The Court of Appeal has reserved its judgment after hearing arguments from Yong's lawyer M Ravi and the Attorney-General, Walter Woon. While Ravi's argument was based on the claim that the mandatory death penalty was unconstitutional as it strips the judges' judicial discretionary, Woon made it clear that the mandatory death penalty, regardless of its international non-practice, was constitutional and not whether it was desirable or not. Singapore is one of the fourteen countries that has the mandatory death penalty.
In fact, the key debate for the judges would be whether the courts have the authority to rewrite the Misuse of Drugs Act - which apparently they do not. The mission of the courts is essentially to carry out justice as laid down by the legislation/laws which is written by the parliament. As Woon argued, "the removal of the mandatory death penalty is a political issue rather than a legal one, its retention or otherwise was a matter for Parliament to decide." It appears that the judges' hands are tied and sparing Yong from the gallows would also mean that he is innocent of drug trafficking and would be a free man, there is simply no lesser punishment for drug trafficking in the Misuse of Drugs Act - such is the tyranny of the law. If the judges decide to acquit Yong, one can be sure of a clash between the legislature and judiciary arms.
While it is a noble cause to argue for the abolishment of the mandatory death penalty, and Yong's case would be a best example to demonstrate how cruel and indiscriminate the mandatory death penalty can be, the courts doesn't seem to be the place to effect some change. At the end of the day, what is needed is politicians to bring up the debate in parliament as civil society can only create the 'noise' and awareness but not change the legislation which judges are bounded by. Until then, it saddens me as I realise that Yong would likely be just another example.
TOC Articles
M Ravi: Death penalty should not be dispensed ‘in an automated, robotic, spasmodic approach'
Discretion to the judges – judgment reserved
Judges reserve judgement in Yong’s mandatory death penalty appeal
Jacob George's Blog
Singapore’s Court of Appeal reserves judgment in Vui Kong’s appeal hearing
Perhaps a more assertive judiciary might not be a bad thing after all.
ReplyDeleteDemocracy has never long existed without an independent, intelligent, humane and assertive judiciary. It is often all that protects people from tyranny: either of an overly autocratic Leader or of the mob that refuses to see anyone different than itself as worthy of compassion. American right-wingers often sermonise about "legislating from the bench;" this case argues eloquently for the need of just such a practice... when needed.
ReplyDelete