Chang Peng Hong Clarence v Public Prosecutor: Multiple Penalties Under Prevention of Corruption Act
In Chang Peng Hong Clarence v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore addressed the question of whether a sentencing judge can impose more than one penalty under Section 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1960 when an accused person has been convicted of two or more offences for accepting gratification. The court answered in the affirmative, holding that a sentencing judge can and must impose more than one penalty, with one penalty for each charge on which the accused person was convicted. The court recalibrated Mr. Chang's in-default imprisonment term upwards to 120 months.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
The Court of Appeal answered the question in the affirmative and recalibrated Mr Chang’s in-default imprisonment term upwards to 120 months.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The Court of Appeal held that a sentencing judge can impose multiple penalties under Section 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Allowed in Part | Partial | Jiang Ke-Yue of Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division) David Menon of Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division) Jonathan Tan of Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division) |
| Chang Peng Hong Clarence | Applicant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Steven Chong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jiang Ke-Yue | Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division) |
| David Menon | Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division) |
| Jonathan Tan | Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division) |
| Gary Leonard Low | Drew & Napier LLC |
| Siraj Omar SC | Drew & Napier LLC |
| Tan Wee Kio Terence | Drew & Napier LLC |
| Tong Yi Keat Zachary | Drew & Napier LLC |
4. Facts
- Mr. Chang was convicted of 19 charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act for receiving gratifications.
- Mr. Chang received US$3.95m and S$525,000 from Mr. Koh between 2006 and 2010.
- Mr. Chang was sentenced to 54 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay a penalty of $6,220,095 by the District Judge.
- The High Court upheld Mr. Chang’s conviction for 19 charges and increased his aggregate sentence to 80 months’ imprisonment.
- The High Court substituted the sole penalty order with three penalty orders.
- The Court of Appeal answered the question of law in the affirmative and recalibrated Mr Chang’s in-default imprisonment term upwards to 120 months.
- Mr. Chang was the Regional Marine Manager Fuels of the Global Residues Unit at BP.
5. Formal Citations
- Chang Peng Hong Clarence v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Reference No 1 of 2024, [2024] SGCA 58
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Permission refused for two questions of law and granted for one question. | |
| Application to amend one of the two questions for which permission was refused was disallowed. | |
| Hearing of the matter where the Question was answered in the affirmative. | |
| Grounds of decision delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Multiple Penalties for Corruption Offences
- Outcome: The court held that a sentencing judge can and must impose more than one penalty when an accused person has been convicted of two or more offences for the acceptance of gratification in contravention of the PCA.
- Category: Substantive
- In-Default Imprisonment Term
- Outcome: The court recalibrated the in-default imprisonment term upwards to 120 months.
- Category: Procedural
- Doctrine of Prospective Overruling
- Outcome: The court held that the doctrine of prospective overruling did not apply in this case.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 2 SLR 557
- [2014] 4 SLR 661
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction and sentence
- Referral of question of law to the Court of Appeal
9. Cause of Actions
- Corruption
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Corruption Offences
11. Industries
- Oil and Gas
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chang Peng Hong Clarence v Public Prosecutor and other appeals | High Court | Yes | [2023] SGHC 225 | Singapore | Sets out the facts of the case and the High Court's judgment. |
| Public Prosecutor v Takaaki Masui and another and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 1 SLR 1033 | Singapore | Cited for the legislative purpose of Section 13(1) of the PCA, which is to prevent corrupt recipients from retaining their ill-gotten gains. |
| Public Prosecutor v Koh Wen Jia Boaz | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 334 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish the purpose of probation and reformative training from the purpose of Section 13(1) of the PCA. |
| Parti Liyani v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2021] 5 SLR 860 | Singapore | Cited to distinguish the purpose of compensation under s 359(3) of the CPC from the purpose of s 13(1) of the PCA. |
| Adri Anton Kalangie v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 557 | Singapore | Cited for the principles to determine whether the doctrine of prospective overruling applies. |
| Public Prosecutor v Hue An Li | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 661 | Singapore | Cited for the factors to consider when determining whether the doctrine of prospective overruling should be invoked. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act 1960 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code 2010 | Singapore |
| Probation of Offenders Act 1951 | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act 1965 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- Gratification
- Penalty order
- In-default imprisonment
- Corruption
- Disgorgement
- Prospective overruling
- Amalgamated charges
15.2 Keywords
- Corruption
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- Penalty
- In-default imprisonment
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Statutory offences | 90 |
| Sentencing | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Corruption
- Sentencing