Proposed amendments restrict applications after failed appeals unless new evidence is presented.
SINGAPORE: A new Bill introduced in Parliament on Monday (Nov 7) aims to clarify the court processes for capital cases that have exhausted all avenues for appeals and clemency. Under this proposal, the Court of Appeal will be designated as the sole court to hear related applications, streamlining the legal process.
In some instances, a single judge may be authorized to hear the application, representing a shift from current practices that allow such cases to be adjudicated in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Additionally, if a prisoner has previously abused court processes, they will not be permitted to file a post-appeal application unless new relevant evidence emerges.
This legislative move follows several judgments in which the Court of Appeal criticized the misuse of court processes and the protraction of post-appeal capital cases.
In a joint press release on Monday, the Ministry of Law and the Ministry of Home Affairs stated that the Bill is intended to “clarify the process for post-appeal applications in capital cases” and to “safeguard the administration of justice and the rule of law.”
Post-appeal applications in capital cases include requests to stay a death sentence, challenges to the conviction or death sentence, and judicial reviews questioning the President’s decision to deny clemency. These applications pertain to cases where prisoners have received death sentences but have failed in all their appeals.
The New Procedure
Under the proposed guidelines, prisoners will need to first apply for permission to submit a post-appeal application. A permission hearing may be conducted by a single judge acting within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. In certain circumstances, the matter may even be resolved without an oral hearing.
Prisoners must provide grounds for their application and justify any delays in filing it. The Court of Appeal will evaluate several factors when determining whether to grant permission, including:
Whether the application relies on material that could not have been presented in court previously.
Any delays in filing the application after the relevant material or evidence was obtained, along with reasons for those delays.
The likelihood of success for the application.
A significant aspect of the legislative amendments addresses the abuse of court processes. If a prisoner has previously been found by the Court of Appeal to have misused the court’s processes in a relevant application, they will not be granted permission to apply unless new evidence is presented. This rule also applies if the prisoner has abused the court’s processes in any other application or court action that has delayed their execution.
Once permission is granted, the post-appeal application must be submitted within a specified timeframe, and a hearing before a panel of three or more judges will be scheduled. A warrant for execution may be enforced unless the Court of Appeal has issued a stay, the President has ordered a respite, or there is a valid application for a stay.
Furthermore, the Court of Appeal may determine whether the prisoner or their legal representative has previously abused the court process to obstruct or delay the execution of the capital sentence. The court has the authority to consider additional evidence when assessing claims of such abuse.
The court retains discretion to permit challenges, even if they do not adhere to the newly established procedural guidelines.
