Iskandar v Public Prosecutor: Sentencing Guidelines for Guilty Pleas in Drug Trafficking Cases
In Iskandar bin Jinan v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore addressed the application of the Sentencing Advisory Panel’s (SAP) Guidelines on Reduction in Sentences for Guilty Pleas (“PG Guidelines”) in drug trafficking cases. Iskandar and Mohd Farid Merican bin Maiden appealed their sentences for drug trafficking offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court dismissed Iskandar's appeal and allowed Farid's appeal in part, reducing his global sentence from 31 years to 30 years, clarifying the utility and proper application of the PG Guidelines for drug trafficking and drug importation offences.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed in part; Farid's global sentence reduced from 31 years to 30 years.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal clarified the application of Sentencing Advisory Panel's guidelines for guilty pleas in drug trafficking, emphasizing a calibrated approach.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Upheld in Part | Partial | Anandan Bala of Attorney-General’s Chambers Claire Poh of Attorney-General’s Chambers Teo Siu Ming of Attorney-General’s Chambers Ng Jun Kai of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Iskandar bin Jinan | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| Mohd Farid Merican bin Maiden | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed in Part | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Steven Chong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Anandan Bala | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Claire Poh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Teo Siu Ming | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ng Jun Kai | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Iskandar pleaded guilty to trafficking not less than 14.99g of diamorphine.
- Iskandar had four previous drug trafficking convictions.
- Farid pleaded guilty to abetting Iskandar to traffic not less than 14.99g of diamorphine.
- Farid had one previous drug trafficking conviction.
- The Sentencing Advisory Panel issued guidelines on reduction in sentences for guilty pleas.
- The PG Guidelines came into effect on 1 October 2023.
- Iskandar and Farid have been in remand since their date of arrest on 22 May 2019.
5. Formal Citations
- Iskandar bin Jinan v Public Prosecutor and another appeal, Criminal Appeal No 18 of 2023, [2024] SGCA 55
- Mohd Farid Merican bin Maiden v Public Prosecutor and another appeal, Criminal Appeal No 6 of 2024, [2024] SGCA 55
- Public Prosecutor v Iskandar bin Jinan and another, , [2024] SGHC 134
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellants arrested | |
| PG Guidelines came into effect | |
| Appeals heard | |
| Grounds of decision delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Application of Sentencing Guidelines for Guilty Pleas
- Outcome: The court clarified the application of the Sentencing Advisory Panel's guidelines for guilty pleas in drug trafficking cases, emphasizing a calibrated approach.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2017] 2 SLR 449
- Mitigating Factors in Sentencing
- Outcome: The court discussed the weight to be given to a guilty plea as a mitigating factor, considering both utilitarian and remorse-based justifications.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Reduction of Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Abetting Drug Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Sentencing Guidelines
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ng Kean Meng Terence v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 449 | Singapore | Cited for according significant mitigatory weight to a plea of guilt even in caught red-handed cases. |
| Public Prosecutor v Iskandar bin Jinan and another | High Court | Yes | [2024] SGHC 134 | Singapore | Cited as the decision below, which the Court of Appeal is reviewing. |
| Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 653 | Singapore | Cited for the view that only a remorse-based approach has any currency in the context of our current jurisprudence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Nur Azam Bin Mohamad Indra and another | High Court | Yes | [2020] 4 SLR 1255 | Singapore | Cited for applying a remorse-centric approach to determining the mitigatory value of a plea of guilt. |
| Public Prosecutor v Steven John a/l Gobalkrishnan | High Court | Yes | [2021] SGHC 111 | Singapore | Cited for applying a remorse-centric approach to determining the mitigatory value of a plea of guilt. |
| Public Prosecutor v Poopathi Chinaiyah s/o Paliandi | High Court | Yes | [2020] 5 SLR 734 | Singapore | Cited for applying a remorse-centric approach to determining the mitigatory value of a plea of guilt. |
| Public Prosecutor v Vashan a/l K Raman | High Court | Yes | [2019] SGHC 151 | Singapore | Cited for according significant mitigatory weight to a plea of guilt even though the offender was caught red-handed. |
| Public Prosecutor v Murugesan a/l Arumugam | High Court | Yes | [2020] SGHC 203 | Singapore | Cited for according significant mitigatory weight to a plea of guilt even though the offender was caught red-handed. |
| Public Prosecutor v Randy Rosigit | High Court | Yes | [2024] 4 SLR 1586 | Singapore | Cited for according due mitigating weight to the offender’s plea of guilt on account of the saving of time and resource, although the court noted that he was apprehended in the course of a police raid and so was caught red-handed. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhamad Akashah Aizad bin Hasni | High Court | Yes | [2024] SGHC 223 | Singapore | Cited for applying the PG Guidelines and noting that the observation in Randy Rosigit may be especially pertinent in the context of drug trafficking and importation cases. |
| Vasentha d/o Joseph v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 122 | Singapore | Cited for the indicative starting points for first-time offenders for drug trafficking and drug importation offences. |
| Suventher Shanmugam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 115 | Singapore | Cited for the indicative starting points for first-time offenders for drug trafficking and drug importation offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Tan Lye Heng | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 5 SLR 564 | Singapore | Cited for the indicative starting points for first-time offenders for drug trafficking and drug importation offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Lai Teck Guan | High Court | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 852 | Singapore | Cited for the framework for sentencing repeat offenders in drug trafficking cases. |
| Murugesan a/l Arumugam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] SGCA 32 | Singapore | Cited for finding that the offender had played a minor role in the drug-trafficking operations as a mere courier and sentenced him to 25 years’ imprisonment. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Rais bin Abdul Rashid | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 99 | Singapore | Cited for finding that the offender performed a limited role as a courier under the direction of another and was not an orchestrating hand in the illicit activities, and sentenced him to 25 years’ imprisonment. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Hakam bin Suliman | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 160 | Singapore | Cited for holding that the offender’s role was “quite limited” and that his culpability was on the lower end of the scale, and sentenced him to 24 years’ imprisonment. |
| Adri Anton Kalangie v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 557 | Singapore | Cited for considering that it was “highly significant” that the offender had voluntarily confessed to his crime and admitted that he was in possession of drugs although he was not discovered, and upheld the 25 years’ sentence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Hari Krishnan Selvan | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 168 | Singapore | Cited for according due weight to the mitigating factors of his guilty plea and cooperation with the authorities as they saved the court and law enforcement agencies considerable time and resources and indicated a measure of remorse. |
| Muhammad Amirul Aliff bin Md Zainal v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 2 SLR 299 | Singapore | Cited for noting that the offender had instructed his co-accused in the drug venture, was a member of the Malaysian-based drug syndicate, and received payment for his role and upheld his sentence of 27 years’ imprisonment. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Affandi bin Mohamed Yuz Al-Haj | High Court | Yes | [2021] SGHC 151 | Singapore | Cited for holding that the accused’s culpability was high as he had performed multiple roles, not just transferring drugs, but also repacking them, collecting payment from drug customers, and remitting drug payment monies overseas. |
| Mohd Fauzi bin Mohamed Mydin v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 313 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court is in no position to reduce a mandatory minimum sentence lawfully imposed pursuant to a voluntary and unqualified plea of guilt. |
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 MDA | Singapore |
| s 33(1) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33(4A) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 8(b)(ii) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 33(4) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 8(a) of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 5(1)(a) read with s 12 of the MDA | Singapore |
| s 8(b)(i) of the MDA | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Sentencing Advisory Panel
- PG Guidelines
- Guilty Plea
- Drug Trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Mitigation
- Utilitarian Justification
- Remorse
- Public Interest Exception
15.2 Keywords
- sentencing
- drug trafficking
- guilty plea
- Singapore
- Misuse of Drugs Act
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 98 |
| Sentencing | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 90 |
| Sentencing Guidelines | 85 |
| Criminal Revision | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Sentencing Guidelines
- Drug Offences
- Criminal Law