SINGAPORE - Death row inmates seeking a stay of execution of their sentences after their legal avenues have been exhausted would be required to state reasons for not filing the application earlier, under a new procedure proposed in Parliament.
On Monday, Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Law Rahayu Mahzam introduced a Bill proposing amendments to the law to clarify the process for the filing of challenges by prisoners after their appeals against their death sentences have been dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
Examples of post-appeal challenges include an application for a stay of execution of a death sentence and a judicial review application challenging the President’s decision not to grant clemency.
A Ministry of Law (MinLaw) spokesman said: “There have been a number of applications by prisoners awaiting capital punishment at the last minute, after all avenues of appeal have been exhausted.
“The proposed amendments will clearly set out the process for such applications, and the court will have discretion to allow challenges even if they do not comply with this process.”
Arguably, the most high-profile case involving a death row inmate was that of Nagaenthran K. Dharmalingam, a Malaysian who was convicted of trafficking 42.72g of heroin in 2010 and given the mandatory death penalty.
His appeal was dismissed in 2011. From 2015 onwards, he filed seven applications to challenge his death sentence.
Days before he was scheduled to be hanged on Nov 10, 2021, his then lawyer M. Ravi filed an application to the High Court, seeking judicial review of the impending execution. This was dismissed, and Mr Ravi filed an appeal.
Mr Ravi also filed a separate application to the Court of Appeal, asking for a stay of execution so that Nagaenthran could be assessed by a panel of psychiatrists.
In its judgment dismissing both challenges in March, the Court of Appeal said they amounted to an abuse of process, as the applications were not a genuine attempt to seek redress, but a “stopgap” measure to delay the execution.
On Monday, MinLaw said that under the new proposed procedure, only the Court of Appeal would hear post-appeal applications by death row inmates and grant a stay of execution of the sentence.
The inmate would have to apply for permission before a single judge to make a post-appeal application.
In applying for permission, the prisoner would be required to state, among other things, the grounds of the challenge and the reasons for not filing it earlier.
If permission were to be granted, the substantive application would have to be filed within a specified period, and the hearing before a panel of three or more judges would be fixed within a specified period.
The proposed amendments also specify four issues that the court must consider at the permission stage. This includes whether the application has a reasonable prospect of success, and whether it is based on evidence or arguments that could not have been presented before the court earlier.
The proposed amendments also provide that a capital sentence can be carried out unless the President has ordered a respite, the Court of Appeal has ordered a stay of execution, or an application for a stay of execution has been filed in court and served on the Singapore Prison Service.
Senior Counsel Jason Chan, who is vice-president of the Law Society, said: “The application for permission means that cases that have a reasonable chance of success can be heard by the Court of Appeal, while cases that do not meet this requirement will be filtered out.”
Mr Suang Wijaya, a partner at law firm Eugene Thuraisingam, said the Bill also empowers the Court of Appeal to potentially compel the inmate or his lawyer to testify on whether there has been an abuse of process.
Mr Wijaya said last-minute applications are normally considered an abuse of process on the basis that the arguments should have been raised far earlier, during the appeal. However, he noted that not all last-minute challenges are found to be an abuse of process.
