Roslan bin Bakar v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of Death Sentences Based on Mental Disability

Roslan bin Bakar and Pausi bin Jefridin appealed to the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 16 February 2022, seeking judicial review of their death sentences for drug trafficking, arguing that their execution would be unlawful due to alleged mental impairments. The High Court dismissed their application, and the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal, finding no merit in their arguments and deeming the application an abuse of process. The court emphasized that the appellants' mental capacity had been thoroughly examined in prior re-sentencing proceedings.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding judicial review of death sentences for drug trafficking, focusing on appellants' mental capacity and international law. Appeal dismissed.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Roslan bin BakarAppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Attorney-GeneralRespondentGovernment AgencyAppeal DismissedWon
Samuel Yap Zong En of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Shenna Tjoa Kai-En of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Ng Yong Kiat Francis of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Pausi bin JefridinAppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Judith PrakashJustice of the Court of AppealYes
Belinda Ang Saw EanJudge of the Appellate DivisionNo
Woo Bih LiJudge of the Appellate DivisionNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Yeo Yao Hui CharlesLF Violet Netto
Samuel Yap Zong EnAttorney-General’s Chambers
Shenna Tjoa Kai-EnAttorney-General’s Chambers
Ng Yong Kiat FrancisAttorney-General’s Chambers

4. Facts

  1. Appellants were sentenced to death for drug trafficking.
  2. Appellants previously appealed their sentences, which were affirmed by the Court of Appeal.
  3. Appellants filed an application for judicial review, arguing that their execution would be unlawful due to mental impairment.
  4. Appellants' IQs were assessed at 74 and 67 respectively.
  5. The High Court dismissed the application for judicial review.
  6. The Court of Appeal found that the appellants had no abnormality of mind that impaired their responsibility for their offenses.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Roslan bin Bakar and anor v Attorney-General, , [2022] SGCA 20
  2. Roslan bin Bakar, Civil Appeal No 6 of 2022, Civil Appeal No 6 of 2022
  3. HC/OS 139 of 2022, 139, HC/OS 139 of 2022
  4. CA/CCA 26/2018, 26/2018, CA/CCA 26/2018
  5. CA/CCA 59/2017, 59/2017, CA/CCA 59/2017
  6. CA/CCA 61/2017, 61/2017, CA/CCA 61/2017

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Court of Appeal affirmed the sentences of death in CA/CCA 59 of 2017.
Court of Appeal affirmed the sentences of death in CA/CCA 26 of 2018.
Court of Appeal dismissed application for leave to review earlier decisions in CA/CCA 59/2017 and CA/CCA 26/2018.
High Court dismissed OS 139.
Court of Appeal dismissed appeal against the High Court's decision in OS 139.
Hearing scheduled for CA/CA 61 of 2021.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Unconstitutionality of Executing Persons with Mental Disabilities
    • Outcome: The court held that executing the appellants would not be unconstitutional, as they were found to have no abnormality of mind that impaired their responsibility for their offenses.
    • Category: Constitutional
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Violation of Article 9(1) of the Constitution
      • Violation of Article 12(1) of the Constitution
    • Related Cases:
      • [2022] SGCA 18
      • CA/CCA 59 of 2017
      • CA/CCA 26 of 2018
  2. Applicability of Customary International Law
    • Outcome: The court held that customary international law is not directly applicable in Singapore if it is inconsistent with domestic law.
    • Category: Jurisdictional
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Incorporation of international law into Singapore domestic law
      • Conflict between international law and domestic law
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 2 SLR 1129
  3. Judicial Review of Death Sentences
    • Outcome: The court held that the appellants failed to establish a prima facie case of reasonable suspicion that carrying out the death sentences would be unlawful or unconstitutional.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Requirements for leave to commence judicial review proceedings
      • Arguable or prima facie case of reasonable suspicion

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Declaratory Judgment
  2. Prohibitory Order
  3. Stay of Execution

9. Cause of Actions

  • Judicial Review
  • Violation of Constitutional Rights

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Appeals
  • Judicial Review
  • Human Rights Law

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Roslan bin Bakar and others v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2022] SGCA 18SingaporeCited for the dismissal of the application to set aside capital sentences due to failure to satisfy s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code.
CA/CCA 59 of 2017Court of AppealYesCA/CCA 59 of 2017SingaporeCited as a prior decision affirming the death sentences for drug trafficking, which the current appeal attempts to challenge.
CA/CCA 26 of 2018Court of AppealYesCA/CCA 26 of 2018SingaporeCited as a prior decision affirming the death sentences for drug trafficking, which the current appeal attempts to challenge.
Pitman & Anr v State of Trinidad and TobagoPrivy CouncilYesUKPC 6Trinidad and TobagoCited for the principle that executing offenders suffering from substantial mental impairment would violate the constitutional prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.
Yong Vui Kong v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2015] 2 SLR 1129SingaporeCited for the principle that there are limits to the incorporation of customary international law as part of Singapore’s domestic law.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed)Singapore
Articles 9 and 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of SingaporeSingapore
Order 53, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Judicial Review
  • Death Penalty
  • Mental Impairment
  • Customary International Law
  • Constitutional Rights
  • Abnormality of Mind
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Prohibitory Order
  • Leave to Commence Judicial Review
  • Prima Facie Case

15.2 Keywords

  • Judicial Review
  • Death Penalty
  • Mental Disability
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law
  • Constitutional Law

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Judicial Review80
Capital Punishment75
Administrative Law70
Drug Trafficking65
Constitutional Law60
Criminal Procedure50
Criminal Law50
Prisoners Rights40
Statutory Interpretation30
Evidence20

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Constitutional Law
  • Human Rights Law
  • International Law
  • Judicial Review