107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERSENHANCEMENT OF THE RULE OF LAW AND PROMOTION
OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST—THE ROLE AND FUNCTION OF
THE PROSECUTION SYSTEM IN SINGAPOREFrancis Tseng*
I. ORGANIZATION AND OVERVIEW
A. The Attorney-General as Public
Prosecutor
All prosecutions in Singapore comeunder the control and direction of the
Attorney-General, in his role as the Public
Prosecutor.
2. The office of the Attorney-General isconstituted by virtue of Article 35 of theConstitution of the Republic of Singapore,
which also provides that the AttorneyGeneral shall have power, exercisable at
his discretion, to institute, conduct ordiscontinue any proceedings for any
offence. Section 336(1) of the Criminal
Procedure Code of Singapore further
provides that “[t]he Attorney-General shallbe the Public Prosecutor and shall have thecontrol and direction of criminal
prosecutions and proceedings under thisCode”. The Criminal Procedure Codeapplies, by virtue of section 3, to all offences
under the Penal Code and all offences
under any other written law. The AttorneyGeneral cannot be removed from office
except by the President acting on the adviceof the Prime Minister, and with theconcurrence of a tribunal consisting of the
Chief Justice and two other judges of theSupreme Court, and then only for thereason that he is unable to discharge thefunctions of his office or for misbehaviour.

* Deputy Head, Crime Division, Deputy Public
Prosecutor, Senior State Counsel, AttorneyGeneral’s Chambers, Singapore.

3. The Attorney-General has secure tenureof office and is thus able to carry out his
duties independently and without fear or
favour, to ensure that law and justice areupheld impartially and without
discrimination.
4. The structure of the Attorney-General’sChambers is shown at Appendix A.
B. Deputy Public Prosecutors
5. Section 336(3) of the Code empowers the
Attorney-General to appoint any officers or
persons to assist him or to act as his
deputies in the performance of any of thefunctions or duties of the Public Prosecutor.
Such appointments will be gazetted in the
Government Gazette.
6. In practice, Deputy Public Prosecutors(DPPs) are appointed from legally qualified
persons who are legal officers in the Legal
Branch of the Singapore Legal Service.
These legal officers are appointed by aconstitutional commission, the Legal
Service Commission under Article 111 of
the Singapore Constitution. The Legal
Service is made up of two branches, theJudicial Branch and the Legal Branch.
7. The legal officers assigned to performthe duties of Deputy Public Prosecutors areposted to the Criminal Justice Division of
the Attorney-General’s Chambers, where
they undergo intensive initial training forthree months, followed by training on the
job as well as by way of in-house seminars
and external or overseas training courses.
All junior DPPs are attached to more senior

103

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
DPPs who act as their mentors, advise
them and closely supervise all their work.
8. Legal Officers of the Singapore Legal
Service are liable to serve in any positionin the Legal Branch or the Judicial Branchof the Legal Service. These include thesubordinate judiciary, the registry of theSupreme Court, the Attorney-General’sChambers, the Legal Aid Bureau, theRegistry of Land Titles and Deeds, theRegistry of Trade Marks and Patents, theRegistry of Companies and Businesses, theoffice of the Official Assignee and Public
Trustee, and the legal departments of someGovernment Ministries. Legal Officers canbe and are transferred from time to time
to different postings to meet the exigenciesof staffing the various appointments as well
as for their career development.
C. Organizational Structure
9. The Criminal Justice Division of the
Attorney-General’s Chambers is theorganizational extension of the AttorneyGeneral’s function as Public Prosecutor.
The Head of the Division presently reports
directly to the Attorney-General on any
matters in connection with criminal
prosecutions. The Head is assisted by a
Deputy Head, who acts in his place
whenever necessary. In ranking below the
Deputy Head are the senior DPPs who are
the “mentors” of the Division. The
remainder of the DPPs are each directlysupervised by one of these “mentors”.
10. At present, apart from the Head and
Deputy Head, there are 8 senior and 58
junior DPPs, making a total of 68 officers
in the Criminal Justice Division. There
are, however, 9 vacancies which can be
expected to be filled when the new intakeof legal officers come in from now till theend of this year.

104

11. There are also some DPPs who
specialise in prosecuting commercial crime
cases. They are attached to a unit called
the Commercial Affairs Department whichcomes under the wing of the Ministry of
Finance. These DPPs are also legal officersof the Singapore Legal Service and take
instructions directly from the AttorneyGeneral. The Commercial Affairs
Department is headed by a Director, who
is also a senior DPP.
12. The law also allows prosecutions ofsimple criminal cases to be undertaken byexperienced police officers attached to theProsecution Branch of the Police Force.
When such officers conduct prosecutions,they function under the direction andcontrol of the Public Prosecutor and his
deputies, and independently of the Police
Force insofar as their prosecutorial duties
and responsibilities are concerned.
13. There also are lay prosecutors attached
to Government departments and statutory
bodies. These prosecutors may not be
qualified in law. They are authorised by
the Public Prosecutor to prosecute only incases involving laws which theirdepartments or bodies are charged underthose laws with enforcing. Such cases areusually very simple ones, and where any
complex question of law or fact is involved,
the help of the Criminal Justice Division
will be sought.
II. THE ROLE OF THE
PROSECUTOR
A. Investigation
14. In Singapore, the Public Prosecutor is
not involved in the investigation of offences,which is entirely within the province of thevarious investigation and enforcement
agencies. He is, however, empowered toauthorise investigations to be carried out
in certain cases, e.g., he may authorise the
Director of the Corrupt Practices

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
Investigation Bureau or any police officer
to investigate the bank account, shareaccount, expense account or any otheraccount which may be relevant in a
corruption case.
15. Since prosecutors do not conduct
investigations, they do not interview
suspects or accused persons at any stage.
Such interviews are left entirely to thepolice or other law enforcement agency.
16. DPPs may, on occasion, interview
witnesses prior to going for trial for the
purpose of ascertaining their credibility or
clarifying complicated matters. These
interviews are not required under the law
to be officially recorded, and any notes
taken by the DPP are solely for his own
use. Where the DPP feels it is necessary
to do so, the investigating officer will be
asked to record a statement or further
statement as the case may be from thewitness after the interview.
17. In order to secure the attendance of
witnesses for such interviews, prosecutors
have to fall back on the powers of the police
to require witnesses to attend before themfor the purpose of obtaining information.
These powers are found in section 120 of
the Criminal Procedure Code. The police
will then arrange for a deputy publicprosecutor to be present at the interview
of the witness, and the interview may be
carried out in the office of the DPP. In
practice, however, very little resistancefrom witnesses in respect of suchinterviews is experienced.
B. Arrest
18. An arrest is made only where there isa reasonable suspicion of a seizable offence
having been committed. Arrests madewithout good grounds may subject thearresting officer (and the Government,
vicariously) to civil actions for false
imprisonment (or wrongful arrest).

Generally, if the police or other enforcement
officers are in any doubt, they will seek theadvice of a deputy public prosecutor before
proceeding to effect an arrest. It is,however, only the enforcement agency andnot the prosecution that has the power toeffect an arrest under the law. It is also
the enforcement agency (and not theprosecution) that applies for warrants fromthe Courts for the arrest of persons wherethese are required under the law.
19. Under Article 9(4) of the Singapore
Constitution and section 36 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, a person who is arrested
has to be produced before a magistrate
within 48 hours of the arrest. When that
person is brought before the magistrate
and if the investigations are incomplete orif the prosecution is otherwise not ready toproceed with the case, at least a holding
charge has to be read to him. Where theinvestigation agency requires more time toinvestigate, and requires to have custodyof the accused for that purpose, anapplication may be made by the prosecutor
to the court for the accused to be remandedin the custody of the investigation agency.
A magistrate may only remand a accused
person for a period not exceeding 7 days at
any one time, but a District Court, notbeing subject to this restriction, may
remand the accused person (in theory atleast) until the date of trial. In practice,even District Courts do not grant custodyof accused persons to investigation agencies
for more than 7 days at any one time, andapplications for extension of periods ofcustody are closely scrutinised.
Investigators have to provide good reasonsfor applications for custody and even more
so or applications for extension of custody.
20. There are, of course, other reasons aswell for detention of accused persons
pending trial which have nothing to do withthe prosecution. These include detention
as a result of inability to raise bail, or in

105

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
capital cases or cases of offences punishable
with life imprisonment, where no bail isallowed under the law.
C. Search and Seizure
21. Search and seizure, being part of theinvestigation process, are not within thedomain of the prosecution. The
investigation agencies use their own
discretion as to when these should be
carried out, and make the requisite
applications to court for warrants wheresuch are required. However, these agencies
may seek legal advice from the Criminal
Justice Division if necessary.
D. Advantages and Disadvantages of
the System
22. The separation of investigative andprosecutorial functions involves to someextent a duplication of expertise.
Investigators will need to know some law
in order to know what to look for, andprosecutors will need to have someknowledge of investigation policies andprocedures in order to explain such mattersin court and to counter arguments put
forward by the defence. Legal expertise isless accessible at the initial stages ofinvestigation as the lawyers are only
brought into the picture when the cases arealmost ready to be brought to court.
23. With proper training and experience,
investigators can easily acquire a working
knowledge of law and legal procedures.
Prosecutors also do not take long to obtainsufficient familiarity with investigative
processes to enable them to function
effectively. There has been a recent movein Singapore by enforcement agencies to
get the Attorney-General’s Chambers
involved in the more serious or complex
cases at an earlier stage so that legal advice
and prosecution experience can be madeavailable to assist the investigators ingathering evidence which can be used forthe ultimate purpose of prosecution in106

court. This new approach helps tominimise last minute investigations tocover areas of inquiry which would beotherwise be raised by the prosecution only
when the case is being prepared for trial.
24. The separation of investigative andprosecutorial functions, in my opinion,
ensures that no one involved in the entire
process is provided with any motivation
whatsoever to achieve a conviction whichis unjust or based on fabricated evidence.
To the contrary, investigating officers will
be wary of fabricating evidence orconfessions because they know that theirwork will be closely scrutinised by anindependent officer who will have toprosecute the case in court and will
therefore be on the look-out for any
weaknesses in the case he is going topresent. The investigator’s job is merely
to obtain whatever evidence he can andplace it before the prosecutor, who then has
to assess whether that evidence will be
sufficient to persuade a court to convict.
Where the evidence gathered from theinvestigations is insufficient, theprosecutor will not prosecute but will
withdraw the charges. He is under no duty
whatsoever to prosecute every case that isinvestigated. On the other hand, beingfrom a different branch of the government
service, he is also not the administrative
supervisor of the investigator and has no
say in the investigator’s promotions or
career path. Accordingly, neither theinvestigator nor the prosecutor will be
tempted to secure a conviction by unjustmeans.
25. The position could be very different if
the prosecutor is put in charge ofinvestigating as well as prosecuting thecase. Unless adequate safeguards are built
in, an officer put in overall charge of a casemight be tempted, in the interest offurthering his own career, to secure as
many convictions as he possibly can, and107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
might resort to achieving this at all costs,
even to the extent of fabricating evidenceor ordering this to be done by officers
subordinate to himself. In systems inwhich prosecutorial and investigative
functions are combined, safeguards will
accordingly have to be put in place toprotect against that. Prosecutors who do
not act independently of the investigations
may also lose their objectivity and becomebiased in their assessment of the evidence.
26. It has been suggested that havingprosecutors take on investigative functions
avoids subjecting suspects to unduly longdetention and unwarranted trials, and thatthe success of such a system has been borneout by statistics of the conviction rates
achieved. Under the Singapore model,
there is no fear of any undue detention or
unwarranted trial because the Public
Prosecutor assumes control as soon as any
prosecution is initiated. Caution must
always to be exercised when relying on
statistics, as the conclusions reached on thebasis of statistics may not necessarilyreflect the true position.
27. What may work well for one country
may not, because of prevailingcircumstances, work as well for another. I
would like to suggest that it may be moremeaningful to look at whether the people
subject to a particular system of criminal
justice live under fear of (a) becoming
victims of crime and (b) being prosecutedfor something they did not do. If they donot, then the system, however it operates,
must be functioning well.
E. The Prosecution Process
28. Initiation of prosecution is done by theenforcement agency charged withinvestigating the offence, usually but notalways with the prior concurrence of adeputy public prosecutor. In the case ofprivate prosecutions, it is done of theapplication by a person aggrieved to amagistrate, who will, if an offence is madeout on the face of the complaint, issue
either a summons or a warrant of arrest tocompel the attendance in court of theperson complained against. Private
prosecutions are permitted by law only in
relatively minor offences, and thecomplainants will have either to prosecute
their cases themselves or to engage private
lawyers to do so on their behalves.
Whatever the case, all prosecutions comeunder the control and supervision of the
Public Prosecutor and his deputies uponcommencement. The Public Prosecutor
may, in the exercise of his discretion, stepin and take over the conduct of any private
prosecution, to either continue with theproceedings with one of his deputies incharge of it, or to discontinue it.
29. To ensure that the Public Prosecutor
applies his mind before prosecutions forcertain offences are initiated, the written
sanction, consent or authorisation of the
Public Prosecutor as the case may be isrequired before cognizance can be taken bya court of those types of offences. This
prevents any enforcement agency or
private person from using the criminal
process for those offences without theknowledge of the Public Prosecutor.
Examples of such offences are corruption,
forgery, giving of false evidence or false
information to a public officer, criminal
conspiracy, and offences against the state.
In addition, prosecutions for every offence
tried in the High Court (which generallyhears cases in which the penalty is capital
punishment or life imprisonment) and all
criminal appeals are required by law to be
conducted by the Public Prosecutor or oneof his deputies, and prosecution for every
seizable offence before a District Court isrequired to be conducted by the Public
Prosecutor, a deputy public prosecutor, oran advocate, officer or other person
specially authorised by the Public
Prosecutor.

107

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
F. Preliminary Inquiry
30. In the case of a prosecution before theHigh Court, there is an additional stepwhich has to be taken before trial. A
preliminary inquiry before a magistrate
has to be conducted by a deputy publicprosecutor or some other officer authorised.
The evidence is produced before themagistrate, and only if the magistrate findsthat there are sufficient grounds forcommitting the accused person for trial will
the case be sent up to be heard before theHigh Court. If the magistrate finds that
there are insufficient grounds to commit
the accused person for trial, he willdischarge him. This procedure provides yet
another check before any person isprosecuted for a serious offence.
G. Advice and Directions of the
Public Prosecutor’s Office
31. When cases are referred by aninvestigating agency to a deputy publicprosecutor for advice, the DPP may approve
the initiation or continuance of theprosecution, instruct further investigations
to be conducted, or direct that the charge
be withdrawn or that no action is to betaken against the suspect. In seeking suchadvice, the enforcement agency will haveto produce to the DPP all the investigation
papers, including the statements of thevarious witnesses and the suspects,
photographs and sketch-plans, medical andother reports, investigation diaries andsummaries of the facts. On occasion, theDPP may also call for the investigation
papers on his own motion or interview thewitnesses before giving directions
regarding the prosecution of any case.
32. In general, the Attorney-General’sChambers will normally proceed to directthat prosecution be proceeded with when
there is a reasonable prospect of securing aconviction, given that the burden of proof
in criminal cases is that the case must be
proved beyond reasonable doubt. It should108

be borne in mind that in the vast majorityof cases, the prosecution in an adversarial
system such as the one we have in
Singapore does not have the benefit of fully
considering the defence case before trial.
Neither does the prosecution have thebenefit of interviewing the accused persons
prior to the trial for the purpose of
assessing their credibility or the merits of
their defence. All that is available to theprosecution up to that stage are thestatements recorded by the investigatorsfrom the accused persons, who may nothave disclosed everything in theirpossession or knowledge to theinvestigators. The assessment whether
there is “a reasonable prospect of securing
a conviction” is, therefore, based onwhatever reliable evidence there is accessto.
33. We consider that unless there is areasonable chance on the available
evidence that a conviction will eventually
result, it may not be fair to an accused
person to put him or her through therigours of a public trial. Being tried for an
offence involves expense for the defendant,
who may have to pay his lawyers’ fees. A
defendant also has to go through theinconvenience of appearing in court, andhis reputation may also suffer from having
to defend himself in public against acriminal charge. The mental torture ofundergoing a trial also adds to the reasons
why a person should not be put through atrial unless there are good grounds forbelieving that conviction would follow.
34. In order to ensure good and consistentdecisions in capital and more serious cases,
the Attorney-General’s Chambers Criminal
Justice Division has set up a system inwhich every such case is reported by theprosecuting DPPs to a panel consisting of
three or more senior DPPs (or “mentors”),
who have equal say in the recommendation
made. The recommendation is passed

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
through the Head (or Deputy Head) of theDivision, who adds his suggestion to thepanel’s and forwards the entire file to the
Attorney-General for the final decision. In
this way, the Attorney-General gets theassistance of the two most senior levels of
officers before he reaches his decision. The
decision is thus not left to a single officer
to make, but is taken at the very highest
level, with the combined assistance of themost experienced officers.
H. Exercise of the Discretion Not to
Prosecute
35. It is not in every case where there isgood evidence that the Public Prosecutor
will direct that the offender be prosecuted.
Mitigating factors are taken into
consideration in deciding whether or not
to proceed with prosecution, and not
infrequently, warnings are issued in lieu
of prosecution where there are good
grounds for doing so. These grounds may
include sympathetic considerations; theage or immaturity of the offender; theprovocation or temptation provided by thevictim; remorse or rehabilitation of theoffender; low degrees of culpability,
contribution to the offence or guilty intent;
and voluntary disclosure of the offence and/or restitution on the part of the offender.
36. In addition to the cases which theprosecution does not proceed with, there isanother category of offences which arelisted as being compoundable under the
Criminal Procedure Code. Such offences
may be compounded by the victim with theconsent of the court, and while any
objection on the part of the prosecution will
be taken into consideration by the court indeciding whether or not to give therequisite consent, the final say on whether
an offence is to be compounded or not
belongs to the court and not theprosecution. Composition of an offence has
the effect of an acquittal, and the accused
person is thereafter discharged fromfurther having to attend the court
proceedings. The composition of offences
can be done only after the accused has been
indicted. Only relatively minor offences
mainly affecting particular victims
individually are listed as compoundable in
the Criminal Procedure Code.
I. Remedies Where the Public
Prosecutor Decides Not to
Prosecute
37. The discretion given to the Public
Prosecutor regarding prosecution is a very
wide one. In theory, it might be possible
for a private person who is aggrieved by adecision of the Public Prosecutor to apply
to the Supreme Court for a prerogative writknown as a writ of mandamus to compel
the Public Prosecutor to prosecute. Thishas however never been tested in practice.
It seems fairly likely that a court would
generally be extremely reluctant, on
grounds of public policy, to force the Public
Prosecutor to disclose the reasons
underlying the exercise of his discretion;and there is decided authority for the
proposition that the courts will notinterfere with the Public Prosecutor’s
choice of the charge to be proceeded on.
J. Plea Bargaining
38. This is done solely between theprosecution and the defence, and it usually
involves negotiations for a reduced numberof charges and/or an amendment to lessserious charges in exchange for which theaccused will agree to plead guilty. The
court is never brought into thenegotiations, and in fact the practice is tokeep all such communications from thecourt in order to avoid prejudicing thejudge. If, for example, the judge is asked
to comment on the sentence an accused
person may expect if he were to plead
guilty, an impression may be given at thatstage that the accused person is in fact
guilty. If negotiations break down, anotherjudge would have to hear the case, to avoid

109

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
any possibility of prejudice. If the judge is
not brought into the negotiations in thefirst place, the parties can negotiate more
freely, without fear that what they say may
be used against them in the event thatnegotiations break down.
39. Where an accused person pleads guilty
before the court to a non-capital charge, theproceedings will consist of the court
ensuring that the accused person
understands the nature and consequencesof his plea. A statement of the relevantfacts on which the prosecution relies is thenread out and the accused person is asked
whether he admits those facts. If the facts
are admitted without qualification, thecourt will convict the accused person on his
plea of guilty and proceed with thesentencing process. If the accused person
pleads “not guilty” or qualifies the facts
read out, the court will order the hearingof a trial. For capital cases, trial hearings
will be conducted regardless of the pleas
given by the accused persons.
40. The benefit to the State that accrues
from plea bargaining lies in the fact that
expensive court time is saved if an accused
person pleads guilty. The savings in
manpower, in paying the salaries of the
judicial officers and court staff, and thoseof the prosecutors and their supporting
staff may be considerable. The freeing ofcourts also results in other accused persons
being able to have their cases heard earlier.
At the same time, a plea of guilty is a
mitigating factor in favour of the accused.
41. However, the prosecution is always
mindful of the need for deterrence when it
considers matters raised in plea
bargaining, and always endeavours to seethat a balance is struck between thebenefits mentioned and the other objectivesof the criminal justice system.

110

42. The Attorney-General’s Chambers does
not initiate plea bargaining with accused
persons, especially those who are notrepresented, in order to avoid situations inwhich the prosecution may be accused fortrying to intimidate suspects. All accused
persons or their counsel are free however
to write in making representations and allsuch representations will be accorded due
consideration by a deputy publicprosecutor.
K. Immunity from Prosecution
43. Offenders may, on every rare occasions,be offered immunity from prosecution if
they agree to testify against theiraccomplices. Such offers are sometimes
made where it would not otherwise be
possible to obtain evidence against any
person involved in the offence. Rather than
let all the offenders get away scot-free, theprosecution may select one or more of those
involved and offer immunity in exchange
for their testimony against the others.
44. Generally, it is the investigator who
initiates the move to offer immunity. In
our experience, we have hardly ever comeacross any accused person offering inrepresentations made to a deputy publicprosecutor to testify for the prosecution in
exchange for an assurance that he will not
be prosecuted. More often, when an
accused person offers to testify for theprosecution, what is asked in exchange isa reduced charge or a reduced number ofcharges. This demonstrates the attitude
taken by the prosecution in Singapore—that wherever possible, it will insist on atleast some punishment for every guilty
person.
45. The investigator has no authority tomake an offer of immunity, but may
approach the accused persons with thesuggestion and gauge their reactions.
Thereafter, the investigator will refer to the
Attorney-General’s Chambers for approval

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
to make the promise to the person(s)chosen. The request by the investigator isdealt with at the highest level of the
Criminal Justice Division, before it isreferred to the Attorney-General for his
decision.
46. Offers of immunity are made only onvery rare occasions. More often than not,a deputy public prosecutor will prefer not
to proceed at all than to offer immunity.
Great care is taken by the AttorneyGeneral’s Chambers to ensure that theaccused persons proceeded against arereally guilty and that there is no possibilityof any miscarriage of justice before asuggestion to offer immunity to any
accomplice is agreed to.
L. Judicial System
47. The courts for the administration of
criminal justice in Singapore consist of:a. the High Court,
b. District Courts, andc. Magistrates’ Courts.
District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts
are collectively termed “Subordinate
Courts”.
48. In addition, there are two levels of
appeal courts. The High Court in theexercise of its appellate jurisdiction hears
appeals from District Courts andMagistrates’ Courts, while the Court ofAppeal hears appeals from the original
jurisdiction of the High Court.
4 9 . A t t h e b o t t o m o f t h e l a d d e r,
Magistrates’ Courts have power to hear anddetermine prosecutions for offences forwhich the maximum term of imprisonment
provided by law does not exceed 3 years.
District Courts have jurisdiction to try all
offences for which the maximum term of
imprisonment does not exceed 10 years,
and the High Court has unlimited
jurisdiction to hear any offence punishable
by the laws of Singapore.

50. The structure of the Judiciary is set
out in Appendix B.
M. Trial Statistics
51. The numbers of trial hearings
prosecuted by the Attorney-General’sChambers for 1995 and 1996 are shown inAppendix C. In 1996, the number of 2504
trials in the Subordinate Courts washandled by an average of 31 DPPs, making
a total of about 6 to 7 trials per DPP permonth. This includes time for preparation
for the trials, interviews of witnesses,
familiarisation with the facts of the cases
and research on the law. In contrast, 38
DPPs dealt with only 67 cases in the High
Court during the same period of time. The
stark difference is accounted for by the factthat 2 DPPs are assigned to prosecute eachHigh Court case, and the 38 DPPs also
handled 247 Magistrates’ Appeals, 23
appeals to the Court of Criminal Appeal,
25 Criminal Revision proceedings and 19
Criminal Motions. The cases handled bythese 38 DPPs involve much more work percases, and generally the more senior DPPs
are assigned to do this type of work. In
addition, most of the other work listed inAppendix C is also done by these 38 DPPs.
N. Fixing of Trial Dates
52. After accused persons are charged incourt, there usually follows a period whenmatters preliminary to trial have to beattended to. Investigations may have to
be completed, advice may have to be soughtby enforcement agencies from a deputy
public prosecutor, plea bargaining may be
attempted, and counsel may need time totake instructions from their clients. The
progress of these matters is closely
monitored by the court, and parties are
required to return to report to the court
periodically. When all such matters havebeen completed and the cases are ready fortrial, the court will fix a pre-trial conference
for each case. In the pre-trial conference,
matters such as agreement on certain facts,

111

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
crystallization of issues, and the exchange
of certain evidence, particularly
documentary evidence are attended tobefore the judge. Dates are then allocatedaccording to the time that the judge,
assisted by the parties, estimates to benecessary for the hearing of each particular
case.
O. Trial
53. At the commencement of the trial, thecharge is read to the accused person. Thisis done even if it had been read out to him
previously on other dates. The accused
person is then asked whether he is guiltyof the offence or whether he claims to betried. If the accused person pleads guilty,
the court will have to satisfy itself that heunderstands the nature and consequencesof his plea, and if so, will convict him of theoffence. If the accused claims to be tried,the court will proceed to hear the evidence.
54. The prosecution has to call its
witnesses first. The discretion as to which
witnesses to call and in what order lies
solely with the prosecutor. Each witness
is first examined in chief by theprosecution, meaning that the prosecution
has to elicit the evidence from its witness
by asking questions in such that theanswer is not suggested to the witness.
Thereafter, the witness may be crossexamined by the accused person or hiscounsel. Cross-examination is not
subjected to the same restriction as
examination in chief. When the crossexamination is concluded, the witness may
be re-examined by the prosecutor. Reexamination is confined to clarifying
matters raised in cross-examination, and,as in the case of examination in chief,leading questions may not be asked.
55. After the prosecution has called all its
witnesses, the court has to determine
whether a prima facie case has been madeout, which if unrebutted would warrant the112

conviction of the accused. Before doing so,
the court will hear submissions from boththe prosecution and the defence. If thecourt finds that no such case has been madeout, it will record an order to acquittal.
Otherwise, the court will call upon theaccused to give evidence in his own defence,
and will explain to him the effect of notdoing so.
56. If the accused person elects to give
evidence, his testimony has to be taken
before that of any other witness for the
defence. All witnesses for the defence are
examined in chief by the accused or hiscounsel, cross-examined by theprosecution, and re-examined in much thesame manner as the prosecution witnesses
before them. Where there is more than one
accused person, each witness (including theaccused persons themselves if they elect totestify) may be cross-examined on behalfof any other accused person jointly charged
in the same trial.
57. At the close of the case, the prosecution
and the defence may again address thecourt. If the court finds the accused not
guilty, it will record an order of acquittaland discharge him provided no othercharge is pending against him. If the court
finds the accused guilty of the charge, itwill convict him of the same and proceedto pass sentence.
P. Some Burdens of Proof
58. At the close of the case for theprosecution, the court is not required toweigh the evidence or the credibility of thewitnesses, but only to determine whether
on the evidence before it, if such evidence,
not inherently incredible, be true, all the
ingredients of the charge have been madeout.
59. If the accused, after having been called
upon by the court to give evidence in his
own defence, refuses to testify, the court

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
may, in determining whether he is guiltyof the offence, draw such inferences fromthat refusal as may appear proper,
including inferences which may be adverseto the accused.
60. The burden at the conclusion of all theevidence is somewhat different from thatat the close of the prosecution’s case. In
order that a conviction be recorded, thecourt has to find that the prosecution has
proved it case beyond reasonable doubt.
Q. Sentencing
61. Before proceeding to pass sentence, thecourt will want to hear from theprosecution regarding the antecedents of
the accused person. The prosecutor will
read out the antecedents if any and theaccused will be asked if he admits those
antecedents. If he does, the antecedents
will be taken as proved, otherwise ahearing will be conducted for theantecedents to be proved.
62. The defence will then be given a chance
to make a plea in mitigation to the court.
This plea must be confined to matterswhich do not call in question the legality
or validity of the conviction. The
prosecution may dispute any part of theplea in mitigation, and if not withdrawn
by the defence, a hearing may be conducted
for the disputed portion to be adjudicatedupon. The prosecution may also in certain
cases address the court on the sentence tobe imposed. This is not a right as suchprescribed in any statute, but is a practicewhich has developed. The courts generally
take the attitude that it does not hurt tohear what the prosecution has to say. The
judge can always disregard what theprosecutor says if he does not agree.
63. As a matter of practice, theprosecution’s address on sentence does nottouch on the quantum or tariff, only on thefactors which may be seen to aggravate theoffence, and in some cases on the type ofsentence that the prosecution is asking thecourt to impose. The most common
instance in which the prosecution willaddress the court on sentence is where adeterrent sentence is asked for on groundsof public policy or because of thecircumstances of the case.
R. Victim Impact Statements
64. Of late, a practice has developed
whereby after recording a conviction, thecourt may call for a statement from thevictim in respect of the impact that thecrime in question has had on him or her.
This statement is used to assist the courtin assessing sentence. In the past, only onrare occasions did the court ask to hearfrom the victim. Now this procedure has
been formalized and judicial officers areactively encouraged to call for suchstatements in appropriate cases.
65. Although arrived at independently by
the judiciary in Singapore, this practice of
calling for such statements would meetwith the approval of a rising school ofthought known as “Victimology”, which iscurrently gaining popularity, particularly
in Europe, New Zealand and the U.S.A.
This school urges that the rights of victims
of crime should be taken seriously andtreated as no less important than the rightsof accused persons.
66. The prosecution has undertaken thetask of assisting the court in obtaining suchstatements. Instructions will be given bya deputy public prosecutor to theinvestigating officer to contact the victim
for this to be done. Sometimes, when theprosecution intends to address the court on
sentence, instructions will be given inadvance for a statement to be prepared,
even without the court calling for it.
67. The investigating officer will contact
the victim and inform him or her that it is113

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
proposed that a statement setting out the
impact the offence has had on the victim
be tendered to assist the court in deciding
on the appropriate sentence for theoffender. The victim is informed that he or
she is at liberty to refuse to mention
anything which he or she does not want tobe brought to the court’s attention for thispurpose, but any information given in thestatement has to be true and correct, andany false information would render thevictim liable to criminal prosecution. The
victim is also told that a copy of thestatement may be made available to otherpersons such as the accused, defence
counsel, and the media, and that he or she
may be cross-examined on any matterrelevant to it.
68. After the statement is recorded, adeputy public prosecutor will tender it to
the court for consideration before sentence
is passed.
S. Appeals
69. The conviction rates in 1996 for someof the more serious offences tried in theHigh Court are set out in Appendix D. The
rates of conviction and acquittal areconsistent with the prosecution’s policy ofproceeding only where there is a reasonable
prospect of securing a conviction.
70. Any person (including the Public
Prosecutor) who is dissatisfied with any
judgement, sentence or other orderpronounced by a District or Magistrate’s
Court in a criminal matter to which he is aparty may appeal to the High Court,
subject to the following restrictions:a. where an accused person has pleaded
guilty, there can be no appeal except
as to the extent or legality of thesentence; andb. when an accused person has beenacquitted, there shall be no appeal
except by the Public Prosecutor.

114

71. The High Court may also on its own
motion call for the record of proceedings ofany case heard in a District or Magistrate’s
Court and deal with it as if an appeal had
been field.
72. Appeals from judgements or sentencesof the High Court may be made to the Courtof Appeal in the exercise of its criminal
jurisdiction. The Public Prosecutor may
appeal against the acquittal of any personor on the ground of the inadequacy of any
sentence passed.
73. In 1996, out of a total of 33 appeals to
the High Court by the prosecution, 18 wereallowed, 11 were dismissed and 4 werewithdrawn. The High Court allowed a totalof 50 appeals by accused persons anddismissed 93, and 19 were withdrawn
during the same period. The figures showthat accused persons filed about 5 times
as many appeals as the prosecution.
74. The corresponding figures for appeals
to the Court of Appeal decided in 1996 are
as follows:•Prosecution
Filed
4

Allowed1

Dismissed Withdrawn
3 (1 byNil
dissenting
judgement)•Defence
Filed
44

Allowed2

Dismissed Withdrawn
3210

75. It can be seen from the above figuresthat the prosecution files very few appeals
to the Court of Appeal compared to thedefence. The reason for this is that where
there is a death sentence passed, an appeal
will almost inevitably follow, although aperson sentenced to death is not compelledby law to file an appeal.

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
76. Appeals by the prosecution to the
Court of Appeal against acquittals incapital cases have hardly ever been
allowed. To the best of my memory, there
have been only two such cases previously,
in which acquittals in drug trafficking
cases were overturned on appeal and theoffenders were sentenced to death by the
Court of Appeal. The case in 1996 which
was dismissed with a dissenting judgement
was the closest to which an acquittal in amurder case has ever come to being
overturned on appeal. There has howeverbeen one murder case in the past in which
the prosecution’s appeal against an
acquittal without the defence being called
was allowed. The case was sent back to
the High Court for the defence to be called
upon, and the accused was convicted after
the High Court heard the defence. Thereh a v e , h o w e v e r, b e e n s e v e r a l d r u g
trafficking cases in which cases weresimilarly sent back to the High Court forthe defence to be called. Some resulted inacquittals and one in a conviction after the
defences were heard.
III. MISSION
77. The mission statement of the AttorneyGeneral’s Chambers Criminal JusticeDivision is: “To promote a just criminal
justice system by pursuing a fair andimpartial policy in the prosecution of
offenders”. Towards this end, theprosecution in Singapore seeks to give due
consideration to, and to balance the rights
of all those affected by the system—thesocial community, the accused and thevictim—in supplementing the efforts andendeavours of the Judiciary in providing
prompt, enlightened and transparently fairadministration of criminal justice.

115

116

International Affairs
Division• Advise, negotiate and draft
inter-governmental andother agreements.
• Advise and prepare
documents on internationallaw matters.
• Represent Singapore in
legal proceedings before
international tribunals.
• Represent Singapore atinternational forums,
seminars, etc. on legal
matters.

Crime Division• Control and direct all
criminal prosecutions.
•Conduct criminal
prosecutions instituted in
the name of the Public
Prosecutor.

• Advise and represent
Government in all civil
proceedings and prepare
governments contracts andother agreements.
• Undertake AG’s statutoryfunctions such as acting as
guardian ad litem for
adoption proceedings,
custodian of charities andreview of applications foradmissions to the Singapore
Bar.

• Draft bills and subsidiarylegislation and give advice
on problems of statutory
interpretation.

Law Reform & Revision Division*

Civil Division

PARLIAMENTARY COUNSELSOLICITOR GENERALATTORNEY-GENERAL(Public Prosecutor)

STRUCTURE OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S CHAMBERS

Legislation Division

APPENDIX ARESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53

CONTROL OF APPEAL(Chief Justice & 2 Judges of Appeal)

STRUCTURE OF THE JUDICIARY

Magistrate’s
Court• General civil jurisdiction
for claims up to $30,000.
•General criminal
jurisdiction for offences
punishable with fine up to$2,000, imprisonment up
to 2 years, or caning up to
6 strokes (for maleoffenders) or any lawful
combination of thesepunishments.

District Court• General civil jurisdiction
for claims up to $250,000.
•General criminal
jurisdiction for offences
punishable with fine up to$10,000, imprisonment up
to 7 years, or caning up to
12 strokes (for maleoffenders) or any lawful
combination of thesepunishments.
To ascertain causes
and circumstancesof all unnatural
deaths.

Corner’s
Court

Tr y o f f e n c e scommitted by
offenders below 16
years.

Juvenile
Court

FamilyCourt
Deal with family
law matters andadoptions.

SUBORDINATE COURTS

Deal with claims
up to $10,000 or$20,000 by consent
of both parties.

Small Claims
Tribunals• Appellate criminal jurisdiction—appeals from the District and Magistrate’s Courts and any points of law reserved by such a Court.

Provide a forum for
disputants to resolve
disputes involving family
and juvenile matters,
small civil claims andMagistrate’s complaints
without adjudication.

Court Mediation
Centre• Original civil jurisdiction for claims exceeding $250,000.
• Original criminal jurisdiction for all offences under Singapore law committed within Singapore and on board Singapore-registered ships and aircraft; offences committed bySingapore citizens on high seas aircraft and offences committed by any person amounting to piracy on the high seas and hijacking or aircraft.
• Appellate civil jurisdiction—appeals from the District and Magistrate’s Courts for claims exceeding $5,000 or otherwise leave is required. Also appeals from other tribunals if the law
so provides.

HIGH COURT(Chief Justice, 12 Judges, 4 Judicial Commissioners)• Appellant criminal jurisdiction—appeals from High Court in exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction and question of law from a subordinate court appeal to the High Court.

• Appellate civil jurisdiction for claims exceeding $30,000 or otherwise leave is required.

APPENDIX B

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS

117

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
APPENDIX CCRIME DIVISION
Types of Files/Matters
General Advice
Attending to Representations of
Accused Persons or Their Counsel
Considering Requests from Private
Parties for Fiats
Coroner’s Inquiries
Preliminary Inquiries
Subordinate Court Trials
High Court Trials
Magistrate’s Appeals
Criminal Appeals
Criminal References
Criminal Revisions
Criminal Motions

Number of New Files
1995
1996
600
590
4183

3967

220

262

49
70
1613
108
259
73
3
28
43

95
49
2504
67
247
23
0
25
19

APPENDIX D
1996 CONVICTION RATES FOR SERIOUS OFFENCES

Drugs
Rape
Unnatural Offences
MurderHomicide
Arm Offences
Robbery

118

Convicted
after Trial
28
4
1
7
3
1
2

Plead Guilty
9
10
1
0
11
2
2

Convicted on
Reduced Charge
0
0
0
2
0
0
0

Acquitted
4
1
1
3
0
1
0