals by Muhammad bin Abdullah and Yu Ching Thai against their convictions and mandatory death sentences for drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Muhammad bin Abdullah was found in possession of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking, and Yu Ching Thai was convicted of delivering diamorphine to Muhammad bin Abdullah. The court dismissed both appeals, upholding the convictions and mandatory death sentences.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed. Mandatory death sentences upheld.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore Court of Appeal judgment on drug trafficking charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act, upholding convictions and mandatory death sentences.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MUHAMMAD BIN ABDULLAH | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Masih James Bahadur, Rajan Supramaniam, Chuang Wei Ping |
| YU CHING THAI | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Wong Siew Hong, Favian Kang Kok Boon, Joseph Tan Chin Aik |
| PUBLIC PROSECUTOR | Respondent | Government Agency | Judgment for Respondent | Won | Francis Ng, Marcus Foo |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Masih James Bahadur | James Masih & Company |
| Rajan Supramaniam | Hilborne Law LLC |
| Chuang Wei Ping | WP Chuang & Co |
| Wong Siew Hong | Eldan Law LLP |
| Favian Kang Kok Boon | Eldan Law LLP |
| Joseph Tan Chin Aik | Teo Keng Siang LLC |
| Francis Ng | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Marcus Foo | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Yu Ching Thai delivered four bundles of diamorphine to Muhammad bin Abdullah.
- Muhammad bin Abdullah was arrested at a block of flats in Woodlands.
- The bundles contained not less than 19.84 grams of diamorphine.
- Muhammad bin Abdullah claimed he intended to keep one of the bundles for his own consumption.
- Yu Ching Thai claimed he was ignorant of the death penalty.
- Muhammad bin Abdullah had a long history of drug abuse.
- Yu Ching Thai had delivered drugs to Muhammad bin Abdullah on three prior occasions.
5. Formal Citations
- Muhammad bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor and another appeal, , [2017] SGCA 04
- MUHAMMAD BIN ABDULLAH v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Criminal Appeal No 21 of 2015, Criminal Appeal No 21 of 2015
- YU CHING THAI v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Criminal Appeals No 22 of 2015, Criminal Appeals No 22 of 2015
- YU CHING THAI v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Criminal Motion No 53 of 2016, Criminal Motion No 53 of 2016
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Yu Ching Thai rode his motorcycle into Singapore with diamorphine concealed in a secret compartment. | |
| Yu Ching Thai handed over the bundles to Muhammad bin Abdullah in exchange for $9,800. | |
| Yu Ching Thai was arrested by Central Narcotics Bureau officers. | |
| Muhammad bin Abdullah stated to CNB officers that the remaining half pound is for his own consumption. | |
| The trial judge convicted the Appellants. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Rebuttal of Statutory Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The Appellants failed to rebut the presumption that they possessed the drugs for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Defence of own consumption
- Ignorance of the law
- Intention to Traffic
- Outcome: The court found that the Second Appellant intended to commit trafficking of the Bundles when he passed them to the First Appellant in exchange for S$9,800.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Knowledge of consequences
- Agreement to traffic non-capital amount
- Application for Certificate of Substantive Assistance
- Outcome: The court dismissed the Second Appellant's application for an order to compel the Public Prosecutor to direct the CNB to take a further statement.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Opportunity to provide information
- Timing of assistance
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against Conviction
- Appeal against Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Possession of Controlled Drugs for the Purpose of Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Muhammad bin Abdullah and another | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 231 | Singapore | The judgment refers to the Judge's Grounds of Decision in this case for the background facts. |
| Jusri bin Mohamed Hussain v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1996] 2 SLR(R) 706 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that there must be credible evidence of consumption rate and frequency of supply when raising a defence of consumption to rebut the presumption of trafficking. |
| Public Prosecutor v Kwek Seow Hock | High Court | Yes | [2009] SGHC 202 | Singapore | Cited for the factors considered in dealing with a defence of own consumption. |
| Kwek Seow Hock v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 157 | Singapore | Cited for upholding the High Court's findings of fact in relation to the factors considered in dealing with a defence of own consumption. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Farid bin Mohd Yusop | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 16 | Singapore | Cited in relation to the defence that the accused had an agreement with his supplier to deliver only a non-capital amount of drugs. |
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Mohd Ali v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 773 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the latest time to assist the CNB to avail oneself of the alternative sentencing regime under s 33B of the MDA would be during the trial. |
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Mohd Ali v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 1222 | Singapore | Cited for the object of s 33B of the MDA is not to send the message that society has gone soft on drug traffickers. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chum Tat Suan and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 1 SLR 834 | Singapore | Cited for the purpose of the amendments to the MDA was to give an accused person the incentive to come clean at the earliest opportunity. |
| Prabagaran a/l Srivijayan v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] SGCA 64 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the CNB cannot be expected to traverse the globe to investigate merely because an accused person mentions the names of different persons in different countries. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 5(1)(a) read with section 5(2) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33(1) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33B of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33B(2)(a) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33B(2)(b) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33B(4) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 17(c) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 18 of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug Trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Statutory Presumption
- Certificate of Substantive Assistance
- Courier
- Own Consumption
- Trafficking
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Appeal
- Death Penalty
- Diamorphine
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Sentencing
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Statutory Offences
- Misuse of Drugs Act