Lin Haifeng v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Review Application and Judge Recusal

Lin Haifeng applied for a criminal review under s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 after being convicted on appeal by the High Court. He then sought Justice Vincent Hoong's recusal from hearing the s 394H application, arguing apparent bias due to the need to assess the judge's own prior judgment for a breach of natural justice. The High Court dismissed the recusal application, emphasizing the distinct nature of criminal review from appeal and the judge's suitability to assess new evidence in a review application.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application for recusal dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Application for judge recusal in a criminal review. The court dismissed the application, finding no apparent bias and emphasizing the distinct nature of criminal review.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyApplication for recusal dismissedWon
Senthilkumaran Sabapathy of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Joseph Gwee of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Lin HaifengApplicantIndividualApplication for recusal dismissedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Vincent HoongJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Senthilkumaran SabapathyAttorney-General’s Chambers
Joseph GweeAttorney-General’s Chambers
Lok Vi MingLVM Law Chambers LLC
Joseph LeeLVM Law Chambers LLC
Michelle YeoLVM Law Chambers LLC
Samuel LingLVM Law Chambers LLC
Jervis NgLVM Law Chambers LLC

4. Facts

  1. The Applicant was convicted on 18 charges after the Prosecution's appeal.
  2. The Applicant sought a criminal review under s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010.
  3. The Applicant argued that the judge's own judgment disclosed a breach of natural justice.
  4. The Applicant sought the judge's recusal based on apparent bias.
  5. The Prosecution argued that the judge was best placed to consider the review application.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Lin Haifeng v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Motion No 85 of 2023, [2024] SGHC 30

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Criminal Motion No 85 of 2023 filed
Oral judgment issued
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Apparent Bias
    • Outcome: The court found no apparent bias.
    • Category: Procedural
  2. Criminal Review
    • Outcome: The court clarified the nature and purpose of a criminal review, distinguishing it from an appeal.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2016] 3 SLR 135
      • [2022] 1 SLR 1451

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Recusal of Judge

9. Cause of Actions

  • No cause of actions

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Appellate Practice

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Kho Jabing v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2016] 3 SLR 135SingaporeCited for the principle that a criminal review is to correct a miscarriage of justice, not to rehash issues.
Roslan bin Bakar v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2022] 1 SLR 1451SingaporeCited for the principle that a criminal review is an extraordinary proceeding initiated in rare circumstances.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241, 1993 Rev Ed)Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed)Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code 2010Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Criminal Review
  • Recusal
  • Apparent Bias
  • Miscarriage of Justice
  • Section 394H
  • Criminal Procedure Code

15.2 Keywords

  • Criminal Review
  • Recusal
  • Apparent Bias
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Procedure Code

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Criminal Revision90
Prevention of Corruption Act80
Criminal Procedure75
Natural justice60
Recusal50
Apparent bias50
Duty of Candour40
Administrative Law30
Summary Judgement20

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure