Public Prosecutor v Oh Yew Lee: Trafficking Diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act

In Public Prosecutor v Oh Yew Lee, the High Court of Singapore convicted Oh Yew Lee on August 27, 2019, for possessing 25.68g of diamorphine for trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The primary legal issue was whether the accused intended to traffic the drugs. The court found the charge proven beyond a reasonable doubt, rejecting the accused's defense that he intended to return a portion of the drugs to the supplier. Consequently, the mandatory death penalty was imposed.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Conviction and mandatory death penalty imposed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Oh Yew Lee was convicted of possessing diamorphine for trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court found the charge proven beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to a mandatory death penalty.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyConviction and mandatory death penalty imposedWon
Nicholas Wuan Kin Lek of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Samuel Yap of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Tan Wee Hao of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Oh Yew LeeDefendantIndividualConviction and mandatory death penalty imposedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kannan RameshJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Nicholas Wuan Kin LekAttorney-General’s Chambers
Samuel YapAttorney-General’s Chambers
Tan Wee HaoAttorney-General’s Chambers
Chung Ting FaiChung Ting Fai & Co
Ng Wai Keong TimothyTimothy Ng LLC
Prasad s/o KarunakarnK Prasad & Co

4. Facts

  1. The accused was arrested on December 1, 2016, at a unit in Blk 21 Chai Chee Road.
  2. CNB officers raided a unit at Blk 31 Chai Chee Avenue, where the accused was staying.
  3. The officers recovered a reusable bag, a plastic bag, and a Samsung Galaxy Note 5 box containing granular substances.
  4. The substances were analyzed and found to contain 25.68g of diamorphine.
  5. The accused admitted to possessing the drugs and intending to sell them.
  6. The accused later disputed his statements, claiming he intended to return a portion of the drugs.
  7. The court found the accused's statements to be reliable and his account in court to be unconvincing.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Oh Yew Lee, Criminal Case No 8 of 2019, [2019] SGHC 197

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accused arrested at Blk 21 Chai Chee Road.
CNB officers raided the Unit at Blk 31 Chai Chee Avenue.
Drugs recovered from the Unit.
First contemporaneous statement recorded.
Cautioned statement recorded.
Investigative statement recorded.
Investigative statement recorded.
Investigative statement recorded.
Investigative statement recorded.
Investigative statement recorded.
Trial began.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Possession of controlled drug
    • Outcome: The court found that the accused was in possession of the drugs.
    • Category: Substantive
  2. Knowledge of the nature of the drug
    • Outcome: The court found that the accused knew the nature of the drug.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Possession of the drug for the purpose of trafficking
    • Outcome: The court found that the accused possessed the drug for the purpose of trafficking.
    • Category: Substantive
  4. Applicability of s 33B MDA
    • Outcome: The court found that s 33B MDA did not apply because the accused was not merely acting as a courier.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction
  2. Mandatory Death Penalty

9. Cause of Actions

  • Drug Trafficking

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Trafficking

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Public Prosecutor v Lim Koon Eng JeremiahHigh CourtYes[2019] SGHC 71SingaporeCited to note that Jeremiah was also arrested and convicted on a charge of drug trafficking, but that his case has no connection with the accused.
Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other mattersCourt of AppealYes[2014] 3 SLR 721SingaporeCited for the elements of the offence under s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) MDA.
Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2019] 1 SLR 1003SingaporeCited for the principle that a person who possesses drugs with the intention of returning them to the person from whom they had received the drugs does not have the requisite intention to traffic.
Public Prosecutor v Chum Tat Suan and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2015] 1 SLR 834SingaporeCited for the principle that the accused’s intention to sell the drugs that are the subject of the charge clearly takes him out of the scope of ss 33B(2)(a) and 33B(3)(a).
Zamri bin Mohd Tahir v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 1 SLR 724SingaporeCited for the principle that regardless of whether the accused had sold any of the drugs, his intention to do so was sufficient to take him out of the scope of ss 33B(2)(a) and 33B(3)(a).

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Misuse of Drugs Act (Chapter 185, 2008 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Chapter 185, 2008 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 17(c) MDASingapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 23 CPCSingapore
s 33B MDASingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Diamorphine
  • Trafficking
  • Misuse of Drugs Act
  • CNB
  • Baifen
  • Batu
  • Statements
  • Presumption of Trafficking

15.2 Keywords

  • Drug Trafficking
  • Diamorphine
  • Misuse of Drugs Act
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law
  • Death Penalty

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Statutory Interpretation