Public Prosecutor v Gobi a/l Avedian: Illegal Importation of Diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act
The Public Prosecutor appealed against the High Court's decision to convict Gobi a/l Avedian on a reduced charge of attempting to import a Class C controlled drug. Gobi was originally charged with importing not less than 40.22g of diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The High Court found that Gobi had rebutted the presumption of knowledge of the nature of the drug. The Court of Appeal reversed the High Court's decision, finding that Gobi did not rebut the presumption of knowledge and was guilty on the original charge.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal reversed the High Court's decision, finding Gobi a/l Avedian guilty of importing diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Appellant | Government Agency | Appeal allowed | Won | Nicholas Wuan of Attorney-General’s Chambers Tan Zhongshan of Attorney-General’s Chambers Mohamed Faizal of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Gobi a/l Avedian | Respondent | Individual | Conviction on reduced charge set aside | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Judith Prakash | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Nicholas Wuan | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tan Zhongshan | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Mohamed Faizal | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Shashi Nathan | KhattarWong LLP |
| Jeremy Pereira | KhattarWong LLP |
| Tania Chin | KhattarWong LLP |
4. Facts
- The respondent was charged with importing not less than 40.22g of diamorphine.
- The respondent claimed he believed the drugs were 'chocolate drugs' mixed with chocolate and used in discos.
- The High Court found the respondent had rebutted the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA.
- The respondent admitted to delivering similar bundles of drugs into Singapore on eight or nine previous occasions.
- The respondent was paid RM500 for each packet delivered.
- The respondent sought advice from a friend, Jega, about the 'chocolate drugs'.
- The respondent's DNA was found on the tapes used to wrap the drugs.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Gobi a/l Avedian, Criminal Appeal No 20 of 2017, [2018] SGCA 72
- Public Prosecutor v Gobi a/l Avedian, , [2017] SGHC 145
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Respondent imported drugs into Singapore at Woodlands Checkpoint. | |
| Respondent was arrested. | |
| Trial began. | |
| Judge convicted the respondent on an amended charge. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Rebuttal of Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal held that the respondent did not rebut the presumption of knowledge of the nature of the drug under s 18(2) of the MDA.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2011] 4 SLR 1156
- [2017] 1 SLR 633
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction on the original charge
9. Cause of Actions
- Importation of Controlled Drugs
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obeng Comfort v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 633 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an accused person seeking to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA should be able to say what he thought or believed he was carrying. |
| Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2011] 4 SLR 1156 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that to rebut the presumption in s 18(2), the accused person must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he did not have knowledge of the nature of the controlled drug. |
| Khor Soon Lee v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 201 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that unique circumstances justifying a very high level of trust must be shown by the accused person before the Court is persuaded that the accused person is entitled to rely solely or mainly on the information given by the drugs supplier. |
| Public Prosecutor v Phuthita Somchit and another | High Court | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 719 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that unique circumstances justifying a very high level of trust must be shown by the accused person before the Court is persuaded that the accused person is entitled to rely solely or mainly on the information given by the drugs supplier. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 7 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 18(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 141(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 12 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Chocolate Drugs
- Controlled Drug
- Importation
- Rebuttal
15.2 Keywords
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Diamorphine
- Importation
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Criminal Law
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Importation of controlled drugs | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 50 |
| Evidence Law | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Statutory Interpretation