Malaysian Drug Trafficker Loses Bid to Escape Death Sentence in Singapore

Yong Vui Kong, a 23-year-old Malaysian who faces execution for smuggling 47 grams (1.7 ounces) of heroin to Singapore, lost a bid at the city state’s highest court for a presidential review of his sentence.

Yong’s lawyer M. Ravi asked a 3-judge appeal panel to re-examine Singapore’s clemency process, in the 1st case of its kind. Ravi had argued the president had the power to grant a pardon, rather than Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s cabinet, which had earlier advised President SR Nathan not to commute the sentence.

Yong’s appeal was “devoid of merit,” Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong said in delivering the verdict today on behalf of a three-judge panel.

Singapore, which has one of the world’s lowest crime rates, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes, has a mandatory death sentence for drug smuggling. Yong had lost an earlier appeal in which he argued the mandatory provision was unconstitutional.

Ravi said he plans to appeal again to the city state’s cabinet seeking clemency.

“He was hoping for the best,” Ravi said after the ruling. “He’s deeply disappointed and aggrieved by the judgment.”

Yong, who appeared in court today in a purple prison jumpsuit with his head shaved, was a former kitchen helper who sold DVDs in a night market. He claimed he tried to provide money for his mother by smuggling drugs into Singapore. An online petition appealing for clemency for Yong had at least 42,039 signatures.

Mandatory Death Sentence

Singapore also imposes a mandatory death sentence for murder and some firearms offenses. The city’s overall crime rate slipped 0.6 percent to 32,986 cases last year, according to data from the police.

“We take a very serious view of drug trafficking,” Lee said in December 2005, when he dismissed Australia’s calls to commute Australian drug smuggler Nguyen Tuong Van’s death sentence. “The penalty is death.”

Nguyen’s death sentence for smuggling 396 grams of heroin into Singapore in 2002 caused an uproar in Australia. Consumers, politicians and newspapers editorials there called for boycotts of companies including Singapore Telecommunications Ltd.’s Optus unit and Singapore Airlines Ltd.

The case is Yong Vui Kong v Attorney-General CA144/2010 in the Singapore Court of Appeal.

Click here to sign an online petition urging Singapore's president to commute Yong Vui Kong's death sentence to a prison sentence.

Source: Bloomberg News, April 4, 2011

Court upholds death sentence against Vui Kong in drug case

SINGAPORE: The Court of Appeal here has dismissed the appeal by Sabah-born Yong Vui Kong, 23, who was sentenced to death by the High Court for possession of 47.27gm of heroin.

The appeal was dismissed in a joint judgment by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and Judges of Appeal Justice Andrew Phang Boon Leong and Justice V.K. Rajah yesterday.

Vui Kong’s lawyer M. Ravi had brought up several points in the appeal, including a statement by the republic’s Law Minister K. Shanmugam who commented last May that he should not be pardoned as it could lead to an increase in drug-related activities in the country.

The statement was made before Yong could submit his clemency application to Singapore president S.R. Nathan.

Before announcing their judgment, Chan explained that the three judges had unanimously agreed that the appeal had no merit and should be dismissed.

Vui Kong, who kept looking down during the whole process, seemed distraught when the decision was finally made.

Outside the court, his elder brother Vun Leong, 26, said he was saddened by the court’s decision.

“I feel that they are being unfair to my brother as he was young, uneducated and easily influenced at the time of the incident.

“I hope the Malaysian Government will help him as he has changed for the better,” he said.

Vun Leong said he had yet to break the news to his mother.

Ravi said he would continue with his clemency petition to the Singapore president.

“Although the decision is very disappointing, we will not give up and will submit the clemency petition to the president within the next three months,” he said, adding that the president then had three months to reply.

“We will also be appealing to the Malaysian Government to intercede on Vui Kong’s behalf. Hopefully, it will make a difference,” he said.

Ravi said he would also be filing an official complaint on the Appeal Court’s decision to the International Court of Justice.

“We hope the Malaysian Government will strongly back us on this,” he said.

Vui Kong was caught in June 2007 when he was 18 and was sentenced to death in January 2009.

Source: The Star, April 5, 2011
_________________________

Use the tags below or the search engine at the top of this page to find updates, older or related articles on this Website.

Comments

Iran: flogging still a common practice

Flogging of Sufis in Gonabad: Fourteen Ne’matollahi dervishes received 25 lashes each for allegedly disturbing the public security Public flogging in Iran "The lash ruling against 14 Ne'matollahi dervishes of Gonabad was carried out. They were residents of Baydokht and had been arrested and condemned by the Public Prosecutor of Gonabad after a protest against the illegal treatment dealing with the Sufis in June of last year [2010]. According to the website of Majzuban-e-Nur, Mr. Sa'id Kashani, Mr. Amir Roshan-Mojaver-Sufi, Mr. Alimohammad Amanian, Mr. Ruhollah Safari, Mr. Ali Abbasi-Baydokhti, Mr. Ebrahim Abbaszadeh, Mr. Mohammadali Ja'fari, Mr. Hossein Mahdavi, Mr. Hossein Abbaszadeh-Baydokhti, Mr. Rahmat Hosseini, Mr. Reza Kakhki, Mr. Behruz Mojaver-Sufi, Mr. Ali Mir, and Mr. Hassan Baluchi-Baydokhti are the fourteen dervishes whose requests were not only rejected, but who were condemned to 25 lashes for disturbing the public security. It should be mentioned th...

Japan’s Internet Wants Uchida Riko Executed. Here’s Why That Won’t Happen

This week, the prosecution in the case of a murder of a 17-year-old girl in Hokkaido came out with its sentencing recommendation. Japanese social media reacted by clamoring for the accused woman’s blood. But, while the facts of the case are heinous, the prosecutor’s decision not to seek the death penalty is grounded in long-standing precedent. Murdered for looking at the accused wrong Uchida Riko (内田梨瑚), 23, and her friends stand accused of murdering 17-year-old Murayama Runa (村山瑠奈) in Hokkaido’s Asahikawa. Prosecutors say the dispute began after Murayama posted a photo of Uchida to social media. They say Uchida’s group abducted the girl, made her undress, and then forced her to jump from a bridge.

I watched Ohio's last execution. Here's what it was like

As Gov. DeWine calls for Ohio to end capital punishment, the state’s last execution remains the one I witnessed in 2018 Inside Ohio's death house, there is a room for executions and separate witness rooms: one for those connected to the victim and another for those connected to the inmate. Windows separate the death chamber from those watching, the condemned from the living. I was there on July 18, 2018 – during Ohio’s most recent execution. Robert Van Hook was put to death that day for killing David Self in 1985. He sat on death row for three decades. I was one of three media witnesses to the execution.

Kansas AG urges governor to deny clemency to 8 sentenced to death

TOPEKA — Attorney General Kris Kobach on Tuesday urged the governor to deny clemency to Kansas inmates who have been sentenced to death. Eight of nine people sentenced to death in Kansas formally filed clemency requests in May, according to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office. Kobach urged Gov. Laura Kelly to reject them.

Gov. Mike DeWine calls for Ohio to abolish the death penalty

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Gov. Mike DeWine Tuesday morning called on Ohio to abolish the death penalty, citing data that he said proves it is no longer a deterrent to violent crime. “For the state to take a human life, there must, in my opinion, there must be evidence that in doing so it will help protect the public, that the threat of that action will deter someone from committing murder,” DeWine said. “I do not believe that argument today can be successfully made.” DeWine cited data showing a decline in the last four decades of executions being carried out and an increase in the time inmates spend on death row.

New Mississippi billboard warns criminals: ‘Firing squad is legal’

DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. (WREG) — A billboard standing on Interstate 55 southbound as you cross the Tennessee state line and enter Mississippi from Memphis is sending a grim message to those coming into the state. DeSoto County District Attorney Matthew Barton recently announced the new billboard campaign, which features the sign reading, “WELCOME TO MISSISSIPPI. WHERE THE FIRING SQUAD IS LEGAL. THINK TWICE.” It references Mississippi’s law permitting execution by firing squad under certain circumstances for inmates sentenced to death. Barton says this campaign is aimed at deterring violent crime and sends a direct message to criminals entering Mississippi.

20 Minutes to Death: Witness to the Last Execution in France

The following document is a firsthand account of the final moments of Hamida Djandoubi, a convicted murderer executed by guillotine at Marseille’s Baumettes Prison on September 10, 1977. The record—dated September 9—was written by Monique Mabelly, a judge appointed by the state to witness the proceedings. Djandoubi’s execution would ultimately be the last carried out in France before capital punishment was abolished in 1981. At the time, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing—who had publicly voiced his "deep aversion to the death penalty" prior to his election—rejected Djandoubi’s appeal for clemency. Choosing to let "justice take its course," the President allowed the execution to proceed, just as he had in two previous cases during his term: Christian Ranucci , executed on July 28, 1976 and Jérôme Carrein , executed on June 23, 1977. Hamida Djandoubi , a Tunisian national, was sentenced to death for killing his former lover, Elisabeth Bousquet. He was execu...

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch wanted an execution that a Trump judge deemed illegal

The Supreme Court these days is generally in the business of helping executions go forward. But on Thursday night, the court did something notable: It told Alabama no. Even then, the court wasn't unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the refusal to let the nitrogen gas execution of Jeffery Lee proceed. What prompted the rare rejection? In line with the typical shadow docket practice, the court didn't explain itself. Nor did the dissenters, who merely noted their disagreement. But a deeper look at the case helps us understand why a majority of the court was unwilling to help the state this time.

With nitrogen gas blocked, Alabama seeks to execute inmate by lethal injection

Jeffery Lee, who successfully challenged his scheduled Thursday execution by nitrogen gas, argued that execution by firing squad would be less painful. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office Friday sought to put an Alabama death row inmate to death by lethal injection a day after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed the state’s attempt to execute him by nitrogen gas. In a filing with the Alabama Supreme Court Friday afternoon, the state sought an expedited motion to set a new execution date for Jeffery Lee, 49. The state said that with a permanent injunction in place against nitrogen gas, the method by which the state intended to execute Lee on Thursday, it could execute him by lethal injection or the electric chair.

SCOTUS: Alabama can’t execute Jeffery Lee by nitrogen; Thursday execution called off

After a week of legal volleyball, Alabama death row inmate Jeffery Lee’s execution—scheduled for Thursday evening—was called off after federal courts called the state’s nitrogen gas execution method “likely unconstitutional.” The state took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping Lee could still be put to death tonight. In an order issued at 8:10 p.m., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that it would not lift a ban on Alabama executing Lee via nitrogen . In a short court order, the justices denied Alabama’s motion to go ahead with the execution. Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the appeal and let the execution proceed, according to the order.

Death Penalty News

Search This Blog