Gobi a/l Avedian v Attorney-General: Judicial Review & Equal Protection of Law
The plaintiffs, Gobi a/l Avedian and Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah, sought judicial review against the Attorney-General in the High Court of Singapore. The plaintiffs requested a prohibiting order to stay their executions, a mandatory order directing the Minister for Home Affairs and the Attorney-General to grant immunity to a former Singapore Prison Services officer, and the court to grant the same immunity. The High Court dismissed both Originating Summons No 111 of 2020 and Originating Summons No 181 of 2020, finding no basis for a breach of the plaintiffs’ rights or for the orders sought.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Applications dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Constitutional
1.4 Judgment Type
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court dismissed applications for judicial review and a stay of execution, finding no breach of constitutional rights or basis for immunity.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-General | Defendant | Government Agency | Judgment for Defendant | Won | Wong Woon Kwong of Attorney-General’s Chambers Pavithra Ramkumar of Attorney-General’s Chambers Seah Ee Wei of Attorney-General’s Chambers Ng Yong Kiat of Attorney-General’s Chambers Francis SC of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah | Plaintiff | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost | |
| Gobi a/l Avedian | Plaintiff | Individual | Application Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Valerie Thean | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Wong Woon Kwong | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Pavithra Ramkumar | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Seah Ee Wei | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ng Yong Kiat | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Francis SC | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ravi s/o Madasamy | Carson Law Chambers |
4. Facts
- The plaintiffs, Malaysian citizens, were convicted of drug offenses and sentenced to death.
- Mr. Gobi a/l Avedian was convicted on 25 October 2018 under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
- Mr. Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah was convicted on 8 May 2015 under s 5(1)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
- The plaintiffs sought a declaration that a statement made by the Attorney-General breached their right to a fair hearing.
- The plaintiffs sought a prohibiting order to stay their executions based on allegations about the execution protocol.
- The plaintiffs sought a mandatory order directing the Minister for Home Affairs and the Attorney-General to grant immunity to a former Singapore Prison Services officer.
- The Attorney-General affirmed that he would not be granting immunity from criminal prosecution to the former SPS officer.
5. Formal Citations
- Gobi a/l Avedian and another v Attorney-General, , [2020] SGHC 31
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Mr. Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah was convicted and sentenced to death by the High Court. | |
| Mr. Datchinamurthy a/l Kataiah's appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed. | |
| Mr. Gobi a/l Avedian was convicted on appeal and sentenced to death by the Court of Appeal. | |
| Lawyers for Liberty issued a press statement. | |
| Pre-trial conference held for OS 111/2020. | |
| OS 181/2020 was filed. | |
| Judgment delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Breach of Right to Fair Hearing
- Outcome: The court found no basis for claiming that the Attorney-General had threatened Mr. Ravi or breached the plaintiffs’ right to a fair hearing.
- Category: Constitutional
- Judicial Review of Execution Protocol
- Outcome: The court found that the plaintiffs did not present any admissible evidence to support their claim regarding the execution protocol.
- Category: Procedural
- Mandatory Order for Immunity
- Outcome: The court held that it could not compel the Minister or the Attorney-General to grant immunity and that there was no basis in law to impose a duty on the Minister to consider granting immunity.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Prohibiting Order
- Mandatory Order
- Declaration
9. Cause of Actions
- Judicial Review
- Breach of Constitutional Rights
10. Practice Areas
- Constitutional Law
- Judicial Review
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Mohd Ali v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 1222 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the burden is on the plaintiffs to satisfy the prima facie standard for leave to be granted under O 53 of the ROC. |
| OpenNet Pte Ltd v Info-communications Development Authority of Singapore | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 2 SLR 880 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that applications for leave to commence judicial review are not interlocutory proceedings. |
| Zheng Jianxing v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 1100 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a low threshold for applications does not mean that plaintiffs can come before the court with skimpy or vague arguments and evidence. |
| Teng Fuh Holdings Pte Ltd v Collector of Land Revenue | High Court | Yes | [2006] 3 SLR(R) 507 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a low threshold for applications does not mean that plaintiffs can come before the court with skimpy or vague arguments and evidence. |
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Mohd Ali v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 773 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court cannot compel the Minister or the AG not to prefer charges. |
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 s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Rev Ed) O 15 r 16 | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint) Art 9 | Singapore |
| Rules of Court O 53 | Singapore |
| Rules of Court O 41 r 5(1) | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322, 2007 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Constitution Art 35(8) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed) s 134 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Judicial Review
- Execution Protocol
- Immunity
- Fair Hearing
- Originating Summons
- Prima Facie Case
- Hearsay Evidence
15.2 Keywords
- Judicial Review
- Constitutional Law
- Execution
- Immunity
- Singapore
- Drug Offenses
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Constitutional Law | 80 |
| Administrative Law | 75 |
| Civil Procedure | 60 |
| Evidence Law | 50 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 40 |
| Criminal Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Constitutional Law
- Criminal Law
- Administrative Law
- Judicial Review