Public Prosecutor v. Chong Hoon Cheong: Trafficking Charge under Misuse of Drugs Act
In [2021] SGHC 211, the High Court of Singapore found Chong Hoon Cheong guilty of possessing not less than 25.01g of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking, an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The Prosecution, represented by Mark Tay and Teo Siu Ming, argued that Chong possessed the drugs for trafficking, while the Defence, represented by Chin Li Wen Tania, Laura Yeo, and Lau Kah Hee, claimed the drugs were for his own consumption. Justice Vincent Hoong rejected the consumption defense and imposed the mandatory death penalty.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Guilty of Trafficking Charge; Mandatory Death Penalty Imposed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Chong Hoon Cheong faced a trafficking charge under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court found him guilty, rejecting his consumption defense.
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 | Teo Siu Ming of Attorney-General’s Chambers Mark Tay of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Chong Hoon Cheong | Defendant | Individual | Convicted of Trafficking Charge | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Vincent Hoong | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Teo Siu Ming | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Mark Tay | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lau Kah Hee | BC Lim & Lau LLC |
| Chin Li Wen Tania | Withers KhattarWong LLP |
| Laura Yeo | Withers KhattarWong LLP |
4. Facts
- Accused claimed trial to one charge of having in his possession not less than 25.01g of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking.
- Exhibits A1A, A2, A4A and D1A2 were recovered from the accused’s rented room.
- Accused knew that the drug contained in those exhibits was heroin.
- Accused's defence is that 10.93g of heroin was for trafficking and 14.08g was for his own consumption.
- CNB officers raided the property and arrested the accused on 8 December 2015.
- Accused agreed to work for a Malaysian, known to the accused only as “Ah Kiat”.
- Accused was to repack heroin into smaller sachets and deliver these sachets to another location for collection.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Chong Hoon Cheong, Criminal Case No 35 of 2019, [2021] SGHC 211
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Accused arrested by CNB officers | |
| First Contemporaneous Statement recorded | |
| Second Contemporaneous Statement recorded | |
| Cautioned Statement recorded | |
| First Long Statement recorded | |
| Second Long Statement recorded | |
| Third Long Statement recorded | |
| Fourth Long Statement recorded | |
| Trial began | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Trafficking of Diamorphine
- Outcome: The court found the accused guilty of trafficking diamorphine, rejecting his defense that the drugs were for personal consumption.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2014] 3 SLR 721
- Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court applied the presumption of trafficking under s 17(c) of the MDA, as the accused possessed more than 2 grams of diamorphine.
- Category: Substantive
- Consumption Defence
- Outcome: The court rejected the accused's consumption defense, finding it not credible based on inconsistencies in his statements and evidence.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2017] 1 SLR 427
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Death Penalty
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Drug Trafficking
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 721 | Singapore | Cited for the elements of the offence of trafficking under s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the MDA. |
| Public Prosecutor v GCK and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 486 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Lee Ngin Kiat v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [1993] 1 SLR(R) 695 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the actus reus and mens rea of trafficking are deemed to be present when the presumption in s 17(c) of the MDA is raised. |
| Ali bin Mohamad Bahashwan v Public Prosecutor and other appeals | Unknown | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 610 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the actus reus and mens rea of trafficking are deemed to be present when the presumption in s 17(c) of the MDA is raised. |
| Public Prosecutor v Wan Yue Kong and others | Unknown | Yes | [1995] 1 SLR(R) 83 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the onus shifts to the accused to prove on the balance of probabilities that his possession of Exhibit D1A2 was not for the purpose of trafficking. |
| Muhammad bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 427 | Singapore | Cited for factors to consider when dealing with a defence of consumption. |
| Kwek Seow Hock v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 157 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a court is entitled to disbelieve the evidence of a witness even without having to draw an adverse inference against him for omitting to mention earlier some material fact which, if disclosed, would be in his favor. |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 257 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a court is entitled to disbelieve the evidence of a witness even without having to draw an adverse inference against him for omitting to mention earlier some material fact which, if disclosed, would be in his favor. |
| Muhammad Nabill bin Mohd Fuad v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 984 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an adverse inference ought not to be drawn if the failure to produce evidence is reasonably attributable to reasons other than the merits of the case. |
| Sudha Natrajan v The Bank of East Asia Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 141 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an adverse inference ought not to be drawn if the failure to produce evidence is reasonably attributable to reasons other than the merits of the case. |
| Zainudin bin Mohamed v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 449 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish the accused's role from that of a mere courier. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 5(1)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 17(c) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 23 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Trafficking
- Consumption Defence
- CNB
- MDA
- Ah Kiat
- Repacking
- Drug Intoxication
- Drug Withdrawal
- HSA
- Bai Fen
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Consumption Defence
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Sentencing | 60 |
| Evidence | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Statutory Interpretation