[ad_1]
SINGAPORE – In an attempt to delay the execution of his client, the lawyer for a convicted Singaporean drug trafficker argued before the Court of Appeal on Tuesday (September 22) that prisoners sentenced to death are not being treated in the same way.
Mr. M. Ravi stated that executions are not carried out in the same order as the death sentences were handed down.
He said his client, Syed Suhail Syed Zin, 44, was scheduled to be hanged earlier than those who were sentenced before him.
The lawyer suggested that as a result of travel restrictions due to the Covid-19 pandemic, executions of foreigners are being delayed.
He said that his client believes that the death sentence imposed on foreigners will not be carried out until the borders are reopened, as they do not have access to their relatives and there may be problems repatriating their remains.
Mr. Ravi argued that this was a violation of article 12 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
The state’s lead attorney, Francis Ng, of the Attorney General, argued that there is no provision requiring that sentences be carried out in the same order in which they were imposed.
The court, consisting of Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and Appellate Justices Andrew Phang and Judith Prakash, requested further submissions on this issue.
In a statement, the Interior Ministry said there was no discrimination or irregularities in the scheduling of executions.
The execution will be scheduled after a prisoner has exhausted all legal channels of appeal and clemency, regardless of whether the prisoner is a Singaporean or a foreigner, he said.
The ministry added that its response to the “unfounded” allegations will be presented before the next court hearing.
Suhail was sentenced to death by the High Court on December 2, 2015 for trafficking 38.84 g of heroin.
His appeal was dismissed on October 18, 2018. On July 5, 2019, Suhail was informed that his clemency petition had been rejected.
On September 11 of this year, they told him that they would hang him on September 18.
Mr. Ravi took his case.
On September 17, his request to the High Court for judicial review was rejected, but Suhail’s execution was stayed pending appeal.
Ravi also requested a judicial review of the clemency process.
Noting the scarcity of successful clemency petitions, he argued that the validity of the process had “expired.”
Chief Justice Menon said the cases can also be inferred to be without merit.
Judge Phang said: “You cannot accept a negative result and then work backwards to say that the process is unfair.”
Mr. Ravi also referred to a letter from Suhail to his former lawyer that the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) sent to the Attorney General’s Office (AGC).
In an attempt to disqualify the AGC team, he argued that it was a violation of attorney-client privilege, which invalidated the judicial process.
Lead attorney Ng told the court that he has not seen any letters.
Chief Justice Menon said he had difficulty following Ravi’s arguments, while Justice Phang called him “non-sequitur.”
MHA explained that in his appeal in 2018, Suhail had told the court that he wanted to call his uncle as a witness.
Then AGC checked with the SPS if Suhail had previously expressed his intention to call his uncle.
SPS then sent copies of his letters to his uncle and the then AGC attorney. At the time, there was no legal prohibition on doing so, MHA said.
[ad_2]
