In its statement on Tuesday, MHA highlighted how the appellate court recognised how these provisions are an “essential part of the government’s toolkit against drug trafficking” and are consistent with the fundamental rules of natural justice.
These provisions also allow prosecutors to “overcome the evidential difficulty of proving the state of mind of the accused person, which is often exclusively within his knowledge”, said the ministry, referring to the judgment delivered by Chief Justice Menon.
The other judges of the coram are Justice of the Court of Appeal Belinda Ang, Judges of the Appellate Division Woo Bih Li and See Kee Oon and Senior Judge Judith Prakash.
MHA noted that Home Affairs Minister and then-Law Minister K Shanmugam had set out the government’s position on the Misuse of Drugs Act presumptions in a ministerial statement in April.
Mr Shanmugam said at the time that there was “no reason” to amend these presumptions, which date back to the enactment of the anti-drug law in 1973.
These presumptions in drug cases are necessary to protect Singapore from drug trafficking as they dealt with the “practical challenges” in proving facts that were often only known by the accused person.
Hence, under the Misuse of Drugs Act, the onus is on the accused person to prove he did not know that what was found to be in his possession were drugs.
“While many other countries have faced huge difficulties in combatting drugs, Singapore has been able to maintain one of the lowest rates of drug abuse in the world,” Mr Shanmugam said then.
APPEAL DISMISSED
The four inmates had filed appeals against their conviction and sentence for drug trafficking, but these were dismissed.
They filed subsequent applications, one of which sought a declaration that the presumptions of possession and knowledge should be “read down” to comply with the Constitution and the presumption of innocence. The application was also to obtain an order against their death sentences.
This application was dismissed, so the inmates filed an appeal on Dec 23, 2022. However, they failed to file the necessary documents and the appeal was withdrawn.
The inmates’ latest bid to the Court of Appeal was to restore their Dec 23 application.
The team representing the four death row inmates included National University of Singapore’s Assistant Professor Marcus Teo and lawyers Eugene Thuraisingam and Suang Wijaya.
The Attorney-General argued that the presumptions were compatible with the presumption of innocence because they did not displace the prosecution’s overall legal burden to prove the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
It also argued that the presumptions were not contrary to the Constitution, which does not include the “presumption of innocence”.
Among its findings, the apex court ruled that the presumptions did displace the prosecution’s legal burden to prove the accused person’s guilt.
The legal burden remained with the prosecution, which has to establish each element of the offence, said Chief Justice Menon.
The five-judge coram also found that the fundamental rules of natural justice were consistent with the prosecution’s ability to rely on the presumptions to establish the offence.
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal also noted: “It is plain beyond doubt that the general approach towards drug offences taken by parliament over the years has been influenced by its strong belief in the necessity of eliminating drug trafficking and abuse in Singapore as best it can.”
“Further, it is clear from these debates that parliament has taken the view that the (Misuse of Drugs Act) presumptions specifically are an essential part of the toolkit that is deployed by our enforcement agencies in order to keep the scourge of drug trafficking within confines.”
The Court of Appeal then dismissed the application in its entirety.
