Life imprisonment in Singapore

Last updated

The Supreme Court of Singapore, where all suspects in Singapore face trial for crimes that attract life imprisonment Singapore New Supreme Court 10.jpg
The Supreme Court of Singapore, where all suspects in Singapore face trial for crimes that attract life imprisonment

Life imprisonment is a legal penalty in Singapore. This sentence is applicable for more than forty offences under Singapore law (including the Penal Code, the Kidnapping Act and Arms Offences Act), such as culpable homicide not amounting to murder, attempted murder (if hurt was caused), kidnapping by ransom, criminal breach of trust by a public servant, voluntarily causing grievous hurt with dangerous weapons, and trafficking of firearms, in addition to caning or a fine for certain offences that warrant life imprisonment.

Contents

From 1 January 2013 onwards, the amendments to the death penalty laws in Singapore allow judges to impose life imprisonment as the lowest punishment for capital drug trafficking and murder with no intention to kill, under certain conditions for eligibility. Despite the legal changes and increasing cases of life imprisonment for murder and drug crimes, Law Minister K. Shanmugam revealed in 2020 that through two public surveys on Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans, more than 80% of both groups responded that the death penalty is more effective than life imprisonment as a deterrent towards capital offences. [1]

Since 20 August 1997, after the landmark appeal of Abdul Nasir Amer Hamsah, the definition of life imprisonment is changed to mean a term of incarceration for the rest of a convict's natural lifespan, although it carries a possibility of release on parole after a minimum period of 20 years behind bars based on the prisoner's conduct.

The most recent case of life imprisonment in Singapore was that of 32-year-old Tan Sen Yang, who was found guilty of murdering a 31-year-old chemist at Orchard Towers in 2019. Tan was sentenced to life imprisonment (plus 12 strokes of the cane) on 25 April 2024. [2]

History

Origins and original definition of life imprisonment

Since the British colonial period of Singapore, the laws of Singapore was enacted based on the laws of England, and life imprisonment was thus included as one of the legal penalties allowed for certain offences in Singapore, even after its independence from British colonial rule. In the past, the laws of Singapore decreed that life imprisonment was a fixed sentence of 20 years with the possibility of one-third remission of the sentence (13 years and 4 months) for good behaviour. This definition was recognised by the Court of Appeal in the judgement of Neo Man Lee, a schizophrenic killer who received a life term in 1989 for the 1984 case of culpable homicide of Judy Quek.

Extracted from Neo Man Lee v Public Prosecutor (1991):

We were of the opinion that the conditions for sentence to imprisonment for life were clearly satisfied in the present case and justified a life sentence. The appellant (Neo Man Lee) is clearly a continuing danger not only to himself but also to the public. The trial judge was of the view, which we shared, that he should be detained as long as it was permissible under the law. We might add that, with remissions, life imprisonment in Singapore may be reduced in practice to no more than 14 years, and the appellant may in fact be out of prison in another seven years. [3]

In June 1993, a question over the definition of life imprisonment was raised during the trial of Tan Swee Hoon, who was one of the two perpetrators responsible for the 1985 murder of an Indonesian fish merchant Nurdin Nguan Song. After Tan, who was arrested for another crime in 1992, pleaded guilty to manslaughter and unrelated armed robbery charges, the prosecution argued that Tan should be sentenced to the maximum penalty of life imprisonment, and in response, Tan's defence counsel Michael Teo and Liew Chen Mine argued that Tan should not be jailed for the rest of his natural life and it would be unfair to have the other jail terms for armed robbery to run consecutively with a life sentence for manslaughter, and this led to the trial court inquiring the prosecution about whether life imprisonment was supposed to be a jail term of 20 years or the remainder of one's natural life. [4] However, the prosecution did not reply, and instead, they changed their request for Tan to serve 20 years' preventive detention. In the end, 41-year-old Tan was sentenced to 23 years in prison and 24 strokes of the cane. [5] On the other hand, Tan's accomplice Loh Yoon Seong was caught in 1988, and he was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death in 1990, [6] [7] Loh lost his appeal in 1991, [8] and his execution was carried out on an unknown date after the end of Tan's trial. [9]

Since then, the definition of life imprisonment was still considered as a jail term of 20 years, but it would eventually be amended with effect from 20 August 1997 due to a landmark appeal that significantly raised the question behind the meaning of life imprisonment.

Change of definition from "life" to "natural life"

On 20 August 1997, Abdul Nasir bin Amer Hamsah, a Singaporean who received a life sentence (20 years) for the kidnapping of two policemen and a consecutive 18-year sentence for a separate case of robbery with hurt, submitted an appeal for the two sentences to run concurrently, which would mean he only need to serve 20 years in jail rather than 38 years (with the two terms served consecutively) if successful. But the Court of Appeal dismissed Abdul Nasir's appeal and ordered that he be serving 38 years in jail like the trial judge ordered. However, the three-judge panel, led by Chief Justice Yong Pung How, decide that it would be wrong to consider life imprisonment as a fixed jail term of 20 years and thus changed the definition of life imprisonment to a term of imprisonment for the prisoner's remaining lifespan. [10] The amended definition is thus retroactively applied to future crimes committed after 20 August 1997. Since Abdul Nasir was already sentenced prior to this appeal verdict, his life sentence remained as a 20-year jail term under the previous law's definition. [11] [12] [13] [14]

The appeal of Abdul Nasir, titled " Abdul Nasir bin Amer Hamsah v Public Prosecutor [1997] SGCA 38 ", [10] was since regarded as a landmark in Singapore's legal history as it changed the definition of life imprisonment from "life" to "natural life" under the law. It also affected the future cases of life imprisonment that occurred after 20 August 1997, where criminals like Sundarti Supriyanto, Tony Anak Imba, Leslie Khoo Kwee Hock and Yong Vui Kong were sentenced to the current version of natural life imprisonment instead of the old "20 years" version of life imprisonment.

The ruling of Abdul Nasir's appeal, however, did not affect any outstanding cases that happened before the 1997 changes to the law, and the old life imprisonment laws is still applicable for these cases, where the offender would not be imprisoned for life but for at most twenty years. In the case of wanted gunman Chin Sheong Hon, who was arrested in 2013 for using a revolver to rob and hurt a woman back in November 1981, the trial judge Pang Khang Chau highlighted that life imprisonment, as the maximum penalty for Chin's crime, should not be a term that lasts the remainder of his natural life but a term of twenty years' jail under the old laws before Abdul Nasir's case, since his crime was committed in 1981 while the previous laws were still in effect back then. 72-year-old Chin, in the end, was sentenced to 18 years' imprisonment in November 2022 despite the prosecution's submissions for a life sentence. [15] [16] [17]

Introduction of life imprisonment for murder and drug trafficking

On 1 January 2013, the government of Singapore approved the changes to the death penalty laws, in which they introduced life imprisonment as the minimum punishment for murder offences with no intention to kill and capital drug trafficking, under certain conditions. For offenders who commit murder but had no intention to kill, they would receive life sentences with caning. This discretion is similarly applied to those convicted of drug trafficking, provided that they only act as couriers, suffering from impaired mental responsibility (e.g. depression), and/or substantively assisting the authorities in disrupting drug-related activities. Drug traffickers who were suffering from diminished responsibility will serve a mandatory life sentence without caning for their crimes, while those who acted as couriers would receive life terms and caning of not less than 15 strokes.

Minister for Law K. Shanmugam stated that these changes were a right step taken in view of the extremely low crime rate and increasing rate of public safety in Singapore, and such changes were made to allow judges to have more discretion in deciding between death and life in capital cases where their individual circumstances did not sufficiently call for the death penalty, which allowed more emphasis on mercy during sentencing while maintaining the need for retribution and deterrence. Shanmugam also quoted in his own words, "Justice can be tempered with mercy and, where appropriate, offenders should be given a second chance". [18]

These legal reforms allowed offenders in some capital cases to be sentenced to life imprisonment instead of death, and it also allowed some death row inmates (notably Cheong Chun Yin and Yong Vui Kong) to be given the chance to undergo re-sentencing and had their sentences commuted to life. [19] [20] There were also subsequent cases, notably the case of Kho Jabing, that coined the main sentencing guidelines for murder, where it specified the required factors for judges to consider before imposing either the death penalty or life imprisonment, and it influenced the judgements of several murder cases like Micheal Anak Garing, Boh Soon Ho, Leslie Khoo Kwee Hock, Chia Kee Chen and Azlin Arujunah. [21] [22]

Landmark rulings relating to life imprisonment

Sia Ah Kew and Others v Public Prosecutor (1974)

On 14 March 1972, five men – Sia Ah Kew, Ho Kok Keng, Hoong Khung Cheong, Koo Ah Choo and Lim Chai Thiam – were involved in the kidnapping of Tjioe Kok Hwie, an affluent Indonesian businessman and they demanded from Tjioe's daughters and wife a ransom of S$50,000. The five kidnappers were later arrested and sentenced to death by two High Court judges Choor Singh and D. C. D'Cotta on charges of kidnapping by ransom, a crime which attracts either a death sentence or life imprisonment with/without caning under the Kidnapping Act. [23]

After the end of their trial proceedings in October 1973, the five kidnappers filed their appeals for their death sentences to be reduced, and on 2 April 1974, the Court of Appeal, having duly considered the facts, decided to reduce the death sentences to life imprisonment for the kidnappers. In addition to their life sentences, the five men also received caning: out of the five, Ho received the highest number of 12 strokes of the cane, Hoong received nine while the remaining three were caned six strokes. [24]

In their ruling, the three-judge panel, consisting of Wee Chong Jin, Frederick Arthur Chua and T. Kulasekaram, stated that despite the kidnappers being armed with pistols and daggers and had threatened Tjioe and his family, they did not cause physical harm to Tjioe and they treated him well while he was confined by the kidnappers. The judges were of the view that the death penalty should strictly be reserved for the worst cases of kidnapping and in cases where the circumstances did not signal an anxious need for capital punishment or spark an outrage of the community's feelings, life imprisonment (whether with caning or not) should be the default sentence for those convicted of kidnapping by ransom. [25]

Extracted from Sia Ah Kew and Others v Public Prosecutor [1974]:

In our opinion the maximum sentence prescribed by the legislature would be appropriate where the manner of the kidnapping or the acts or conduct of the kidnappers are such as to outrage the feelings of the community. [25]

In the aftermath of the case, there were only five cases of kidnapping by ransom that took place between 1999 and 2014, though all cases ended with the courts issuing verdicts of life imprisonment based on the benchmark ruling and principles set by the Sia Ah Kew case, since all cases did not involve any serious harm caused to the victims. [26] [27] [28] The rarity of kidnapping in Singapore was due to the tough laws and use of capital punishment in Singapore for the crime, and it was known to be an effective deterrent, resulting in kidnapping crimes being rarely committed in Singapore, as well as the judges' preference to sentence kidnappers to life in prison rather than death due to lack of aggravating circumstances that called for the death penalty. [29]

Abdul Nasir bin Amer Hamsah v Public Prosecutor (1997)

Lim Hock Hin Kelvin v Public Prosecutor (1997)

In November 1996, 28-year-old cleaning supervisor Kelvin Lim Hock Hin was arrested by the police for allegations of sexual assault of five young boys between ages nine and 13, of which two of the victims were his godsons. He was investigated to have used offers of free tuition and toys to lure his victims and gain their trust before performing anal and oral sex on them. Prior to his arrest, Lim was convicted twice in 1988 and 1993 for sexual offences against young boys; his first sentence was 15 months' jail and the second was 32 months, and he was just released for less than four months before he re-offended. As Lim, who pleaded guilty to ten out of 40 charges of unnatural sex with a minor, was diagnosed with chronic paedophilia, a psychological sexual disorder where there is a sexual preference in young children, and Lim also had a high risk of re-offending, which persuaded Justice T. S. Sinnathuray to sentence Lim to a total of 40 years' imprisonment (consisting of four consecutive terms of ten years each) on 29 August 1997, to isolate him from society out of protection as long as possible. [30] [31] [32] [33] In fact, under the law back in 1997 before its eventual repeal, Section 377 of the Penal Code (the 1985 edition) decreed that a charge of unnatural sex with a minor carries the maximum sentence of life imprisonment, a sentence which Lim evaded. [34]

In November 1997, in dismissing Kelvin Lim's appeal, the Court of Appeal's three judges – consisting of Chief Justice Yong Pung How, Judges of Appeal Thean Lip Ping (L P Thean) and M Karthigesu – took into consideration Lim's refusal of medical treatment, lack of familial support and the great danger he posed to society given his paedophilic condition, they decided to not reduce his 40-year sentence.

Extracted from Lim Hock Hin Kelvin v Public Prosecutor [1997]:

There were no significant mitigating factors in this case. The learned judge (Sinnathuray) had found, rightly in our opinion, that paedophilia is not a disease or a physical illness but is a disorder. … Even if paedophilia is an illness, we reject any suggestion that the sufferer cannot help it and therefore carries only a diminished responsibility for his actions. There is no evidence that paedophiles cannot exercise a high degree of responsibility and self-control. The learned judge found that the appellant (Lim) had a choice of whether to commit paedophilic offences against the victims, and chose to do so. [35]

The three judges also made a benchmark ruling, which decreed that in whichever future cases, if a chronic paedophile was unable to or see no initiative to refrain himself from his sexual advances towards children, such offenders should be sentenced to the maximum penalty of life imprisonment. This legal benchmark, however, did not retroactively apply to Lim's case since he was sentenced before the date of his appeal's ruling. [35] [36] [37]

Public Prosecutor v Tan Kei Loon Allan (1998)

In August 1998, Allan Tan Kei Loon, an 18-year-old gang member who killed a rival gang member Png Hock Seng during a street gang attack, was found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder by the High Court, and the trial judge Tay Yong Kwang sentenced Tan to seven years' imprisonment and nine strokes of the cane despite the prosecution's arguments for life imprisonment and 24 strokes of the cane. [38] By this point of time, due to Abdul Nasir Amer Hamsah's landmark appeal the year before, the definition of life imprisonment has been changed to mean the term of incarceration for the remainder of a prisoner's natural life. The prosecution appealed for a life term in October 1998, arguing that life imprisonment should be the benchmark sentence for killings that arose from gang-related fights in the interest of public order and safety, and cannot be lower than the maximum sentence for rape (which is 20 years). Under the law back then, an offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder warranted either a life sentence, or up to ten years' imprisonment, in addition to caning or a fine.

However, the Court of Appeal disagreed with the prosecution that life imprisonment should be the benchmark sentence for gang killings, as the cases of such homicides may not arise from the same reason. [39] Furthermore, the appellate judges stated that with the changes to the law and significant change of the length of life imprisonment from "20 years" to "natural life", they felt that this signalled the courts' need to be cautious before committing an offender, especially a young person, to life behind bars:

Extracted from Public Prosecutor v Tan Kei Loon Allan [1998] 3 SLR(R) 679:

On the question whether a sentence of life imprisonment was appropriate, we were naturally impressed by the implications of our decision in Abdul Nasir. Certainly, even with R119A, a sentence of life is now much harsher than it was before our ruling in Abdul Nasir. Whereas an accused person previously would serve a maximum sentence of 20 years, with a potential remission commuting his sentence to one of 13 years and 4 months, he must now serve a minimum of 20 years’ imprisonment, at which point his release would be within the discretion of a Life Imprisonment Review Board. So, the minimum period of incarceration is now six years and eight months longer, whilst the maximum period of incarceration, previously 20 years, is now the remainder of the prisoner's natural life. In this context it is equally important to note that under the old position, his release after 20 years would have been guaranteed, but a prisoner sentenced for life in respect of a crime committed after Abdul Nasir has no such peace of mind.

In that respect, we are of the view that the courts must now exercise caution before committing a young offender to life imprisonment. Contrary to traditional reasoning, in similar cases involving a youthful offender on the one hand and an older offender in the other, the youthful offender sentenced to life imprisonment would now be subject to a longer period of incarceration than an older offender, assuming they both lived to the same age. [40]

The late High Court judge Lai Kew Chai (deceased since 2006), who delivered the verdict he finalized with Thean Lip Ping (L. P. Thean) and M. Karthigesu, also highlighted the limits to sentencing an offender to either life or up to ten years, given that judges cannot impose sentences of more than ten years but less than life, which would leave judges with the dilemma that a life term may be an excessive punishment for an offender convicted of culpable homicide, which was exactly the case for Tan based on the mitigating and aggravating factors of his case. In his own words, Justice Lai quoted:

Extracted from Public Prosecutor v Tan Kei Loon Allan [1998] 3 SLR(R) 679:

In a situation in which the court is desirous of a sentence greater than ten years, but feels that a sentence of life imprisonment is excessive, we have no choice but to come down, however reluctantly, on the side of leniency. Otherwise, the punishment imposed would significantly exceed the offender's culpability. It would, in our view, be wrong to adopt an approach in which the court would prefer an excessive sentence to an inadequate one. [40]

As such, the prosecution's appeal was rejected, but the Court of Appeal increased Tan's sentence to the alternate maximum term of ten years' imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane, as they conceded in agreement with the prosecution that Tan's seven-year sentence and nine-stroke caning were not manifestly adequate to address his culpability of the killing. [41] However, the ruling in Tan's case was frequently referred to in subsequent cases of culpable homicide before the courts, where the prosecution sought a life term for the offender(s), in which some offenders were sentenced to life in prison while others get not more than ten years' imprisonment.

Eventually, in 2008, the Penal Code was revised and Section 304 of the Penal Code was amended to allow judges to impose sentences of either life or up to 20 years in jail with/without caning and/or a fine for future cases of culpable homicide not amounting to murder from 2008 onwards. [42]

Public Prosecutor v Kho Jabing (2015)

On 14 January 2015, the prosecution appealed against the re-sentencing of Kho Jabing, a Malaysian who was convicted of the 2008 murder of a Chinese construction worker during an armed robbery. Kho was sentenced to death in 2010 for murder, but the 2013 legal reforms to the death penalty allowed Kho, like other death row prisoners in Singapore, to appeal for re-sentencing, and High Court judge Tay Yong Kwang (who is current Judge of Appeal since 2016) re-sentenced Kho to life in prison and 24 strokes of the cane. The ruling of the appeal, by a 3–2 decision, led to Kho being sentenced to death once again and he was eventually hanged on 20 May 2016 after several failed attempts to overturn his sentence. [43]

The verdict is considered as a benchmark of sentencing guidelines for judges to decide between the death penalty and life sentence for murder, as the five judges, despite conflicting decisions between the majority and minority on the final sentence, unanimously agreed that the death penalty should be imposed in serious cases of murder where an offender, despite not having an intention to kill, exhibited viciousness and/or a blatant disregard for human life, and furthermore, if an offender's actions outraged the feelings of the community. [44] [45] This verdict of Kho's case effectively impacted on the outcomes of several future cases, where some murderers were sentenced to life imprisonment due to their conduct not sufficiently calling for the death sentence while others were executed.

Legislation

Judicial sentencing powers

In Singapore, both the High Court and Court of Appeal have the power to sentence an offender to life imprisonment; and the Court of Appeal could either raise a fixed sentence to life, reduce a death sentence to life or reduce a life sentence to a fixed jail term. [46] In the cases of Ridzuan Mega Abdul Rahman and Azlin Arujunah in 2022, who were both charged for the fatal abuse of their five-year-old son, the Court of Appeal increased the couple's sentences to life imprisonment, after finding Ridzuan guilty of causing grievous harm and Azlin guilty of murder. [47] [48] Convicted drug trafficker Aishamudin Jamaludin (who only acted as a courier in his case), had his sentence of 25 years' jail and caning (15 strokes) for a lower drug offence increased to life imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane in 2020 due to the prosecution's appeal to convict him of the original capital drug charge. [49] In a 1998 landmark case relating to the successful partial defence of sudden and grave provocation against murder, a Malaysian named Kwan Cin Cheng had his sentence increased from ten years to life imprisonment for culpable homicide by the Court of Appeal, due to the judges feeling that the manner of Kwan killing his girlfriend being too deplorable and violent that a ten-year term was manifestly inadequate despite their disagreement to the prosecution's arguments for the murder charge and death penalty. [50] In another case, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal of 55-year-old brothel owner Chan Lie Sian, who was convicted of the murder of William Tiah Hung Wai, and they re-sentenced Chan to life imprisonment after overturning his death sentence in July 2019. [51]

Not only that, the President of Singapore have the power to grant a death row inmate clemency and commute his or her death sentence to life imprisonment, but since 1965, there were only six successful cases of clemency (two for drug trafficking and four for murder) when the President pardoned an inmate from execution in Singapore. The last case was in April 1998 when then President Ong Teng Cheong granted clemency to 19-year-old convicted murderer Mathavakannan Kalimuthu and commuted his sentence to life imprisonment. [52] Not only that, the President also had the power to pardon a prisoner from serving a life sentence and order the convict's release, which was the case for Sim Ah Cheoh, a drug trafficker and mother of two who suffered from terminal cancer and thus asked the President for clemency a second time to allow her to be released and spend her remaining time with her family. Sim was originally sentenced to hang in 1988 for smuggling 1.37 kg of heroin before her death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by a presidential pardon. After then President Ong Teng Cheong approved her second clemency petition, Sim was released in February 1995, and died one month later. [53] [54]

However, the Court of Appeal, being the highest court of the nation, also had the authority to increase a life sentence (or any other jail term) to the death penalty, as demonstrated by several cases like Rozman Jusoh (from seven years to death), [55] Gerardine Andrew (from eight years to death), [56] Kho Jabing (from life to death) [57] and Chia Kee Chen (from life to death). [58] The courts of Singapore also had the authority to acquit a person of an offence punishable by a life term, as demonstrated by some cases like that of Ramadass Punnusamy, a 41-year-old Malaysian and alleged drug courier who was originally sentenced to life with caning (15 strokes) for smuggling 1.875 kg of cannabis by the High Court before the Court of Appeal reviewed the case and found that both Ramadass and his co-accused Raj Kumar Aiyachami (originally sentenced to death) were innocent of the alleged drug offence, leading to the acquittal and release of both Ramadass and Raj in May 2022. [59]

Parole conditions and sentencing

Before 20 August 1997, a life sentence meant a prison term of twenty years, and like all other fixed term sentences, it carried the usual one-third remission for good behaviour, which allowed prisoners to gain parole after serving at least two-thirds of their sentences. In the case of Bobby Chung Hua Watt, a murder convict and carpenter whose death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in January 1980 after receiving clemency, he served two-thirds of his life term (equivalent to 13 years and four months) before he was released on parole for good behaviour and had the final third of the sentence remitted. [60]

After the landmark appeal of Abdul Nasir Amer Hamsah on 20 August 1997, although life imprisonment is meant to last for the remainder of a convict's natural lifespan, the sentence still carries a possibility of release on parole after a minimum period of 20 years behind bars. A life convict can be eligible for parole based on his conduct in prison, albeit with conditions like no further instances of reoffending while the parole order remains in force and this remission order, which suspends the prisoner's life sentence, would last until the convict's death. Even if a convict is not eligible after reaching the 20-year mark of his sentence, he will still be periodically assessed annually until the authorities are satisfied that he becomes eligible for parole. [46] However, according to Josephus Tan, a criminal lawyer who formerly defended several criminals at risk of facing the gallows, he stated that there was "no guarantee of release" for the life term prisoners despite their right to parole and he personally did not see any post-1997 cases of a life sentence prisoner being released on parole. [61]

One instance of a "natural life sentence" convict being released on parole was Singaporean Vincent Lee Chuan Leong, who masterminded the kidnapping of a 14-year-old girl on 9 September 1999, and within the same month, Lee and his two accomplices were arrested and they were all sentenced to life imprisonment in April 2000. According to a YouTube video, Vincent Lee, who was 33 years old when committing the crime, was currently released on parole from prison at the age of 54 since 22 June 2020 after serving a total of 20 years, ten months and nine days in prison with good behaviour, and is employed as a lorry driver. However, Lee's case was the only known and reported case of a life term prisoner released on parole. [62] [63]

Unlike the United States and certain Western countries like England, the current life imprisonment laws in Singapore did not adopt a practice of life without parole, and the courts in Singapore had never imposed any consecutive natural life sentences on convicts in any case since after 1997. They decreed that all those people who received fixed prison terms other than life imprisonment would have to serve their fixed jail terms concurrently with life imprisonment, unless their life sentences were reduced and thus made the fixed jail terms to run consecutively with the reduced sentence. [46]

Similarly, an offender sentenced to two or more terms of life imprisonment would have to serve the life terms concurrently instead of consecutively. One example was Soh Wee Kian, a former National Serviceman who killed a woman and grievously stabbed three more females in four stabbing incidents. Soh, who was assessed to be suffering from an adjustment disorder and thus had his murder charge reduced, was sentenced in August 2013 to serve two life sentences – one for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and another for a charge of causing grievous hurt with dangerous weapons – by the High Court, though however, the trial court ordered Soh to serve both terms of life imprisonment concurrently instead of consecutively. [64] A much earlier case occurred in 1984 when Beh Meng Chai, a Malaysian and one of the three perpetrators of an armed-robbery and double murder case, was sentenced to two life sentences for two manslaughter charges, as well as ten years for each charge of armed robbery, although his life terms and other sentences were ordered to be served concurrently, in addition to 24 strokes of the cane. [65] [66]

Offences punishable with life

Penal Code

Under the Penal Code, [67] there are more than forty offences that can result in life imprisonment. For certain offences, life imprisonment is the maximum penalty, while for some capital offences, life imprisonment is the minimum penalty under the law, notably murder with no intention to kill since 2013:

  • Murder (§302(2)) (applicable only under S300(b), S300(c) and S300(d) of the Penal Code)
  • Abetting the suicide of a person under the age of 18 or an "insane" person (§305)
  • Robbery committed by five or more people that results in the death of a person (§396)
  • Attempted murder with harm caused to the victim (§307)
  • Culpable homicide not amounting to murder (§304)
  • Criminal breach of trust by a public servant (§409)
  • Causing grievous hurt with dangerous weapons/means (§326)
  • Voluntarily causing hurt to extort property or to constrain to an illegal act (§329)
  • Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession or to compel restoration of property (§331)
  • Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from their duty (§333)
  • Piracy (§130B) (Mandatory)

There is also a section of the Penal Code which slated that whoever was found guilty of committing attempted murder while serving a life sentence in Singapore, he/she would be automatically sentenced to death. Originally, the offence of rape was punishable by life imprisonment as the maximum sentence before the maximum sentence was amended to twenty years' imprisonment instead, due to the effects of life imprisonment being extended to natural life. [46]

Kidnapping Act

Under the Kidnapping Act, several kidnapping offences, notably kidnapping for ransom, dictates life imprisonment as the minimum punishment upon conviction. [68]

Section 3 of the Kidnapping Act provides:

Whoever, with intent to hold any person for ransom, abducts or wrongfully restrains or wrongfully confines that person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be punished on conviction with death or imprisonment for life and shall, if he is not sentenced to death, also be liable to caning. [68]

In certain cases of life imprisonment for kidnapping, caning is also potentially imposed (exclusively for male convicts) under certain circumstances like the vulnerability of the victim, the presence of weapons or if any harm/threat was made during the kidnapping. In the 2014 case of Sheng Siong kidnapper Lee Sze Yong, the High Court sentenced him to life imprisonment with three strokes of the cane for, with the abetment of Heng Chen Boon (who served three years' jail for wrongful confinement), abducting the 79-year-old mother of the Sheng Siong supermarket chain owner. [27] In another kidnapping case that took place in 2003's Christmas Day, Tan Ping Koon and Chua Ser Lien (who committed suicide at Changi Prison in July 2020) [69] were both jailed for life and caned three strokes for targeting and abducting a seven-year-old girl into their car. [70] [71] Selvaraju Satippan, who held a reporter and her maid hostage in 2003 and even used a knife to threaten and harm the victims, was given 24 strokes of the cane in addition to his life sentence for having committed arson, using a knife and caused harm to the hostages. [72] [73] [26] Abdul Nasir Amer Hamsah, in another case, received 12 strokes of the cane and life imprisonment for kidnapping and holding two police officers hostage with another man in 1996. [10]

In contrast to the above cases, caning was not imposed for Vincent Lee Chuan Leong and his two accomplices Shi Song Jing and Zhou Jian Guang, who were all sentenced to life imprisonment without caning for abducting a 14-year-old female student on account of their lack of criminal records and their proper care and treatment towards the girl while she was in their captivity. [74] In the 2001 Tay Teng Joo kidnapping case, both Agnes Ng Lei Eng and Ng Soon Teck were jailed for life but spared the cane due to Agnes Ng being a female and both were unarmed unlike the mastermind Chng Teo Heng, who was caned six times (in addition to a life sentence) for using a knife. [26]

Misuse of Drugs Act

Since 2013, the changes to the death penalty laws for capital drug trafficking allowed judges to have the discretion to sentence drug traffickers to life imprisonment, provided that they acted as couriers, cooperated with the authorities to disrupt drug-related activities and/or suffering from mental illnesses. [75] Notable cases of traffickers who received life imprisonment includes Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian who was initially sentenced to death before the reduction of his sentence to life. [76]

There were also certain offences where trafficking of drugs with amounts below the capital threshold may also attract life imprisonment as a possible punishment, which is also the maximum for the trafficking of such amounts. [75]

Arms Offences Act

Under the Arms Offences Act, there were several offences that would warrant life imprisonment upon conviction, either as the mandatory sentence in some cases, or the minimum or maximum punishment for several others. These include trafficking of arms, and unlawful possessions of firearms upon arrest for any scheduled offence. [77]

One example of a person sentenced to life in prison under the Act was Muhammad Iskandar Sa'at, a 23-year-old Singaporean who was the culprit of the Khoo Teck Puat Hospital shooting incident in 2015, in which he snatched a revolver with attempt to cause hurt to Staff Sergeant Muhammad Sadli bin Razali while attempting to escape from the hospital, where he was receiving medical treatment shortly after his capture for theft. Iskandar was sentenced to a mandatory term of life imprisonment and 18 strokes of the cane after pleading guilty to a reduced charge of unlawful possession of a firearm for causing hurt to a public servant. [78]

Another case was Nyu Kok Meng, a Malaysian who, together with serial killer Sek Kim Wah, robbed a businessman and his family while armed with a knife and a stolen military rifle. Although Nyu did not help Sek to murder three of the five hostages, he faced charges of using a firearm to commit armed robbery under the Arms Offences Act, and he was sentenced to life imprisonment with six strokes of the cane on 9 July 1985. [79] [80]

Hijacking of Aircraft and Protection of Aircraft and International Airports Act

Under Section 124 of the Hijacking of Aircraft and Protection of Aircraft and International Airports Act, an offender can be sentenced to life imprisonment as the mandatory punishment if they were found guilty under this Act for whichever offences related to:

  1. hijacking of aircraft
  2. violence against passengers or crew members
  3. destroying, damaging or endangering the safety of aircraft
  4. and endangering safety at aerodromes

This law was first enacted since 1978. [81]

Sentencing conditions and exceptions

There are several conditions and exceptions for courts in Singapore to consider in cases where a person faces a potential life sentence under the law for whichever scheduled offence charged.

Mentally ill offenders

Cases of culpable homicide not amounting to murder

For instance, should a person suffering from a mental illness was charged with any offence punishable by life (or less than life), notably culpable homicide not amounting to murder (or manslaughter), the courts has to ascertain the extent of diminished responsibility suffered by the person. While the defence of diminished responsibility could enable the reduction of a murder charge to culpable homicide, it was also a condition where the judges can refer to as a relevant factor of consideration on whether life imprisonment, as the maximum punishment, should be imposed on the offender. In several cases of life imprisonment for mentally ill offenders, the judges were of the opinion that the offender should be committed to a sentence of life behind bars if the condition presents him/her as a psychiatric danger to society and to himself.

In the 2006 precedent case of 37-year-old Constance Chee Cheong Hin, a former air stewardess who abducted four-year-old Sindee Neo and threw her off the girl's flat, causing Neo to die from fatal head injuries five days later, she was sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment for wrongful abduction and culpable homicide (three years for the first charge and ten years for the second charge). In rejecting the prosecution's arguments and psychiatric opinion for life imprisonment in Chee's case, then High Court judge V. K. Rajah stated that Chee should not be liable for life imprisonment on account that she had strong familial support, with her three sisters writing to the court their affirmation to take care of Chee and ensure she had proper treatment for her schizophrenia, with one of her sisters making plans for Chee to live with her permanently after her release, and with reference to another medical report, Justice Rajah noted that with consistent and sufficient medical treatment, Chee's schizophrenic condition would eventually get better and hence, her psychiatric condition was not severe enough to the extent of needing to have Chee separated from society for as long as life, thus making life imprisonment inappropriate for her. [82]

The case of Constance Chee was referred to in several cases. One of the cases was Guen Garlejo Aguilar, a Filipino maid who killed her friend Jane Parangan La Puebla and disposed of two suitcases containing the victim's dismembered body parts at Orchard Road and MacRitchie Reservoir respectively. Aguilar, who was found to be suffering from depression, pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of culpable homicide and sentenced to ten years in jail. V. K. Rajah, the judge who also heard Constance Chee's case, heard Aguilar's case and took into consideration the root of her illness being her financial woes, and that with strong familial support, and her progressive recovery from depression since the start of her treatment while in remand, Aguilar's future risk of re-offending was low. Justice Rajah quoted about the conduct of Aguilar under influence of her depression, "By choosing to plant the deceased's head and torso in two very public places, her behaviour strikes one as nothing short of incoherent and incomprehensible,... Her post-offence conduct was baffling and testament to the workings of a tortured mind". [83]

Another was the 2005 case of 27-year-old Lim Ah Liang, a male prostitute who stabbed and hammered his 37-year-old lover Ho Kien Leong to death. Lim was initially charged with murder but pled guilty to culpable homicide due to dysthymia, a life-long depressive disorder, that severely impaired his mental faculties at the time of the killing. The trial judge, V. K. Rajah (judge of the above two cases), having considered the elderly age of Lim's mother and stepfather, the lack of familial support, and the lifelong need to subject Lim to medication and a controlled environment based on his condition, decided to sentence Lim to life imprisonment. [84]

Cases of drug trafficking

Since 2013, the changes to the Misuse of Drugs Act decreed that all judges were to impose a mandatory life sentence for drug traffickers who were suffering from mental illnesses, provided that their conditions had substantially impaired their mental responsibility at the time of the offence. This requirement for eligibility, if fulfilled, could spare such drug offenders from the death penalty in spite of the amount of drugs exceeding the capital threshold.

In the case of Dinesh Pillai Reja Retnam, he became the first drug trafficker to have his death sentence lowered to life imprisonment during a 2013 re-sentencing trial by the High Court on the grounds of diminished responsibility, as he was assessed to suffer from depression at the time he trafficked 19.35g of heroin. [85] Pang Siew Fum, the 60-year-old accomplice of drug courier Cheong Chun Yin (who smuggled 2,726g of heroin from Myanmar to Singapore), was also re-sentenced to life imprisonment in 2015 as a result of depression. [86] Upon his appeal in 2022, 50-year-old Roszaidi Osman's death sentence was reduced to life imprisonment by the Court of Appeal through a 3–2 majority decision on account of his depression and substance use disorder despite his offence of trafficking 32.54g of pure heroin. [87]

Mentally unsound offenders

However, for cases of people who were mentally unsound when they commit any offences that warrant life imprisonment, they would be acquitted of any charges and indefinitely detained at the President's Pleasure, and they would serve their detention at a mental facility, prison or any other safe places in custody. These offenders would be subject to regular psychiatric assessments until they were found mentally fit and suitable for release back into society. [88] In September 2022, Commonwealth double killer Gabriel Lien Goh was acquitted of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (punishable by life) for killing his mother and grandmother in October 2019, as he was found to be suffering from acute hallucinogen intoxication at the time of the killings and hence was of substantial unsound mind when he committed the murders of his mother and grandmother, since his drug consumption caused him to experience illusions, hallucinations and paranoid delusions at the time of the offences. After this acquittal, Goh was detained at the President's Pleasure. [89]

Underaged offenders

There was no minimum age set for a person to be sentenced to life imprisonment. However, certain laws still prohibit the imprisonment of children, although with a few exceptions.

Under Section 37 of the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA), it was decreed that a child below the age of 14 years will not be incarcerated for any offence. This is similarly applied for a person aged 14 and above but below 16, who would be detained at a juvenile rehabilitation centre, although the courts had the authority to order otherwise through evaluations of his character. These two above laws prohibit life imprisonment for young offenders from these two age groups. [46]

However, if a child or young person is convicted of a very serious crime that potentially requires a sentence of life imprisonment, and the court found that life imprisonment was the only available and suitable option to deploy during sentencing, the offender will be detained for a period of time as specified in the sentence under Section 38 of the CYPA. They would be subjected to similar conditions for eligibility of parole like adult offenders serving life in prison. [46]

Under Section 314 of the Criminal Procedure Code from 2010 onwards, if a person was found guilty of committing murder, drug trafficking or other offences punishable by death when he was below 18 years old, the convict would not receive the death penalty, and instead, he would be committed to a mandatory term of life imprisonment as an alternative punishment instead. Before its abolition in 2010, a sentence of indefinite detention at the President's Pleasure was imposed for minors who commit capital crimes while under the age of 18. [46]

The first underaged offender to be sentenced to life imprisonment for a capital offence was Zin Mar Nwe, a Myanmar maid who was charged with killing an elderly Indian woman at Choa Chu Kang in June 2018. Zin Mar Nwe, who used a knife to stab the 70-year-old victim 26 times (and it led to the woman's death), was 17 years old when she committed the offence, and after the defendant was found guilty of murder in May 2023, the trial judge Andre Maniam noted that Zin was a minor at the time of the offence, and the Criminal Procedure Code also prohibited the imposition of capital punishment for offenders who were below 18 when committing murder, and that a life sentence should be the only punishment required for such cases. As a result, Zin Mar Nwe was spared the gallows and instead, she was sentenced to life imprisonment on 4 July 2023. [90]

Elderly offenders

There was also no legislation that prohibit the imposition of life imprisonment for elderly offenders who commit crimes that warrant such a sentence in Singapore. However, in several cases, where an elderly offender faces a sentence of either life or less than life for any crimes punishable by life, the courts and/or lawyers (from either the prosecution or defence) would be cautioned against imposing imprisonment terms that may exceed the remainder of the defendant's lifespan, meaning that the sentence should not be contextually as long as life imprisonment in view of the defendant's age or health, unless in any exceptional circumstances. In the case of Tan Nam Seng, a 72-year-old retired shipping company owner who was convicted of culpable homicide for killing his 38-year-old son-in-law Spencer Tuppani in 2017 for cheating on his daughter (also Tuppani's wife) and business, the judge Dedar Singh Gill noted that Tan suffered from major depressive disorder, as well as two heart attacks and tuberculosis while in remand, and thus exercised his leniency to sentence Tan to eight-and-a-half years' jail on 21 September 2020 due to his advanced age and increasingly poor health. [91] In another case, 86-year-old Pak Kian Huat, alias Pek Kiah Huat, who was charged in 2019 for using a chopper to hack his 79-year-old partner Lim Soi Moy to death over her refusal to let him use a bigger bedroom, was sentenced to 15 years' jail for culpable homicide, with the trial judge See Kee Oon calling the offence "deliberately and unspeakably vicious and brutal" for Pak's remorseless conduct and his actions of inflicting 54 knife wounds on Lim over a trivial dispute, and stated that Pak's advanced age was not a mitigating factor in light of the brutality of the attack and would have warranted life imprisonment, which the prosecution did not pursue. [92]

However, in cases where an elderly offender was found guilty of a criminal offence that mandates a life sentence, or a capital charge that attracts a sentence of either life or death, the courts were not restricted from the possibility of sentencing such convicts to life imprisonment if they felt that the death penalty is inappropriate or that the life sentence was the only option. In the case of 69-year-old Seet Cher Hng, who was convicted of murder for killing his wife Low Hwee Geok at ITE College Central in 2018, the High Court sentenced him to a life term after the prosecution decided to not pursue the death penalty. [93] Similarly, for 67-year-old Toh Sia Guan, a homeless man who fatally stabbed 52-year-old coffee shop helper Goh Eng Thiam during a fight at Geylang in 2016, he was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison in 2020, despite his advanced age and poor health. [94] In a third case, Pung Ah Kiang, a Singaporean who was 61 years old at the time of sentencing, was sentenced to life imprisonment as he was acting as a mere courier when he assisted 41-year-old Malaysian Kishor Kumar Raguan (sentenced to death) to traffic 36.05g of heroin. [95]

Life imprisonment cases in Singapore

Murder

Culpable homicide not amounting to murder

Causing grievous hurt by dangerous means

Rape

Kidnapping

Drug trafficking

Attempted murder

War crimes

This section covers the list of defendants, mainly Japanese army and Kempeitai officers, who were responsible for the war atrocities that occurred during the Japanese occupation of Singapore (1942–1945), and they were tried and sentenced to life terms in Singapore under British laws enacted by the colonial government:

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Caning in Singapore</span> Corporal punishment

Caning is a widely used form of corporal punishment in Singapore. It can be divided into several contexts: judicial, prison, reformatory, military, school and domestic. These practices of caning as punishment were introduced during the period of British colonial rule in Singapore. Similar forms of corporal punishment are also used in some other former British colonies, including two of Singapore's neighbouring countries, Malaysia and Brunei.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment in Singapore</span>

Capital punishment in Singapore is a legal penalty. Executions in Singapore are carried out by long drop hanging, and usually take place at dawn. Thirty-three offences—including murder, drug trafficking, terrorism, use of firearms and kidnapping—warrant the death penalty under Singapore law.

Tay Yong Kwang is a Singaporean judge of the Supreme Court. He was first appointed Judicial Commissioner in 1997, appointed Judge in 2003, and appointed Judge of Appeal in 2016. He was noted for being the presiding judge in several notable cases that shocked the nation and made headlines in Singapore. He was most recently re-appointed for a further two year term on the Court of Appeal from 3 September 2024.

Choo Han Teck is a Singaporean judge of the Supreme Court. He was formerly a lawyer before his appointment to the court as a judge. It was revealed in 2021 that Choo was one of the defence lawyers representing Adrian Lim, the infamous Toa Payoh child killer who was executed in 1988 for charges of murdering a girl and boy as ritual sacrifices. In 1994, Choo also defended Phua Soy Boon, a jobless Singaporean who was hanged in 1995 for killing a moneylender.

See Kee Oon is a Singaporean judge who is currently a Judge of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arms Offences Act</span> Statute of the Parliament of Singapore

The Arms Offences Act 1973 is a statute of the Parliament of Singapore that criminalizes the illegal possession of arms and ammunition and the carrying, trafficking, and usage of arms. The law is designed specifically to make acts of ownership, knowingly receiving payment in connection with the trade of a trafficked armaments and ammunition, as well as the unlawful usage of arms and ammunition a criminal offence.

Eugene Singarajah Thuraisingam is a Singaporean lawyer. He is the founder of the law firm Eugene Thuraisingam LLP, a law firm that specialises in international arbitration and criminal and commercial litigation. He is also known for his advocacy of human rights and for his opposition of the death penalty in Singapore. In relation to his domestic practice as a criminal lawyer in Singapore, Thuraisingam has defended many alleged suspects in high profile criminal trials, including those who were dissidents and critics of the government of Singapore. For his legal service for many defendants in the court of Singapore, Doyles Guide has named him as a leading criminal defence lawyer in Singapore in 2020.

On the early morning of 31 May 2001, 17-year-old national footballer Sulaiman bin Hashim, along with his two friends were attacked by a group of eight youths from gang 369, known as Salakau, as they were walking along South Bridge Road, Clarke Quay, Singapore. Sulaiman was grievously assaulted by the gang while his two friends managed to escape. During the assault, Sulaiman sustained 13 stab wounds and two of them were fatal; he died as a result. The case was classified as murder and within the next 13 months, six of the gang members involved were arrested and eventually sentenced to jail and caning for culpable homicide, rioting and voluntarily causing grievous hurt. However, till today, the remaining two assailants were never caught.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010 Kallang slashings</span> 2010 robbery-murder case in Singapore

The 2010 Kallang slashings refer to a series of four robberies committed by a group of four Malaysians from Sarawak, Malaysia in the night of 29 May 2010 and the early hours of the morning of 30 May 2010, mostly around Kallang Area, Singapore. In the robberies, there were a total of four victims – the first three victims were seriously injured and hospitalised while a fourth victim was killed.

On 6 June 1994, two Japanese tourists were robbed and attacked by two men in their shared room in the Oriental Hotel in Singapore. One of them was brutally assaulted and died, while the other survived. The case, known as the Oriental Hotel murder, was classified as murder by the police. The perpetrators were eventually caught 2 years later and they were subsequently sentenced to serve lengthy jail terms with caning for their part in the robbery and assault of the two tourists, as well as for unrelated offences committed before their arrests.

On 30 October 2010, at Downtown East, Singapore, 19-year-old Darren Ng Wei Jie, a Singaporean student from Republic Polytechnic, was slashed by 12 youths from a rival gang after a staring incident between one of Ng's friends and one of these youths attacking him. Ng suffered from 28 knife wounds and died in Changi General Hospital five hours after the incident. The case was classified as murder, and the police arrested all the suspects. Six of them were charged with murder, but all except one were sentenced to serve lengthy jail terms with caning for culpable homicide, while the others were sentenced to varied jail terms and caning for rioting.

Chan Seng Onn is a Singaporean judge who presently serves as a Senior Judge of the High Court of Singapore. Formerly a prosecutor, Chan had previously served as a High Court judge from 2007 to 2022.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sheng Siong kidnapping</span> 2014 case of an elderly woman kidnapped in Singapore

On 8 January 2014, 79-year-old Ng Lye Poh, the mother of the Sheng Siong supermarket chain's founder CEO, was kidnapped by two men for a S$20 million ransom. The next day, shortly after the ransom was paid and Ng's release, the two kidnappers – Heng Chen Boon and Lee Sze Yong – were arrested and charged with kidnapping for ransom, an offence that carries the death penalty in Singapore, where kidnapping was considered an extremely rare crime. Eventually, one of the perpetrators, Heng, was jailed for three years on a reduced charge of abetting wrongful abduction, while Lee, who was the mastermind of the case, was found guilty of kidnapping for ransom and sentenced to life imprisonment and three strokes of the cane on 1 December 2016.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Nurdin Nguan Song</span> 1985 murder of an Indonesian fish merchant in Singapore

On 13 November 1985, 33-year-old Indonesian fish merchant Nurdin Nguan Song was murdered at a hotel along Waterloo Street, Singapore. Nurdin died after he was slashed and stabbed repeatedly by two men, who were revealed to have been paid by Nurdin's business rival to attack him. Between 1988 and 1992, the two murderers were arrested after spending several years on the run from the police, and charged with murder. One of them, a Malaysian named Loh Yoon Seong, was found guilty of murdering Nurdin and sentenced to death, while the other, a Singaporean named Tan Swee Hoon, pleaded guilty to manslaughter and for having killed Nurdin and committed an armed robbery while on the run, Tan was jailed for 23 years and given 24 strokes of the cane.

On 19 November 2014, inside a flat in Ang Mo Kio, a 32-year-old Vietnamese woman named Tran Cam Ny was suffocated to death by her 40-year-old Singaporean boyfriend Jackson Lim Hou Peng. Lim, who was previously jailed for drug offenses, was charged with murder after his arrest on the same day of his girlfriend's death. It was revealed that Lim and Tran were at the flat consuming drugs and as Tran kept making loud sounds, Lim covered her mouth to stop her making any sounds out of fear of attracting the neighbours, suffocating her. Lim was eventually found guilty of manslaughter and drug consumption, sentenced to jail for nine and a half years and given three strokes of the cane.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Png Hock Seng</span> 1997 gang-related killing of a National Serviceman in Singapore

On 25 October 1997, nearby Dhoby Ghaut MRT station, 18-year-old Png Hock Seng, a full-time National Serviceman and member of the Sio Gi Ho gang, was attacked by seven members of the Sio Koon Tong gang, which operated at Orchard Road. Png died from a stab wound inflicted on his back. The seven offenders, all youths between 16 and 19, were charged with murdering Png, whom they erroneously believed to be a member of a rival gang.

References

  1. ↑ Yuen-C, Tham (5 October 2020). "Parliament: Statistics, studies show death penalty deterred drug trafficking, firearms use and kidnapping, says Shanmugam". The Straits Times. Retrieved 12 October 2022.
  2. ↑ "Last accused person in Orchard Towers fatal fight sentenced to life imprisonment for murder". CNA. 25 April 2024.
  3. ↑ Neo Man Lee v Public Prosecutor [1991], Court of Appeal (Singapore).
  4. ↑ "Judge tells DPP: Check what life term means". The Straits Times. 19 June 1993.
  5. ↑ "DPP did not answer query by judge on length of life term". The Straits Times. 24 June 1993.
  6. ↑ "Death sentence for fish merchant's killer". The Straits Times. 11 July 1990.
  7. ↑ "杀印尼鱼商被告判死刑". Lianhe Zaobao. 11 July 1990.
  8. ↑ "三司：持刀伤人致死就算谋杀 杀鱼商死囚上诉被驳回". Lianhe Zaobao. 26 October 1991.
  9. ↑ "渔商酒店内中14刀惨死". Lianhe Wanbao. 18 June 1993.
  10. 1 2 3 "Abdul Nasir bin Amer Hamsah v Public Prosecutor". Webcite. Archived from the original on 26 April 2012. Retrieved 8 October 2022.
  11. ↑ "Oriental Hotel murder | Infopedia". eresources.nlb.gov.sg.
  12. ↑ "True Files S3E10 Fatal Step". meWATCH. Retrieved 8 October 2022.
  13. ↑ "The Best I Could S1 – EP6 Oriental Hotel Murder". meWATCH. Retrieved 8 October 2022.
  14. ↑ Abu Baker, Jalelah (16 January 2015). "Murderer fails to escape the gallows: 6 other cases involving the revised death penalty laws". The Straits Times. Archived from the original on 21 March 2018. Retrieved 8 October 2022.
  15. ↑ "Man who shot woman with revolver in 1981 armed robbery sentenced to jail". TODAY. 15 November 2022. Retrieved 15 November 2022.
  16. ↑ "Man who shot woman with revolver in 1981 armed robbery sentenced to jail". CNA. 15 November 2022. Retrieved 15 November 2022.
  17. ↑ "Singapore gunman who shot woman in robbery jailed after 32 years on the run". The Straits Times. 15 November 2022. Retrieved 15 November 2022.
  18. ↑ Saad, Imelda; Ramesh, S (9 July 2012). "Singapore completes review of mandatory death penalty". Channel NewsAsia. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  19. ↑ Abu Baker, Jalelah (16 January 2015). "Murderer fails to escape the gallows: 6 other cases involving the revised death penalty laws". The Straits Times. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  20. ↑ Pei Shan, Hoe (21 April 2015). "2 death row traffickers get life term instead". The Straits Times. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  21. ↑ "CNA Explains: Why a person may not get a death sentence even if convicted of murder". CNA. 23 September 2022. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  22. ↑ "Apex court sentences man to hang for murder, cancelling reprieve". Today Singapore. 14 January 2015. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  23. ↑ "KIDNAP GANG TO HANG". The Straits Times. 9 October 1973. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  24. ↑ "Kidnap: Five get life in place of death". The Straits Times. 3 April 1974. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  25. 1 2 Sia Ah Kew and Others v Public Prosecutor [1974], Court of Appeal (Singapore).
  26. 1 2 3 Lim, Yan Liang (10 January 2014). "Three previous cases of kidnapping for ransom over 13 years". The Straits Times. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  27. 1 2 Ng, Kelly (1 December 2016). "Man behind Sheng Siong kidnapping pleads for death penalty, gets life sentence". Today. Singapore. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  28. ↑ Lee, Min Kok (9 October 2022). "Former detective Richard Lim Beng Gee, 65, dies: 5 high-profile cases he helped crack / TEENAGE GIRL KIDNAPPED WHILE WALKING HOME". The Straits Times.
  29. ↑ "Kidnapping rare because of death penalty". AsiaOne. 12 January 2014. Retrieved 15 November 2022.
  30. ↑ "True Files S1 E8 The Paedophile". meWATCH. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  31. ↑ Vijayan, K. C. (25 January 2016). "Ex-Supreme Court judge T S Sinnathuray dies: 6 memorable cases he presided over". The Straits Times. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  32. ↑ "'Dangerous paedophile' who sexually abused 11 schoolboys gets 42 years' jail, 24 strokes / Sex criminals who got long jail terms". The Straits Times. 22 August 2022. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  33. ↑ "Molester who preyed on boys jailed 40 years". The Straits Times. 30 August 1997.
  34. ↑ Cap. 224,1985 Rev. Ed.
  35. 1 2 Lim Hock Hin Kelvin v Public Prosecutor [1997], Court of Appeal (Singapore).
  36. ↑ "Sex offender's appeal for shorter term turned down". The Straits Times. 4 November 1997.
  37. ↑ "Doing more to keep child sex offenders from making same mistake". The Straits Times. 15 August 2021. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  38. ↑ "Teen who killed rival gang member jailed". The Straits Times. 10 August 1998.
  39. ↑ "Court ups sentence of teen killer". The Straits Times. 6 October 1998.
  40. 1 2 Public Prosecutor v Tan Kei Loon Allan [1998] 3 SLR(R) 679, Court of Appeal (Singapore).
  41. ↑ "SINGAPORE Judicial CP – October 1998". Corpun. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  42. ↑ Cap. 224,2008 Rev. Ed.
  43. ↑ "Public Prosecutor v Kho Jabing (2015)" (PDF). Singapore Law Watch. 14 January 2015. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  44. ↑ "Convicted murderer fails to escape gallows a second time". The Straits Times. 14 January 2015. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  45. ↑ Abu Baker, Jalelah (16 January 2015). "Murderer fails to escape the gallows: 6 other cases involving the revised death penalty laws". The Straits Times. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  46. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "How Long Is Life Imprisonment in Singapore? And Other FAQs". Singapore Legal Advice. 1 February 2021. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  47. ↑ "Mother who scalded 5-year-old convicted of murder on appeal; father gets life term". CNA. 12 July 2022. Retrieved 13 October 2022.
  48. ↑ "S'pore mum, 30, escapes death penalty, 28-year jail term upped to life imprisonment for scalding son, 5, to death". Mothership. 18 October 2022. Retrieved 18 October 2022.
  49. ↑ "Drug courier's jail term increased from 25 years to life imprisonment following appeal". The Straits Times. 17 July 2020. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
  50. ↑ "PP v Kwan Cin Cheng". Studocu. 9 February 1998. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
  51. ↑ "Brothel owner spared the gallows for murdering pimp, jailed for life instead". Today Singapore. 30 July 2019. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  52. ↑ "From death sentence to life in prison to freedom". AsiaOne. 23 January 2012. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  53. ↑ "Cancer-stricken, dying drug trafficker pardoned and freed". The Straits Times. 18 February 1995.
  54. ↑ "Cancer pardon woman dies". The New Paper. 30 March 1995.
  55. ↑ "Two get death for drugs after prosecutor's appeal". The Straits Times. 15 August 1995.
  56. ↑ "Woman gets death for role in murder". The Straits Times. 10 September 1998.
  57. ↑ Lum, Selina (20 May 2016). "Convicted murderer Jabing Kho hanged after latest bid to escape gallows fails". The Straits Times. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  58. ↑ Lum, Selina (27 June 2018). "Businessman who murdered wife's ex-lover sentenced to death upon prosecution's appeal". The Straits Times. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  59. ↑ Lum, Selina (27 May 2022). "Apex court acquits 2 men of cannabis trafficking; 1 of them was on death row". The Straits Times. Retrieved 2 November 2022.
  60. ↑ "这11人在新加坡犯了滔天大罪也能有退路". 红蚂蚁 (in Chinese). 3 January 2019. Retrieved 7 June 2020.
  61. ↑ "CNA Explains: Why a person may not get a death sentence even if convicted of murder". CNA . Singapore. 23 September 2022. Retrieved 27 November 2022.
  62. ↑ "Life After 20 Years in Singapore Changi Prison: Vincent's Second Half". YouTube. Our Grandfather Story. 25 January 2021. Archived from the original on 5 February 2021. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  63. ↑ Lee, Min Kok (19 January 2016). "Former detective Richard Lim Beng Gee, 65, dies: 5 high-profile cases he helped crack / TEENAGE GIRL KIDNAPPED WHILE WALKING HOME" . Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  64. 1 2 "Woodlands stabbing: Man sentenced to life in prison, but spared caning". TODAY. 22 August 2013. Retrieved 29 April 2022.
  65. ↑ "四年前裕廊发生 渔市场双尸案 焊工承认误杀 被判终身监禁另鞭笞24下". Shin Min Daily (in Chinese). 8 October 1984.
  66. ↑ "Life term and 24 strokes for killer in double-murder case". The Straits Times. 9 October 1984.
  67. ↑ Cap. 224,2013 Rev. Ed.
  68. 1 2 Cap. 151,1999 Rev. Ed.
  69. ↑ "Man serving life sentence over 2003 kidnapping killed himself at Changi Prison: Coroner". The Straits Times. 22 December 2020. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  70. ↑ Lay, Belmont (14 October 2019). "Last 2 times children were kidnapped off the streets in S'pore: 1999 & 2003". Mothership.sg. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  71. ↑ "Public Prosecutor v Tan Ping Koon and another". Supreme Court judgements. Retrieved 22 December 2020.
  72. ↑ "Public Prosecutor v Selvaraju s/o Satippan". Supreme Court Judgements. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  73. ↑ "Selvaraju s/o Satippan v Public Prosecutor". Supreme Court Judgements. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  74. ↑ Lee, Min Kok (19 January 2016). "Former detective Richard Lim Beng Gee, 65, dies: 5 high-profile cases he helped crack / TEENAGE GIRL KIDNAPPED WHILE WALKING HOME". The Straits Times. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
  75. 1 2 Cap. 185,2013 Rev. Ed.
  76. ↑ Lum, Selina (24 November 2013). "A street urchin's journey to Death Row and back". The Straits Times. Retrieved 11 October 2022.
  77. ↑ Cap. 14,1998 Rev. Ed.
  78. ↑ K.C., Vijayan (20 March 2018). "Man who snatched police officer's revolver and fired three shots gets life term in jail, caning". The Straits Times. Retrieved 10 October 2022.
  79. ↑ "Andrew Road murder case: Man gets life". The Straits Times. Singapore. 9 July 1985. p. 1. Retrieved 20 November 2022.
  80. ↑ "Guilty As Charged: Serial murderer Sek Kim Wah found it 'thrilling' to strangle victims". The Straits Times. 15 May 2016. Retrieved 20 November 2022.
  81. ↑ "Hijacking of Aircraft and Protection of Aircraft and International Airports Act 1978". Government of Singapore.
  82. ↑ "Ex-SIA stewardess gets 13 years' jail". The Star . Malaysia. 8 April 2006. Retrieved 7 November 2022.
  83. ↑ "Guilty As Charged: Filipino maid Guen Garlejo Aguilar strangled best friend over $2,000". The Straits Times. Singapore. 17 May 2016. Retrieved 8 November 2022.
  84. ↑ "Public Prosecutor v Lim Ah Liang". Supreme Court Judgements. Retrieved 8 November 2022.
  85. ↑ Poh, Ian (3 March 2014). "Drug trafficker on death row gets life sentence instead, in first case involving depression". The Straits Times. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  86. ↑ Pei Shan, Hoe (21 April 2015). "2 death row traffickers get life term instead". The Straits Times. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  87. ↑ "Drug courier's death penalty reduced to life sentence in split decision by Court of Appeal". The Straits Times. 1 December 2022. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  88. ↑ "The last 2 detainees serving time at the President's pleasure". The Straits Times. 7 January 2018. Retrieved 9 December 2022.
  89. ↑ "Commonwealth double deaths: Man who killed his mother, grandmother to be detained indefinitely". CNA. 23 September 2022. Retrieved 9 December 2022.
  90. ↑ "Myanmar maid who stabbed employer's mum-in-law 26 times gets life term for murder". The Straits Times. 4 July 2023.
  91. ↑ "Boon Tat Street death: Man jailed 8½ years for killing son-in-law". The Straits Times. 21 September 2020. Retrieved 26 November 2022.
  92. ↑ "'Vicious, horrifying': 15 years' jail for 86-year-old man who hacked partner to death with chopper". TODAY. 22 May 2023.
  93. ↑ "ITE murder: Retiree who stabbed ex-wife sentenced to life imprisonment". The Straits Times. 22 September 2021. Retrieved 26 November 2022.
  94. ↑ "Man jailed for life for murdering coffee shop assistant". The Straits Times. 3 March 2020. Retrieved 26 November 2022.
  95. ↑ "Malaysian who delivered bag of heroin given death penalty, S'porean recipient gets life term". The Straits Times. 4 February 2022. Retrieved 10 December 2022.
  96. ↑ Lum, Selina (13 March 2014). "Prison officer to spend life in jail for murdering girlfriend". The Straits Times. Retrieved 29 October 2022.
  97. ↑ Lee, Jan (19 April 2018). "Man once spared for killing brother-in-law gets life sentence over another death". The Straits Times. Retrieved 29 October 2022.
  98. ↑ Lum, Selina (4 July 2019). "Toa Payoh carpark murder: Man who killed waitress in phone row gets jailed for life, caning". The Straits Times. Retrieved 29 October 2022.
  99. ↑ "Cleaner, who killed supervisor during row, gets life in jail". The Straits Times. Singapore. 5 November 2020. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  100. ↑ "Crimewatch 2021 – Ep 1 Ferry Terminal Murder". meWATCH. 25 April 2021. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  101. ↑ "Apex court rejects mental illness defence by maid who killed employer by stabbing her almost 100 times". Today. 31 March 2022. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  102. ↑ "Retiree engraved dates of ex-wife's alleged affairs on knife before stabbing her at ITE". The Straits Times. 14 September 2021. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  103. ↑ "ITE murder: Retiree who stabbed ex-wife sentenced to life imprisonment". The Straits Times. 22 September 2021. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  104. ↑ "Life sentence for retiree who killed ex-wife at ITE: 4 other cases of murder and death in families". The Straits Times. 23 September 2021. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  105. ↑ "Man convicted of murdering housemate in Teck Whye flat sentenced to life imprisonment". TODAY. Singapore. 13 January 2022. Retrieved 29 October 2022.
  106. ↑ "Man gets life term, caning for killing girlfriend's 9-month-old son in Yishun carpark". The Straits Times. Singapore. 11 August 2022. Retrieved 26 October 2022.
  107. ↑ "Life imprisonment for man who stabbed roommate after fight over spending habits". CNA. 22 September 2022. Retrieved 29 October 2022.
  108. ↑ "Public Prosecutor v Purwanti Parji". Supreme Court Judgements. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  109. ↑ "Purwanti Parji v Public Prosecutor". Supreme Court Judgements. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  110. ↑ "Indon maids escape gallows". The Straits Times. 6 September 2005.
  111. ↑ "Public Prosecutor v Lim Ah Liang". Supreme Court Judgements. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  112. ↑ "Man who slit his mum's throat sentenced to life imprisonment". TODAY. Singapore. 15 September 2015.
  113. ↑ "Coroner rules out foul play in death of inmate serving life term after killing mother". The Straits Times. Singapore. 13 April 2023.
  114. ↑ "Life in jail for man with schizophrenia who killed older sister by stamping on her chest". TODAY. Singapore. 14 September 2021. Retrieved 29 October 2022.
  115. ↑ "Man gets life term for raping army wife". The Straits Times. 8 January 1970.
  116. ↑ "Rape of 2 girls: Life for youth". The Straits Times. 8 October 1975.
  117. ↑ "Man who raped child gets life and cane". The Straits Times. 2 March 1976.
  118. ↑ "Life and 24 strokes for raping three girls". The Straits Times. 18 July 1978.
  119. ↑ "LABOURER GETS LIFE SENTENCE FOR RAPING FIVE GIRLS". Singapore Monitor. 13 March 1984.
  120. ↑ "Man gets 'life' and 15 strokes for rape". The Straits Times. 26 January 1985.
  121. ↑ "Three armed robbers escape death penalty". The Straits Times. 8 June 1993.
  122. ↑ "Gun shots: Man faces life in jail". Today. 18 September 2001. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  123. ↑ "Armed robber gets life imprisonment". Today. 19 September 2001. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  124. ↑ K.C., Vijayan (20 March 2018). "Man who snatched police officer's revolver and fired three shots gets life term in jail, caning". The Straits Times. Retrieved 17 October 2022.
  125. ↑ "Drug courier's death penalty reduced to life sentence in split decision by Court of Appeal". The Straits Times. 1 December 2022. Retrieved 1 December 2022.
  126. ↑ Lee, "War Crimes Trials in Singapore", pp. 305—8.
  127. ↑ "Death for two and life term for five found guilty". New Nation. 10 January 1975. Retrieved 8 December 2022.
  128. ↑ "Double Tenth trial | Infopedia". eresources.nlb.gov.sg.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.