Dao Thi Boi v Public Prosecutor: Endangered Species Act & Import Offenses
Dao Thi Boi, owner and director of VNSG Trading Pte Ltd and Song Hong Trading & Logistics Pte Ltd, appealed to the General Division of the High Court of Singapore against her conviction and sentence for importing elephant tusks without a permit, violating s 4(1) of the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act. The High Court, comprising Sundaresh Menon CJ, Tay Yong Kwang JCA, and Steven Chong JCA, dismissed the appeal, holding that knowledge of the contents was not required for an import offense and that the appellant had consented to the importation. The court found that the appellant could not rely on the statutory defense in s 6 of the ESA.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Dao Thi Boi appeals conviction under the Endangered Species Act for importing elephant tusks. The court considers the knowledge requirement and affirms the conviction.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | Peter Koy of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lee Zu Zhao of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lu Huiyi of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Dao Thi Boi | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Steven Chong | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Peter Koy | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lee Zu Zhao | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lu Huiyi | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Wee Pan Lee | Wee, Tay & Lim LLP |
4. Facts
- The appellant was the director of Song Hong Trading & Logistics Pte Ltd.
- Song Hong imported a container declared to contain groundnuts from Nigeria.
- The container was found to contain 1,787 pieces of elephant tusks weighing 3,480 kg.
- The appellant was charged under s 4(1) read with s 20(1)(a) of the Endangered Species Act.
- The appellant claimed she was told the container contained groundnuts by her client.
- The appellant had been told by her Vietnamese client, known to her as “Su Thien”, that the Seized Container contained groundnuts.
- The appellant continued working with Su Thien after the seizure.
5. Formal Citations
- Dao Thi Boi v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9030 of 2023, [2024] SGHC 290
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Immigration and Checkpoints Authority officer found images akin to animal horns inside a container. | |
| Unstuffing of the container revealed bags of suspected elephant tusks. | |
| Seizure forms issued to Maung Shwe Tint. | |
| Seizure forms issued to the appellant. | |
| Statement recorded from the appellant. | |
| Independent expert issued a report analyzing four consignments involving the appellant. | |
| Wildlife Reserves Singapore issued an acknowledgement letter confirming the elephant tusks. | |
| District Court’s decision at Public Prosecutor v Dao Thi Boi [2023] SGDC 257. | |
| Hearing date. | |
| Appellant directed to surrender to commence serving her sentence. | |
| Grounds of decision delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Import Offense under Endangered Species Act
- Outcome: The court held that knowledge of the nature of the thing being imported is not necessary to establish an offence under the “import” limb of s 4(1) of the ESA.
- Category: Substantive
- Consent under s 20(1)(a) of the ESA
- Outcome: The court held that the relevant test for consent under s 20(1)(a) of the ESA was articulated in Albert Tan at [39].
- Category: Substantive
- Statutory Defence under s 6 of the ESA
- Outcome: The court held that the appellant could not avail herself of the statutory defence in s 6 of the ESA.
- Category: Substantive
- Manifestly Excessive Sentence
- Outcome: The court held that the sentence of ten months’ imprisonment imposed by the DJ was not manifestly excessive.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Violation of Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Regulatory Offences
11. Industries
- Logistics
- Shipping
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Dao Thi Boi | District Court | Yes | [2023] SGDC 257 | Singapore | The District Court's decision that the appellant was guilty under s 4(1) of the ESA and convicted her was appealed. |
| Burberry Ltd v Megastar Shipping Pte Ltd and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 536 | Singapore | Distinguished from the present case as that decision was concerned with s 27 of the Trade Marks Act which imposed liability for the “use” of trade marks without consent. |
| Louis Vuitton Malletier v Megastar Shipping Pte Ltd (PT Alvenindo Sukses Ekspress, third party) and other suits | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 305 | Singapore | Cited for the proposition that it was not the party to whom goods are consigned that was the importer. |
| The “Axel Maersk” | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [1979-1980] SLR(R) 822 | Singapore | Cited for the proposition that only the shipper knows the contents of a container sealed and shipped under a Container Yard/Container Yard (“CY/CY”) bill of lading. |
| The “American Astronaut” | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [1979-1980] SLR(R) 243 | Singapore | Cited for the proposition that the phrase “shipper load stowage and count” means that only the shipper knows and is responsible for the contents, weight and count of goods loaded into a container. |
| Public Prosecutor v Tan Seo Whatt Albert and another appeal | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2019] 5 SLR 654 | Singapore | Articulated the appropriate test for consent under s 20(1) of the ESA. |
| Abdul Ghani bin Tahir v PP | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2017] 4 SLR 1153 | Singapore | From which Albert Tan adopted its definition of consent. |
| Tan Cheng Bock v Attorney-General | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 850 | Singapore | Cited for the exercise of statutory interpretation proceeds in three stages. |
| Tan Cheng Kwee v Public Prosecutor | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2002] 2 SLR(R) 122 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that fault is presumptively a necessary ingredient of any offence-creating statutory provision, this presumption is often displaced in situations where the statutory offence in question pertains to issues of social concern. |
| Public Prosecutor v Jurong Country Club and another appeal | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2019] 5 SLR 554 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that fault is presumptively a necessary ingredient of any offence-creating statutory provision, this presumption is often displaced in situations where the statutory offence in question pertains to issues of social concern. |
| Public Prosecutor v Koh Peng Kiat | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 1 SLR 753 | Singapore | The Court of Appeal held that the existence of s 16(3) of the HPA made it clear that Parliament intended not merely to deter the accused from engaging in the prohibited conduct but also to compel him to take sufficient care to avoid the occurrence of the elements of the offence. |
| ADF v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 874 | Singapore | Appellate intervention in sentencing is justified only where the trial judge erred with respect to the proper factual basis for sentencing. |
| Public Prosecutor v Kong Hoo (Pte) Ltd and another appeal | Singapore Law Reports | Yes | [2017] 4 SLR 1291 | Singapore | The relevant offence-specific factors for an offence under the ESA. |
| Public Prosecutor v Sustrisno Alkaf | Singapore District Court | Yes | [2006] SGDC 182 | Singapore | Cited as a comparison for sentencing. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act (Cap 92A, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act (Cap 92A, 2008 Rev Ed) s 4(1) | Singapore |
| Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act (Cap 92A, 2008 Rev Ed) s 20(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act (Cap 92A, 2008 Rev Ed) s 6(1) | Singapore |
| Evidence Act 1893 (2020 Rev Ed) s 107 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Endangered species
- Import
- Elephant tusks
- Permit
- Consent
- Due diligence
- Strict liability
- CITES
- Consignee
- Freight forwarder
15.2 Keywords
- Endangered Species Act
- Import offence
- Elephant tusks
- Mens rea
- Strict liability
- Singapore
- Criminal law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Endangered Species Law | 98 |
| Import and Export Law | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 85 |
| Sentencing | 80 |
| International Trade | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Environmental Law
- Wildlife Trade
- Import/Export Regulations