M'sian High Com to visit Yong today: mkini

Malaysiakini:

M'sia expected to break silence on Yong's fate...finally

Susan Loone
Jun 18, 10
10:06am

For the first time in two years since his incarceration, Malaysian prisoner Yong Vui Kong is expected to receive a visitor from the Malaysian High Commissioner's office in Singapore later today

It is uncertain whether the Commissioner himself or a representative from the his office will be dropping in on the 22-year old in Changi prison.

Malaysia has largely kept silent on his sentence and pending execution for a drug trafficking offence in 2007 when he was barely 19.

But a ray of hope for Yong flickered yesterday, when his Singaporean lawyer M. Ravi received a telephone call from the Commissioner's office, requesting an "urgent" meeting regarding the case.

Ravi, (right) an established human rights lawyer in Singapore, told Malaysiakini that Commissioner Md Hussin Nayan wanted a briefing on the latest developments of the case at 10am tomorrow (today).

"I am hopeful that Malaysia would intervene in this matter and I will explain in detail about the legal consequences of this case, which is important to Malaysia, and the clemency petition to commute Yong's death sentence," said the lawyer, who is representing Yong on a pro-bono basis.

Flawed legal process

"The crux of the issue is that a Malaysian citizen has been denied clemency, and the whole process is flawed and illegal," he added.

Ravi was referring to a senior law officer's comment that it is not the Attorney-General but cabinet which makes a decision on this matter. Later, President SR Nathan had rejected the petition.

However, Yong's scheduled hanging in December last year was delayed when his lawyer applied for a stay of execution.

Ravi thanked Malaysiakini for highlighting the issue in its news portal as a series of articles recently had sparked the interest of the Malaysian government and Singaporean online media to look further into the case
.
"I am prepared to give my fullest cooperation to assist the Malaysian government to act in the rightful manner and best interest of my client," he added.

Yesterday, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri
Abdul Aziz ruffled the legal community's feathers when he said he was unaware of Yong's case, and since it happened in Singapore, Malaysia will not interfere in its legal process.

Lawyers working on the death penalty issue and Yong's case had expressed 'shock and astonishment' that Nazri, the de facto law minister, could wash his hands of the matter.

However, Param Curamasamy, former UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, said despite Nazri's "irrational public statements," he cannot be faulted on this particular issue.

He said this is because Asean, of which Malaysia is a member, had a pact not to interfere in each other's internal affairs.

Moreover, in both countries - Malaysia and Singapore - drug traffickers face the mandatory death sentence.

Silence on Yong's pending execution in S'pore

Malaysiakini - Susan Loone Jun 14, 10 3:29pm

Malaysia appears to be painfully silent on the upcoming execution of 22-year-old Malaysian Yong Vui Kong, for trafficking 47g of heroin into Singaporethree years ago.

Yong's Singaporean lawyer, M Ravi, who was in Kuala Lumpur on Thursday, told Malaysiakini he was in town to seek help from the public to show the Singapore government that Malaysians cannot tolerate Yong's execution or the death penalty.

Yong (pictured with his mother) was only 19 when arrested in 2007, outside the Meritus Mandarin Hotel in Singapore.

He was convicted on Nov 14 last year for drug trafficking and sentenced to death, which should have taken place on Dec 4.

However, Ravi, a prominent human rights lawyer, filed for a stay of execution on Dec 1, making it the first such case to be halted in the country.

When contacted, Ravi said he is aware why Singapore did not find it necessary to highlight Yong's case.

"Probably because he presents no political mileage. He is first of all a (Malaysian) Chinese, and a Sabahan," said Ravi in a telephone interview.

"But Malaysia can help by bringing the case to the International Court of Justice to determine whether Singapore's conduct constitutes a violation of both local and international laws and further seek a judgment," he said.

Ravi (right) said the mandatory death sentence in any country is tantamount to cruelty and violates international standards and human rights law.

Despite Yong's petition for clemency, Singapore Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong ruled on May 14 that Yong must go to the gallows.

"It is all wrong, because even a senior cabinet minister has said he should be hanged even before he had presented his petition," said Ravi.

According to Article 22(p) of the Singapore constitution, a petition is submitted to the president who then makes his decision on the clemency or mercy petition. President SR Nathan rejected the clemency petition last December.

When met in the Parliament lobby today, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz was in the dark about the case.

"This is the first time I heard about this case. What is it all about?" he asked.

When details were given, Nazri simply said: "It's in Singapore so we will not interfere in their legal processes."

'Sad case'

Think Centre, a human rights NGO in Singapore, said the Court of Appeal has acknowledged that the mandatory death sentence is a cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment in other countries.

"But since Singapore's constitution does not provide for a prohibition against cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment, the legal system here (Singapore) seems extremely inhumane," said executive director Samydorai Sinnappan.

Activist Rachel Zeng, who has met Yong's family, said this was indeed one of the "saddest" cases in Singapore.

"I hope everything goes well with his appeal. We will do what we can to campaign along with the appeal," she added when contacted.

Zeng said Yong was permitted to see his mother through a glass panel last December. He knelt and bowed three times to her.

"It was really emotional as they have not seen each other for three years," said Zeng, who related the experience in her blog.

"They (Yong's family) did not tell her that her son is on death row in order to minimise the blow due to her (health) condition."

Zeng said she does not understand why the Singapore government and the attorney-general's chambers seem to be in a hurry to execute Yong.

"I also learnt just last Friday that there was another execution of a young man from Sabah (at the end of last November).

"Yong knew the young man as they were on death row together. It was a drug-related case as well," she added.

In Asia, apart from Singapore, only two other countries execute those who are found guilty of trafficking drugs - Malaysia and Thailand.

High Court waives $$20,000 security deposit for Vui Kong's Judicial Review application

In light of last month's Court of Appeal's decision to dismiss the appeal for condemned drug trafficker Yong Vui Kong, counsel M. Ravi made an application last week to the High Court for Judicial Review related to Vui Kong's clemency process and other constitutional matters.

Under normal circumstances, a $20,000 security deposit and a $1,000 filing fee are payable for an application for judicial review, especially so in Vui Kong's case because he had already exhausted the Criminal Jurisdiction process, and an application for judicial review would fall under civil law.

On a letter dated 7th June 2010, the High Court replied to M. Ravi stating, "we unable to accede to your request for a waiver of filing fees for the Judicial Review application." No reasons were given.

The following day, the High Court did an about-turn when it sent another letter, which reads, "Please be informed that as the intended application for Judicial Review arises out of a criminal case, it is treated as a criminal case and therefore no filing is payable. This letter supersedes our letter dated 7 June 2010."

One can only speculate the High Court's sudden change of decision regarding the waiver of fees, which sums up to over $21,000, which is by no means a small amount for most people.

But one thing for certain is that this could have favourable implications on future applications for judicial reviews, as it sets a precedent for future criminal cases and allows the vast majority, who are not able to afford the large sum of money needed, to determine their rights by way of judicial review.

APYN action for Yong Vui Kong

Yong Vui Kong was a teenager when he was found guilty of carrying 47g of heroin from Malaysia into Singapore. In Singapore there is a mandatory death sentence for all drug trafficking cases involving more than 30g of heroin leaving judges no discretion to consider factors such as age, background of the offender or other special circumstances

Youg Vui Kong is now 22 years old, he has exhausted his appeals and he is due to be hanged shortly. The only hope for his life being spared is if he is granted clemency and his death sentence is commuted to a prison sentence.

Please take a few minutes to support this urgent APYN action by sending a message to the President of Singapore and to the Editor-in-Chief of the Straits Times. Please create your own polite message; this is very important as inappropriate messages will be counter-productive. Or you can use the model text below.

Express action option – send your messages by email

President of Singapore e-mail address : s_r_nathan@istana.gov.sg

Editor-in-Chief of the Straits Times stonline@sph.com.sg

Semi-express action option – please send tourist postcards showing a famous landmark in your country to the President and to the Editor-in-Chief of the Straits times so they are aware that people in lots of countries are concerned about this case.

President
His Excellency SR Nathan
Office of the President
Orchard Road, Istana
Singapore 0922

Editor-in-Chief
The Straits Times
1000 Toa Payoh North
News Centre
Singapore 318994

What else can I do?

Take a photo of yourself holding a sign saying “Don’t Execute Yong Vui Kong” and upload it as your Facebook profile picture. If you decide to do this please also keep a link to this action posted near the top of your Wall and/or use the Facebook Notes option to tell your Friends about the Youg Vui Kong case and include a link to this action at the end

• Please tell your friends about this case and invite them to take this action
• You can post a link to this action and a link to the Vui Kong’s Story video clip on your Facebook Wall (links below)
• Consider writing about Youg Vui Kong’s case on blogs
• You can confirm on www.apyouth.net which actions you’ve taken

Find out more about the Yong Vui Kong case

A Call for a Moratorium, Mandatory Death Penalty

Vui Kong’s Story

Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign Facebook Group

AIHK Urgent Action for Yong Vui Kong

The dirty secret arrangement between Malaysia and Singapore government

Excerpts of press release by N. Surendran, Malaysian anti-death penalty activist, human rights lawyer

"Today for the first time we've got the legal representative of one of our citizens who is in another country facing death. The representative of that person has come to our country to plead that our country does something to save its citizen.

A large number of Malaysians are arrested under Singapore's harsh drug laws, they are tried, sentence and executed, and the Malaysian government has remained silent.

Ravi, who has fought a heroic battle... managed to get a stay of execution after the clemency petition was rejected, and he remains unsupported by Malaysia or its government. We call for the Malaysian government to speak up for its citizens, and let us save Yong Vui Kong's life.

There seems to be an 'I scratch your back, you scratch my back' arrangement, a dirty secret arrangement between Malaysia and Singapore where I'll do whatever I want with my or your citizens I catch... and hand in hand we'll execute each others' citizens.

The (Singapore) government and the Cabinet abused the clemency petition process. Instead of letting the president decide, the Cabinet usurped his role, so you're talking about a stark illegality in the legal process. If Singapore is not going to back off then Malaysia should consider legal proceedings in this matter. "

Video courtesy of klik4malaysia - Urgent Action Needed for Malaysian Citizen in Singapore

Yong Vui Kong finally catches Malaysian media's attention

Yong Vui Kong's counsel, M. Ravi was in Kuala Lumpur for a press conference yesterday (Jun 10) at the office of the Malaysian Bar Council. The press conference was to raise attention through the Malaysian media on Vui Kong's capital case in Singapore.

Among other issues, Ravi pointed out that it was the Singapore Cabinet that was making the decision for presidential clemency, even though it is in fact in the President's authority.

Ravi also mentioned that only three countries in Asia still have laws mandating the mandatory death penalty for traffickers, namely Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand. Most countries recognise the cruelty of mandatory death penalty and have therefore abolished it.

Malaysian human rights lawyer and anti-death penalty activist Edmund Bon said that the Malaysian government should not remain silent on this subject and should lend a helping hand to assist Yong Vui Kong, a Sabahan.

As of yesterday the Malaysian press have picked up the story and the articles published online can be found below.

Klick4malaysia - Urgent Action Needed for Malaysian Citizen in Singapore (with two videos of the press conference)

Guangming Daily -新加坡販毒判死‧非總統特赦決定‧青年盼政府使權打救

Sin Chew Jit Poh -青年販毒問吊：“新加坡內閣認定須受刑”‧代表律師：只能要求總統特赦

China Press - 大馬青年新國販毒死刑 新國人權律師促馬政府帶上國際法庭聲援死囚

Oriental Daily - 律師冀政府以國家主權說情

Note: Some articles are in Chinese. Translation available with Google.

Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign statement on dismissal of Yong Vui Kong's appeal

The Singapore Anti-Death Penalty Campaign (SADPC) expresses its deepest disappointment towards the dismissal of Yong Vui Kong's appeal by Singapore's Court of Appeal on Friday. This was despite all the extensive and constructive arguments put forward by his lawyer Mr. M Ravi.

It was also regretful that the court declared this judgment to be set as a precedent and no future arguments against the mandatory death sentence shall be made in a court of law. As a matter of prudence, legal interpretations must be subject to revision, continually challenged by new developments in legal and social thought.

While the Court acknowledged that the mandatory death sentence is considered a cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment in other countries, it added that Singapore's constitution does not provide for a prohibition against cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment.

Hong Kong had already abolished the death penalty in 1966. China, India and Japan have scrapped the mandatory death penalty, while Taiwan and Korea have held a moratorium on executions. In light of the global trend of countries abolishing the mandatory death penalty, Singapore's continued retention of the arbitrary law is both backward and deplorable. The SADPC reiterates that the mandatory death penalty is inhumane and has no place in a modern, civil society.

We are also disturbed that the Law Minister should comment on the case, making specific references to Yong, as the constitutionality of the MDP was pending before the Courts. His comments further prejudices the clemency process which is the final remedy available to Yong.

Further, the dearth of public discourse over the exercise of the death penalty in the tightly regulated mainstream media makes it difficult to gauge public approval. As such, the right of the state to carry out executions on behalf of the public must be called into question.

Given these circumstances, it is unsafe for the cabinet to decide on the clemency and the SADPC henceforth urges the state to commute Yong's death sentence to life imprisonment. In fact, having regard to international legal opinion, this seems to be the only option available to the state.

We would also like to salute Mr. M Ravi for all the energy and effort that has been put into fighting the case of Yong. It is inspiring to see that he has not given up hope and intends to continue in the fight to save Yong from the gallows.

The SADPC will continue to campaign along with Mr. Ravi's legal actions and we hope that the judiciary will change its mind and give Yong a chance to live.

A Letter to Yong Vui Kong

Dear Vui Kong,

Thanks so much for your letter. I’m sorry it’s taken me this long to reply.

Your brother Yun Leong tells me you are amazingly strong. That you’re prepared to accept whatever happens next. That you want to live, want so much to live, but are ready to face death. I saw what he meant in court on Friday. The serenity on your face. The way you even managed a smile and a wave for your siblings after the awful, awful verdict.

I know you’ve been studying hard. Trying to learn English, quizzing your lawyer about various legal concepts in order to fully understand your own case. So midway through the proceedings on Friday, you must have realised – as did the rest of us in the gallery – that the judges were not going to rule in your favour. They didn’t think our constitution protected us from “inhuman” punishment. Nor did they agree with your lawyer that it should embrace customary international law, which rejects the mandatory death penalty. In fact, despite the vast amount of cases and research presented by your lawyer, they felt there was no customary international law against the mandatory death penalty. I could feel myself shaking my head over and over again, my hand, trembling as I took down the Chief Justice’s words.

What was going through your mind then?

It is now three days after the verdict. Did you spend the weekend trying to make sense of the judges’ logic? Or are you at peace? Calm, as your family said you would be. They say you’ve learnt to let go of fear and anger.

They have nothing but admiration for you, your brothers and sisters. They often speak of your transformation. Of the way you’ve carried yourself through these horrible, dark times. Of the effect Buddhism has had on you. I know they’re not saying all this to drum up sympathy for your cause. I can tell they are genuinely amazed by how much you’ve changed. At various points, they’ve each said the same thing to me - “He’s a totally different person.”

I know it’s been really hard on your siblings. Yun Leong has literally shrunk over the past six months. There are dark circles under his eyes. He is exhausted most of the time. Yet he continues to see you on his one rest day each week. I know he goes without fail, and I know talking to you makes him feel better. He has been a real rock, your brother – dealing with questions from your relatives, the pesky media, your family’s pain… trying to hide the truth from your mother.

Friday night, I had a chat with Vui Fung. She seemed inconsolable. Sad and bewildered and scared. If you should die, she’d have to come and take your ashes back to Sabah. “It’s family custom,” she told me. “But how can I? He’s my brother, my lovely brother. I don’t want to bring him home.”

I didn’t know what to say. How was it possible to make her feel better? No amount of logic, or talk of the Constitution, could justify the court’s verdict to her. It was all legal goobledygook. All she knew was that the judges had agreed that it was right for the state to murder you. YOU. Her lovely brother.

And then, she surprised me. Just before calling it a night, she told me she would try to be strong – that in the end, everyone would be answerable to god. You, for your deeds, the people who sanction your murder, for theirs. I do not believe in god, but perhaps some of the judges do. What answers will they give?

In your letter, you thanked me and all the other people who’ve rallied around your family for our unconditional support. I can’t speak for the others, but as much as I like being thought of as selfless, I have to admit I was initially drawn to your case for personal reasons. I do not have children. But I have a young nephew and niece whom I love dearly. And I do not want them to grow up in a place where ‘inhuman’ punishment is seen as constitutional; where drug mules are hanged and drug lords get the red-carpet treatment.

Above all, I cannot bear the thought of your blood on my hands. What purpose will it serve us to kill you?

Vui Kong, following your case has been the hardest, most heartbreaking thing many of us have ever done. We are all emotionally spent. Exhausted. I cannot imagine how Yun Leong and Vui Fung must feel. Today, someone asked me if it might have been kinder to persuade your family to give up the fight back in December. To let the state hang you and spare your loved ones the agony of waiting and hoping. I think the person failed to fully comprehend the depth of your siblings’ love for you. I know that the waiting is tough, the uncertainty, nerve-wracking. But I know they will cling on to whatever hope they can find. I know how much they appreciate each extra moment they have with you. Yun Leong said as much on Friday. You might be a lowly mule, a statistic to those who want you dead in order to prove a point. But you are also Vui Fung’s lovely brother, Yun Leong’s inspiration, your mother’s favourite son. And they all want you to live. Their pain must be excruciating. The state wants to murder you. And there is so little they can do.

Your life now lies in the hands of our President. He is not known for his compassion – has apparently never granted clemency to anyone. But we continue to cling on to hope. Perhaps, he will grow a heart and surprise us all.

In December, when it felt as if all was lost, Vui Fung went out and bought you some new clothes - a crisp white shirt, some fashionable checked pants. She’d taken pains to pick stuff she thought you would like. These were meant for the state-sponsored photo-taking session before your execution, and after that… your funeral. She showed them to us when she came for your hearing in March. It felt a little surreal, watching her as she carefully unfolded the clothes.

“We want Vui Kong to have the best,” Yun Leong explained, “the very best.”

And then he said this, and I will never forget the look on his face:

“But we hope he never gets to use these things. Never.”

We hope so too. We really do.

Lynn

lianainfilms

Singaporean drug trafficker caught smuggling drugs into Australia

TOC: Judgement on Yong Vui Kong’s appeal this Friday

Posted by theonlinecitizen on May 10, 2010

The Court of Appeal will be delivering its judgement this Friday, 14 May, on Yong Vui Kong’s appeal. The hearing will take place at 11am.

It has been two months since Yong made his appeal on 15 March. He is appealing against the death sentence which was imposed on him in 2007 when he was caught with 47g of diamorphine. He was found guilty of drug trafficking and was given the mandatory death penalty.

Originally scheduled to hang on 4 December last year, his lawyer, Mr Madasamy Ravi, persuaded the court that Yong had not had his appeal heard, as was his right under the Constitution. The court agreed and granted Yong a hearing on 15 March. In that hearing, Mr Madasamy argued that the mandatory death penalty was unconstitutional, citing many judicial decisions in other jurisdictions all over the world.

On Sunday, 9 May, Law Minister K Shanmugam defended the Singapore government’s position on the issue. According to the Straits Times, the minister “believes this stand has saved thousands of lives… The penalty applies to a crimes [sic] such as murder, kidnapping and drug trafficking, and Mr Shanmugam believes it has had a deterrent effect, and sent a clear signal to drug barons on Singapore’s position.”

The Online Citizen has been campaigning for a moratorium on the mandatory death penalty since Yong’s case came to light.

You can read the articles and view the videos here: Campaign for a moratorium on the mandatory death penalty.

Judgement on Yong Vui Kong’s appeal this Friday

Death Penalty – Are we trading off justice for real deterrence?

Posted in Life and Death, Social Commentary by mathialee on May 10, 2010

I am appalled by how our so called best and brightest legal minds make such illogical childish arguments in court and on the front page press. It makes me wonder if they really believe what they are saying, or are they compelled by some reason beyond our understanding to continue holding their grip on injustice, and are hence left with little choice but use these flimsy arguments.
http://www.todayonline.com/Print/Singapore/EDC100510-0000060/Death-penalty,-a-trade-off

1. “The mandatory death penalty for serious drug offenses here is a “trade-off” the Government makes to protect ‘thousands of lives’ that may be ruined if drugs were freely available”

Since when did we start trading justice for mere its deterrent effect?
If we begin to accept unjustly disproportionate punishments in order protect even innocent lives, would we not have apply the same principle to all abhorant crimes and impose the mandatory death penalty for all these crimes? Rapes, break-ins, corruption, snatch theft, errant construction companies flouting safety rules — are these any more acceptable than drug trafficking and why do we not impose a mandatory death penalty?
Does having the mandatory death penalty instead of a discretionary death penalty really protect ‘thousands of lives’ more?
Where is the proof? Where is the evidence?
How does this even work at the logical level?
.
Firstly, will judges stop imposing the death penalty on drug traffickers just because the sentencing is up to their discretion rather than mandatory? For cases where judges indeed do not impose the death penalty (even on appeal by the State prosecutors), should we ask ‘why’? Is it because our judges have somehow gone soft and incapable of administering just and appropriate punishments? Or is it because discretionary death penalty gives them that capacity to administer just and appropriate punishments?

Are we trading off justice for real deterrence?

New execution in Saudi Arabia

April 25, 2010: A Saudi man was decapitated by the sword in the eastern city of Dammam, in Saudi Arabia, after being sentenced to death for murdering another Saudi man, the government announced.

Saleh al-Ghamdi was executed after being convicted in the shooting death of Idha al-Jaid following a dispute, the interior ministry said in a statement published by the official SPA news agency.

It was the ninth reported execution of the year in Saudi Arabia.

Sources: AFP, April 26, 2010

TOC's Mandatory Death Penalty Campaign video

Quote: The (Singapore) Law Society wants mandatory death penalty for crimes such as murder, drug trafficking and firearms related offences scrapped."

NTU's student publication raises awareness of MDP amongst students

NTU's student publication, The Tribune, carried in its front page of its March issue a heart-wrenching article on Yong Vui Kong, a teen drug runner who was sentenced to death for trafficking 47g of heroin into Singapore.

Specifically, it drove to the crux of the case, the mandatory death sentence which was the required punishment for convicted drug traffickers under Singapore law.

The Tribune, in its article wrote, "The core of Mr Yong's lawyer's appeal - the basic right to life. Singapore's mandatory death penalty for possession of drugs always makes for heated discussion. Lawyers argue that it fails to deal with the right to life and evolve in the context of international laws."

The Tribune then asks NTU students a thought provoking question, "Is it time for change?"

In raising awareness amongst students, The Tribune has done NTU's student body a great service by providing students a refreshing alternative view, and encouraging them to form an informed opinion on capital punishment in Singapore.

Whether one is for or against the mandatory death penalty, tertiary institutions should be a place where opinions on the issue are debated.

Is capital punishment a form of deterrence? What are the statistics of executed drug traffickers in Singapore since the 1970's? What are the possible alternative punishments for the drug trafficker?

These are just some of the questions that can come up in a tertiary-level debate or discussion group that the respective tertiary institution's Student Unions can consider organising.

sgdeathpenalty also urge other tertiary publications to take up the challenge of encouraging a more critical-thinking student population through raising awareness on various social and political issues.

The mandatory death penalty is one of those issues that require urgent attention.

In most part of the world, tertiary institutions have always had the buzz of independent student activity that entails the coming together of the top young minds of the country.

Being part of a cosmopolitan and economically advanced nation, Singapore's educational institutions should be no different.

Heroin Smuggler Challenges Singapore Mandatory Death Sentence

Lawyers for a young Malaysian man facing the death penalty for drug smuggling are arguing that the mandatory death sentence is inhumane and disproportionate.

Singapore executes anyone found guilty of importing more than 15 grams of drugs.
It is one of the few countries in the world to impose compulsory death sentences for drug offences.

As Monica Kotwani reports from Singapore, it is being seen as a key challenge against the longstanding law.
Ah Leong takes a rare break from working in the kitchen at the Marriott Hotel in the heart of Singapore’s shopping district.
He wrings his hands anxiously. His brother Vui Kong is on death row.
Ah Leong says they have had a tough life.
“My parents split up when he was just three. My father left us and my mum had to support us.”
Ah Leong says seeing his mum struggle to survive caused his brother to be attracted by the prospects of riches in the capital. There he was lured into drug trafficking.
“We’re from Sabah, and very poor. You work so hard but you earn very little. But in Kuala Lumpur, Vui Kong’s boss called him to work, and paid him well. He was told by his boss to take these things and give them to people. He could not say no to his boss’s demands.”
Vui Kong was 19 years old when he was arrested in Singapore for possessing 47 grams of heroin, more than twice the maximum amount that warrants the mandatory death penalty.
He was later convicted of trafficking drugs, and sentenced to death.
But in December last year, a few days before Vui Kong was due to be hanged his lawyers obtained an emergency reprieve.
M Ravi is his appeal lawyer.
“When we say mandatory death sentence means basically judges don’t have discretion. Just close your eyes, and that’s it, and execute. Don’t have to look at the person’s background and all that. You know in a sentencing regime, there’s a plea in mitigation, to mitigate your circumstances, it’s part of the sentencing process, so, it was not only that the death penalty was already harsh, but to impose that, it’s just cruel and unusual punishment.”
Taiwan recently abolished the mandatory death penalty and China, which continues to execute prisoners, allows judicial discretion in sentencing drug-related cases.
Ravi says Singapore is out of touch.
“It is a very outdated, outmoded approach. It is not compatible with evolving standards of human rights decency. 95 percent of Asian countries have abolished it.”
Singapore has seen a big decline in its use of the death penalty but the government is resisting any change to the law.
In 2009, Law Minister K Shanmugam cited a survey conducted by Singapore’s main newspaper, The Straits Times, which found that 95 percent of Singaporeans support the death penalty.
But Andrew Loh editor of the Online Citizen website believes this is not an accurate picture.
“There’s a difference between the death penalty and the mandatory death penalty. From my experience, from talking to people, explaining to them what it is, most of the people, when they understand it more, they do not support the mandatory death penalty.”
Andrew says there have been some high profile execution cases in the last few years that involved the Australian and Nigerian governments but, he says, so far the Singaporean government has not relented to international pressure.
“Whenever such cases come out, the government turns the whole issue around to become about national sovereignty - that we have the right to impose our own set of laws. I don’t know why they do that. Maybe to get the general public to support the government, because if you turn it to a national pride kind of issue, people will feel these other countries are attacking us so we have to defend the government.”
I’m standing outside the Supreme Court of Singapore, where Yong Vui Kong’s appeal is being heard.
In the hearing, Singapore’s Attorney General, Walter Woon is arguing that the Mandatory Death Penalty deters others from doing the same.
Asia Calling requested an interview with the Attorney General many times but I was informed by a staff member that he was on a very long leave. An email request for an interview with the Ministry of Home Affairs was denied.
Defence Lawyer Ravi says research in Hong Kong has shown that the death penalty does not reduce crime.
“The fact that it does not deter has been researched by Jeffrey Fagan. Jeffrey Fagan did a study between HK and Singapore - a tale of two cities, that’s the title of his research. After the abolition of capital punishment in HK, there was a reduction in terms of homicide as well as drug trafficking in Hong Kong.”
Back outside the Marriot Hotel Ah Leong has nearly finished his break.
He says he just wants his little brother to live.
“I hope for anything but the death penalty. Anything else is ok. In prison, he can learn, to cook, or read. Twenty or thirty years, it doesn’t matter. It’s still a chance for him, because he’s still such a young boy.”
Ah Leong’s mother suffers from depression and he fears she will not survive if Vui Kong is hanged.
So the family has decided to keep her in the dark.
“As long as she lives, we will never tell our mother. We’ll just tell her that he has been caught, and is in prison. I think this is for the best.”

Asia Calling: Heroin Smuggler Challenges Singapore Mandatory Death Sentence