[ad_1]
SINGAPORE: On Friday (October 16) the Court of Appeals dismissed a request by a drug trafficker sentenced to death to have his case reviewed, reminding defense attorneys not to invoke the review process lightly and without a reasonable basis. or face penalties for abuse Legal processes.
Syed Suhail Syed Zin, 44, was convicted in 2015 on a capital charge of possession of heroin for trafficking and was scheduled to hang himself on September 18 this year. His execution was suspended at the last minute after defense attorney M Ravi intervened.
It sought a review of the 2018 court decision to uphold Syed’s conviction and sentence on two grounds, but the Court of Appeal on Friday dismissed this request for a review.
In issuing the decision, appeal judge Andrew Phang Boon Leong said that Syed, through his lawyer, had not provided enough material and the judges were not convinced that there had been a judicial error in the criminal process.
Judge Phang also emphasized that the review process should not be invoked lightly and that defense attorneys are obliged not to present reasons that have no reasonable basis.
If they do, they face the prospect of being penalized for abusing the judicial process.
Mr. Ravi alleged during an earlier hearing last month that his client had been prejudiced because the letters Syed wrote to his lawyer had been sent by the prison service to the Attorney General’s Office (AGC).
He had asked that the entire AGC team be disqualified from the case.
READ: Court of Appeal orders more arguments in case of drug trafficker sentenced to death, execution pending
In response to this, Judge Phang said that Mr. Ravi had made statements on this matter without presenting any evidence.
“We take this opportunity to reiterate that this is not the proper way to raise these types of issues in court,” he said. “There was an emotional quality to the presentations that were being made, but a court is obliged to deal with these matters only on the basis of established legal principles.”
He said the court obtained confirmation from Deputy Chief Prosecutor Francis Ng, who led the case at the earlier prosecution hearing, that he had not read the letters.
Judge Phang said he was satisfied that Ravi did not show the court any basis to justify his claim that “the entire AGC was disqualified from appearing in this matter”, or that there was some bias from the disclosure of the letters.
The court found no basis to disqualify Mr. Ng and his team.
In closing, Judge Phang said: “We have outlined the strict requirements that must be met in a request for review and we will not hesitate to summarily dismiss evidently meritless requests in the future, including at the licensing stage.”
Ravi said in a Facebook post after the hearing that he had received letters from eight other death row inmates whose clemency petitions had been dismissed.
“If I take these eight cases, this would mean that I am representing the 21 who (are) facing imminent execution,” Ravi said, adding that “he will not say no” to all eight.
