Public Prosecutor v Beh Chew Boo: Misuse of Drugs Act - Importation of Methamphetamine

In Public Prosecutor v Beh Chew Boo, the High Court of Singapore convicted Beh Chew Boo of importing not less than 499.97g of methamphetamine into Singapore, punishable under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court, presided over by Kannan Ramesh J, found that Beh Chew Boo failed to rebut the statutory presumptions of possession and knowledge of the drugs. The court sentenced Beh Chew Boo to the mandatory death penalty. The accused has appealed against the decision.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Convicted of the charge and passed the mandatory death penalty.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Beh Chew Boo was convicted of importing methamphetamine into Singapore under the Misuse of Drugs Act and sentenced to death. The court found that he failed to rebut the presumption of possession.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyJudgment for ProsecutionWon
Sunil Nair of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Samuel Yap of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Mark Jayaratnam of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Beh Chew BooDefendantIndividualConvictedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kannan RameshJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Sunil NairAttorney-General’s Chambers
Samuel YapAttorney-General’s Chambers
Mark JayaratnamAttorney-General’s Chambers
Wong Siew HongEldan Law LLP
Andy Yeo Kian WeeEldan Law LLP

4. Facts

  1. The accused, Beh Chew Boo, was charged with importing not less than 499.97g of methamphetamine into Singapore.
  2. On 26 October 2016, the accused entered Singapore from Malaysia via Woodlands Checkpoint on a motorcycle.
  3. A blue plastic bag containing drugs was found in the storage compartment of the motorcycle.
  4. The accused claimed he borrowed the motorcycle from a friend, Lew Shyang Huei.
  5. The Prosecution relied on the presumptions of possession and knowledge under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
  6. The accused's DNA was not found on the drug exhibits, but Lew's DNA was present.
  7. The accused claimed he was entering Singapore to meet Ah Huat and to spend time with Ting Swee Ling.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Beh Chew Boo, Criminal Case No 30 of 2019, [2020] SGHC 33

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accused entered Singapore from Malaysia via Woodlands Checkpoint on a motorcycle.
Trial began.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Trial.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Importation of Controlled Drugs
    • Outcome: The court found that the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumptions of possession and knowledge of the drugs, thus establishing the elements of the charge of importation.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Possession of drugs
      • Knowledge of the nature of drugs
      • Intentional importation of drugs
    • Related Cases:
      • [2019] 2 SLR 254
      • [2013] 3 SLR 1052
  2. Rebuttal of Statutory Presumptions
    • Outcome: The court found that the accused's testimony was not credible and that the alternative explanations for the presence of the drugs were implausible, leading to the conclusion that the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumptions.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Credibility of the accused
      • Plausibility of alternative explanations
    • Related Cases:
      • [2018] 1 SLR499
  3. Admissibility of Evidence
    • Outcome: The court allowed cross-examination on some messages but disallowed it on others, balancing probative value and prejudicial effect.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Similar fact evidence
      • Probative value vs. prejudicial effect
    • Related Cases:
      • [2017] 1 SLR 771
      • [2017] 3 SLR 66
      • [2003] SGCA 17
  4. Sentencing for Drug Offences
    • Outcome: The court found the accused to be a mere courier but imposed the mandatory death penalty due to the lack of a certificate of substantive assistance from the Public Prosecutor.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Mandatory death penalty
      • Alternative sentencing regime
      • Substantive assistance to CNB
      • Role of mere courier
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 1 SLR 834

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction
  2. Mandatory Death Penalty

9. Cause of Actions

  • Importation of Controlled Drugs

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Litigation
  • Drug Offences

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Harven a/l Segar v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[2017] 1 SLR 771SingaporeCited regarding the admissibility of incriminating messages found in the accused's mobile phone in considering whether he could rebut the presumptions as to possession and knowledge.
Public Prosecutor v Ranjit Singh Gill Menjeet Singh and anotherHigh CourtYes[2017] 3 SLR 66SingaporeCited regarding the admissibility of statements pertaining to previous transactions involving the accused persons.
Ng Beng Siang and others v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2003] SGCA 17SingaporeCited regarding the probative value of previous incidents of drug trafficking.
Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 2 SLR 254SingaporeCited for the elements of the charge of importation under s 7 MDA.
Public Prosecutor v Adnan bin KadirHigh CourtYes[2013] 3 SLR 1052SingaporeCited for the ordinary meaning of the word 'import' in s 7 MDA.
Gopu Jaya Raman v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2018] 1 SLR499SingaporeCited for the principle that evidence must be evaluated neutrally in determining whether the presumption has been rebutted.
Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Farid bin Mohd YusopCourt of AppealYes[2015] 3 SLR 16SingaporeCited regarding the application of illustration (g) to s 116 of the Evidence Act.
Public Prosecutor v Chum Tat Suan and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2015] 1 SLR 834SingaporeCited regarding the evidence that may be relied on at the sentencing stage in support of the courier argument.
Muhammad bin Kadar and another v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2011] 3 SLR 1205SingaporeCited regarding disclosure of investigative statements.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
ss 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
s 33B of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
s 21 of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 14 of the Evidence ActSingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Methamphetamine
  • Importation
  • Misuse of Drugs Act
  • Statutory Presumptions
  • Possession
  • Knowledge
  • Courier
  • Woodlands Checkpoint

15.2 Keywords

  • Drug Importation
  • Methamphetamine
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law
  • Misuse of Drugs Act

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Misuse of Drugs Act95
Criminal Law90
Evidence Law60
Evidence60
Admissibility of evidence50
Criminal Revision30

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Statutory Interpretation