Masoud Rahimi v Public Prosecutor: Application for Stay of Execution in Capital Case
Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment, applied to the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 27 November 2024 for a stay of execution and permission to file a post-appeal application in a capital case (PACC). The application was based on a clemency petition, a complaint against his former counsel, and fresh evidence. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application on 28 November 2024, finding no reasonable prospect of success for the PACC.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Application dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Application for stay of execution by Masoud Rahimi, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment, was dismissed. The court found no basis to grant permission to file a PACC.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Application dismissed | Won | Wong Woon Kwong of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lim Shin Hui of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad | Applicant | Individual | Application dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Wong Woon Kwong | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lim Shin Hui | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad is a prisoner awaiting capital punishment.
- Mr. Masoud was convicted of possession of not less than 31.14g of diamorphine for the purposes of trafficking.
- Mr. Masoud's appeal against his conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
- Mr. Masoud's petition to the President for clemency was rejected.
- Mr. Masoud filed multiple post-appeal applications, which were largely unsuccessful.
- Mr. Masoud lodged a clemency petition to the President on 22 November 2024.
- Mr. Masoud lodged a complaint to the Law Society of Singapore against his former counsel.
5. Formal Citations
- Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad v Public Prosecutor, OAC No 2 of 2024, [2024] SGCA 56
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 enacted | |
| Criminal charges filed against Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad and Mogan Raj Terapadisamy | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad and Mogan Raj Terapadisamy convicted by the High Court | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad sentenced to death | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad appealed against conviction and sentence | |
| Appeal dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad’s petition to the President for clemency was rejected | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad joined other prisoners in filing HC/OS 664/2021 | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad joined other prisoners in filing HC/OS 825/2021 | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad, together with other prisoners, filed an application in HC/OS 1025/2021 | |
| High Court granted permission for OS 664 to be withdrawn | |
| OS 1025 was struck out in its entirety | |
| OS 825 was dismissed by the High Court | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad joined other prisoners in filing HC/OS 188/2022 | |
| High Court dismissed OS 188, save for an award of nominal damages to three of the applicants | |
| Applicants in OS 188 filed an appeal in CA/CA 30/2022 | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad joined other prisoners in filing HC/OC 166/2022 | |
| OC 166 was struck out in its entirety by the High Court | |
| Applicants in OC 166 filed an appeal in CA/CA 31/2022 | |
| CA 31 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| CA 31 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| CA 31 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad joined other prisoners in filing HC/OA 987/2023 | |
| OA 987 was struck out by the High Court | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad filed CM 50 seeking permission to review his appeal | |
| Applicants in OA 987 filed an appeal in CA/CA 1/2024 | |
| CA 1 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad and other prisoners filed HC/OA 306/2024 | |
| OA 306 was struck out | |
| Applicants in OA 306 filed an appeal in CA/CA 38/2024 | |
| Alleged visit by Derek Wong to Arab in prison | |
| CM 50 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| CA 38 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad filed HC/OA 972/2024 | |
| CA 30 was allowed in part by the Court of Appeal | |
| Arab was sentenced to 14 years and six months imprisonment and 22 strokes of the cane | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad submitted a complaint to the Law Society against Ong Ying Ping | |
| President issued the order for Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad to be executed on 29 November 2024 | |
| Warrant of Execution was issued | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad was notified about the date of execution | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad lodged a clemency petition to the President | |
| Statutory declaration filed by Natasha binte Jumaat | |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad filed the present application | |
| Application dismissed by the Court of Appeal | |
| Scheduled execution date |
7. Legal Issues
- Stay of Execution
- Outcome: The court denied the application for a stay of execution.
- Category: Procedural
- Post-Appeal Application in Capital Case (PACC)
- Outcome: The court denied permission to file a PACC.
- Category: Procedural
- Review of Criminal Appeal
- Outcome: The court found no basis to grant permission to review the criminal appeal.
- Category: Procedural
- Clemency Petition
- Outcome: The court noted that the President will not be exercising the power conferred by Art 22P of the Constitution in relation to Mr Masoud’s further petition for clemency.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Stay of execution
- Permission to file a PACC application
- Quashing order of the notice of execution
9. Cause of Actions
- No cause of actions
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Capital Punishment
- Judicial Review
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad and another | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 288 | Singapore | Cited for the High Court's finding that Mr. Masoud was not a 'courier' under the Misuse of Drugs Act and was not issued a certificate of substantive assistance. |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 257 | Singapore | Cited for the Court of Appeal's dismissal of Mr. Masoud's appeal against his conviction and sentence, agreeing with the trial judge that he failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge. |
| Syed Suhail bin Syed Zin and others v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2022] 4 SLR 934 | Singapore | Cited for the dismissal of OS 825, an application alleging discrimination and violation of rights. |
| Syed Suhail bin Syed Zin and others v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2024] SGCA 39 | Singapore | Cited for the Court of Appeal granting some of the declaratory relief sought and giving permission to file criminal motions seeking relief under the criminal law. |
| Iskandar bin Rahmat and others v Attorney-General and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 2 SLR 1018 | Singapore | Cited for the dismissal of CA 31, an appeal against the striking out of OC 166. |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad and others v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2024] 4 SLR 331 | Singapore | Cited for the striking out of OA 987 by the High Court. |
| Pausi bin Jefridin v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2024] 1 SLR 1127 | Singapore | Cited for the Court of Appeal's dismissal of CM 50 and noting that Mr. Masoud was convicted on the basis of his actual knowledge of the drugs. |
| Masoud Rahimi bin Mehrzad and others v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2024] 1 SLR 414 | Singapore | Cited for the Court of Appeal's dismissal of CA 1. |
| Iskandar bin Rahmat and others v Attorney-General | High Court | Yes | [2024] 5 SLR 1290 | Singapore | Cited for the striking out of OA 306. |
| Roslan bin Bakar v Attorney-General | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2024] SGCA 51 | Singapore | Cited by the Prosecution as a similar case regarding the clemency process and intentional delay. |
| Pannir Selvam a/l Pranthaman v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | Pannir Selvam a/l Pranthaman v Public Prosecutor CA/CM 6/2019 | Singapore | Cited in relation to the so-called Pannir Selvam period named after the case of Pannir Selvam a/l Pranthaman v Public Prosecutor CA/CM 6/2019. |
| Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2024] 1 SLR 677 | Singapore | Cited by the Prosecution regarding the court's inherent power to review concluded criminal appeals and the need to avoid abuse of process. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| Rules of Court (Cap 322, R5, 2014 Rev Ed) |
| Rules of Court 2021 |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code 2010 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1985 Rev Ed, 1999 Reprint) | Singapore |
| Post-appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act 2022 (No 41 of 2022) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Post-appeal application in a capital case
- PACC
- Stay of execution
- Clemency petition
- Review of appeal
- Miscarriage of justice
- Reasonable prospect of success
15.2 Keywords
- Capital punishment
- Stay of execution
- Post-appeal application
- Clemency
- Criminal procedure
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Stay of Execution | 95 |
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 90 |
| Sentencing | 80 |
| Criminal Law | 70 |
| Administrative Law | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Constitutional Law