Abdul Aziz v Public Prosecutor: Corruption, Prevention of Corruption Act
In [2022] SGHC 101, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore heard appeals from Abdul Aziz bin Mohamed Hanib, Yeo Siew Liang James, and Chow Tuck Keong Benjamin against their convictions in a joint trial. The appellants were convicted for their roles in a corrupt arrangement to bribe Agus Ramdhany Machjumi, the Indonesian Embassy Labour Attaché, related to the imposition of a $6,000 performance bond requirement for employers of Indonesian foreign domestic workers. Aziz and Benjamin also appealed against their sentences. The court dismissed all appeals against conviction and sentence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore court case involving Abdul Aziz and others convicted of corruption for bribing an Indonesian official. Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Eric Hu of Attorney-General’s Chambers Alan Loh of Attorney-General’s Chambers Jasmin Kaur of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Abdul Aziz bin Mohamed Hanib | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| Yeo Siew Liang James | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| Chow Tuck Keong Benjamin | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Vincent Hoong | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Eric Hu | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Alan Loh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Jasmin Kaur | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Andre Darius Jumabhoy | Peter Low & Choo LLC |
| Wong Thai Yong | Peter Low & Choo LLC |
| Darryl Chew | Chia Wong Chambers LLC |
| Chia Boon Teck | Chia Wong Chambers LLC |
4. Facts
- The Indonesian Embassy imposed a $6,000 performance bond on employers of Indonesian foreign domestic workers.
- Agus, the Indonesian Embassy Labour Attaché, oversaw the accreditation of insurers for the performance bond.
- Aziz was tasked by Agus to find insurance agents willing to give bribes for accreditation.
- Aziz contacted Samad, who introduced Benjamin, who then introduced James to Aziz.
- James agreed to share his commission with Agus, Aziz, Samad, and Benjamin in exchange for accreditation.
- AIG and Liberty were accredited, and James paid out commissions as agreed.
- Aziz also solicited a similar arrangement from Tokio Marine, but it did not materialize.
5. Formal Citations
- Abdul Aziz bin Mohamed Hanib v Public Prosecutor and other appeals, , [2022] SGHC 101
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Indonesian Embassy in Singapore imposed a $6,000 performance bond requirement on employers of Indonesian foreign domestic workers. | |
| Investigations against the appellants began. | |
| Aziz's 1st statement recorded. | |
| Aziz's 2nd statement recorded. | |
| James's 1st statement recorded. | |
| James's 2nd statement recorded. | |
| James's 3rd statement recorded. | |
| Benjamin's 1st statement recorded. | |
| Aziz's 3rd statement recorded. | |
| James's 4th statement recorded. | |
| James's 5th statement recorded. | |
| Aziz's 4th statement recorded. | |
| James's 6th statement recorded. | |
| Benjamin's 2nd statement recorded. | |
| Benjamin's 3rd statement recorded. | |
| James's 7th statement recorded. | |
| Magistrate’s Appeals Nos 9184, 9185 and 9186 of 2021 filed. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Admissibility of Confessions
- Outcome: The court found that the statements were admissible as they were made voluntarily and their probative value outweighed their prejudicial effect.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Voluntariness of statement
- Oppression
- Inducement
- Threat
- Prejudicial effect outweighing probative value
- Use of Co-Accused's Confession
- Outcome: The court held that the pre-amendment version of s 258(5) of the CPC did not permit the use of co-accused's confessions against each other in this case.
- Category: Procedural
- Elements of Corruption Offence
- Outcome: The court found that all elements of the corruption offences were made out against the appellants.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Giving or receiving gratification
- Inducement or reward
- Objective corrupt element
- Guilty knowledge
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Corruption
- Bribery
10. Practice Areas
- Corruption
- Bribery
11. Industries
- Insurance
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PP v Chow Tuck Keong Benjamin and others | District Court | Yes | [2021] SGDC 232 | Singapore | Cited as the grounds of decision of the District Judge in the court below. |
| Sulaiman bin Jumari v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 557 | Singapore | Cited for the summary of the inquiry that the court should undertake when faced with a dispute as to the admissibility of a statement. |
| Chai Chien Wei Kelvin v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 619 | Singapore | Cited for the test for voluntariness under s 258(3) of the CPC. |
| Tey Tsun Hang v PP | High Court | Yes | [2014] 2 SLR 1189 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of oppression in the context of procuring statements from an accused person. |
| Seow Choon Meng v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 2 SLR(R) 338 | Singapore | Cited for observations on oppression in the context of interrogation methods. |
| Yeo See How v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1996] 2 SLR(R) 277 | Singapore | Cited to support the point that some discomfort is to be expected during investigations. |
| Sim Ah Cheoh and others v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1991] 1 SLR(R) 961 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that questioning by investigators that is too vigorous or prolonged may cross the threshold of oppression. |
| Muhammad bin Kadar v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 1205 | Singapore | Cited for the discussion of the common law discretion to exclude evidence where its prejudicial value outweighs its probative value. |
| Taw Cheng Kong v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR(R) 78 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish the facts from the present case regarding the recording of confessions. |
| Ramesh a/l Perumal v PP and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 1003 | Singapore | Cited for the interpretation of the phrase 'the same offence' in the pre-amendment s 258(5) of the CPC. |
| PP v Leng Kah Poh | High Court | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 1264 | Singapore | Cited for the four legal elements of an offence under s 5 of the PCA. |
| Kwang Boon Keong Peter v PP | High Court | Yes | [1998] 2 SLR(R) 211 | Singapore | Cited for the four legal elements of an offence under s 5 of the PCA. |
| PP v Tan Kok Ming Michael and other appeals | High Court | Yes | [2019] 5 SLR 926 | Singapore | Cited for the substantial degree of overlap between s 5 and s 6 of the PCA. |
| Lim Thian Lai v PP | High Court | Yes | [2006] 1 SLR(R) 319 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an accused person can be convicted on the basis of his own confession if the court is satisfied that the confession was voluntary, true and reliable. |
| PP v Mohamed Abdul Gofar | High Court | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR(R) 23 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the furtiveness of the transaction may lend support to the argument that the transaction in question was objectively corrupt. |
| Chan Kin Choi v PP | High Court | Yes | [1991] 1 SLR(R) 111 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court is entitled not to accept the contents of an accused's statement wholesale, and may rely only on the incriminatory portion. |
| PP v Wong Chee Meng | High Court | Yes | [2020] 5 SLR 807 | Singapore | Cited for the consideration of whether to adopt a sentencing framework for PCA offences. |
| Luong Thi Trang Hoang Kathleen v PP | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 707 | Singapore | Cited for the caution against the reliance on unreported decisions. |
| PP v Su Fengxian | District Court | Yes | [2018] SGDC 40 | Singapore | Cited as a reference for sentencing in corruption cases. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) s 5(a)(i) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) s 5(b)(i) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed) s 29(a) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 258(3) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 258(5) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Performance bond
- Gratification
- Accreditation
- Commission
- Bribe
- Foreign domestic worker
- Labour Attaché
- Mirror charges
15.2 Keywords
- Corruption
- Bribery
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Admissibility of statements
- Confession
- Singapore
- Foreign public official
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act | 95 |
| Sentencing | 80 |
| Criminal Procedure | 80 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
| Evidence | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Corruption
- Bribery
- Criminal Procedure
- Evidence
- Sentencing