Criminal Law in Singapore: Understanding Article-9 of the Constitution

RUNNING HEAD: criminal law
CRIMINA
L LAW
November 27
2018

1
Criminal Law
The Constitution of Singapore is a sovereign and autonomous body. It is a republic and fulfills
every aspect of a democratic country. The constitution provides various provisions related to
civil liberties and rights of the citizens of Singapore. It mainly consists of the three main bodies:
the very first is the legislature, who makes the laws the second one is the executive who makes
sure that the citizens are properly following every law in a proper and ethical way. Thirdly and
the most important is the judiciary who ensures that no citizen shall be infringed of their
fundamental rights (Marie, 2012).
The constitution of Singapore states all the rights and restricts the parliament at the very same
time. It also ensures that all the government-owned bodies are working in a proper and authentic
manner, which is not only legal but also it, is ethically correct. In this essay, the discussion
further related to the Article-9 of the constitution of the Republic Of Singapore. This article has
its own importance when it comes to the constitution. Article-9 states that- whenever the police
arrest a person in that scenario what are the different rights and duties the arrested person has.
Other than that what are the remedies and necessities that need to be fulfilled by the police. All
these aspects covered under Article-9 (Anon, 1999). The Article states that every individual shall
have a right to personal life and liberty. Unlike countries like Malaysia and The United States Of
America, Singapore makes sure that the right to life and personal liberty only is related in the
matters related to the detention or incarceration.
The Article consists of following mentioned points that specify all the details with the landmark
judgments as well. The very first clause is-
1. Article 9 ensures that no person unless the constitution allows him deprived of his
personal life as well as liberty. The case had the most landmark judgment related to this

2
Criminal Law
was Ong Ah Chuan v. Public Prosecutor. The case involved two appellants who were
involved in the drugs and caught when coming back from Malaysia to Singapore. One of
them claimed that the heroin he was carrying drugs for his personal use and not for sale
or supply hence not liable for trafficking and the second appellant claimed that the police
informers wrongfully targeted him by putting drugs in his car and thus they both
punished with the death penalty for the same. The counsel for the accused brought three
main issues against the same, which stated that the judgment made by the Privy Council
was not equal as it should be as per the offense. As the death penalty as a punishment is
higher for carrying drugs. Hence, claimed that it was not in Accordance with the law as
stated in the article Lo Pui Sang v. Mamata Kapildev Dave (2008).
2. The Article states that if the detention is unlawful then there should be right to appeal in
the high court for the same as a remedy. In Yong Vui Kong v. Public Prosecutor it was
again stated that every individual no matter if proven guilty by the lower court, he/she has
full authority to appeal in the high court as an appeal so that he can listen and the
conditions of a right of Natural Justice be fulfilled (Thio, and Tan, 2009). That is right to
hear equally and justifiably.
3. The third provision states that every individual if arrested or detained required to be
acquainted with all the reasons for which he/she were arrested. The reason is as soon as
the person arrested, the rights of a citizen are present (Means, 2013). The
accusations/allegations can discuss afterward but the foremost thing is to mention all the
reasons behind (Neo, 2016).