PP v Rahmat & Zainal: Trafficking Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act at IKEA
In [2018] SGHC 01, the High Court of Singapore convicted Rahmat bin Karimon and Zainal bin Hamad of trafficking a Class A controlled drug under s 5(1)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. Rahmat was found to have delivered three packets containing not less than 53.64g of diamorphine to Zainal at IKEA, while Zainal was found to have possessed the drugs for the purpose of trafficking. The court imposed the mandatory minimum sentence of death on both defendants, as no certificate of substantive assistance was provided.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Mandatory minimum sentence of death imposed on both defendants.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Rahmat and Zainal were convicted of trafficking diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act, leading to the mandatory death sentence. The case involved drug delivery at IKEA.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Judgment for Prosecution | Won | Muhamad Imaduddien of Attorney-General’s Chambers Kenneth Kee of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Rahmat Bin Karimon | Defendant | Individual | Convicted | Lost | |
| ZAINAL BIN HAMAD | Defendant | Individual | Convicted | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Aedit Abdullah | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Muhamad Imaduddien | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Kenneth Kee | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Aw Wee Chong Nicholas | Clifford Law LLP |
| Prasad s/o Karunakarn | K Prasad & Co |
| Peter Keith Fernando | Leo Fernando |
| Jeeva Arul Joethy | Hilborne Law LLC |
4. Facts
- Rahmat transported a green bag containing three packets of granular/powdery substance into Singapore.
- The substance was later found to contain not less than 53.64g of diamorphine.
- Rahmat delivered the bag to Zainal at IKEA in exchange for S$8,000.
- Zainal placed the bag behind a stack of pallets in a warehouse at IKEA.
- CNB officers arrested Zainal and recovered the bag.
- Rahmat claimed he thought he was transporting medicinal products.
- Zainal claimed he thought he was receiving contraband cigarettes.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Rahmat bin Karimon and another, Criminal Case No 35 of 2017, [2018] SGHC 01
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Rahmat delivered three packets containing not less than 53.64g of diamorphine to Zainal at IKEA. | |
| Trial began. | |
| Agreed statement of facts tendered. | |
| Evidence presented regarding Zainal's actions at IKEA. | |
| Evidence presented regarding Zainal's colleague. | |
| Arguments heard. | |
| Arguments heard. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Trafficking in Controlled Drugs
- Outcome: The court found both defendants guilty of trafficking in controlled drugs.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Possession of controlled drug
- Knowledge of the nature of the drug
- Purpose of trafficking
- Presumption of Possession
- Outcome: The court found that the presumption of possession applied to both defendants and was not successfully rebutted.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Rebuttal of presumption
- Wilful blindness
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The court found that the presumption of knowledge applied to both defendants and was not successfully rebutted. The court also found that both defendants had actual knowledge and were wilfully blind.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Rebuttal of presumption
- Actual knowledge
- Wilful blindness
8. Remedies Sought
- Mandatory Minimum Sentence of Death
9. Cause of Actions
- Trafficking in a Class A Controlled Drug
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 | Applied to determine the presumptions of possession and knowledge of the nature of drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act. |
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 721 | Singapore | Outlines the elements of a charge for trafficking in a controlled drug under s 5(1)(a) of the MDA. |
| Tang Hai Liang v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] SGCA 38 | Singapore | Cited regarding the reliance on presumptions found in sections 17 and 18 of the Misuse of Drugs Act. |
| Mohd Halmi bin Hamid and another v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR(R) 548 | Singapore | Cited regarding the reliance on presumptions found in sections 17 and 18 of the Misuse of Drugs Act. |
| Harven a/l Segar v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 771 | Singapore | Discusses the threshold for establishing a relationship of trust in drug-related cases. |
| Public Prosecutor v Saravanan Chandaram | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 262 | Singapore | Clarifies the requirements for a credible relationship of trust in rebutting presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ilechukwu Uchechukwu Chukwudi | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] SGCA 33 | Singapore | Cited regarding the standard of proof for rebutting the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA. |
| Dinesh Pillai a/l K Raja Retnam v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2012] 2 SLR 903 | Singapore | Cited regarding the rebuttal of the presumption of knowledge of the nature of a controlled drug. |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 257 | Singapore | Cited regarding the assessment of an accused’s subjective knowledge in relation to the presumption of knowledge. |
| Tan Kiam Peng v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2008] 1 SLR(R) 1 | Singapore | Defines wilful blindness as a form of actual knowledge. |
| Sim Teck Ho v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2000] 2 SLR(R) 959 | Singapore | Establishes that possession encompasses the element of physical control as well as an element of knowledge. |
| Fun Seong Cheng v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR(R) 796 | Singapore | Cited regarding the element of physical control in proving possession. |
| Warner v Metropolitan Police Commissioner | House of Lords | Yes | [1969] 2 AC 256 | United Kingdom | Defines possession as knowledge of the existence of the thing itself and not its qualities. |
| Tan Ah Tee v PP | Unknown | Yes | [1979–1980] SLR(R) 311 | Singapore | Cited regarding the definition of possession. |
| Pham Duyen Quyen v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] SGCA 39 | Singapore | Cited regarding the definition of possession. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 5(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 267(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 143 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 144 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 145(1)(b) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 18(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 18(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 17 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 258 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Presumption of Possession
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Wilful Blindness
- Controlled Drug
- IKEA
- CNB
- Runner
- Money-lending
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- IKEA
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 70 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Offences | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking