Is Safekeeping Drug Trafficking? The Singapore Court of Appeal’s Attempt to Delineate Role and Culpability in Drug Trafficking Offenses

IF 0.4 Q2 Social Sciences New Criminal Law Review Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1525/NCLR.2021.24.1.90
Kenny Yang
{"title":"Is Safekeeping Drug Trafficking? The Singapore Court of Appeal’s Attempt to Delineate Role and Culpability in Drug Trafficking Offenses","authors":"Kenny Yang","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2021.24.1.90","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Singapore is well known for its harsh stance against drug traffickers, with drug trafficking carrying some of the most severe penalties available in law. This includes the mandatory death penalty where the weight of the drug exceeds a statutory threshold. The act of trafficking is also broadly defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 and can encompass a wide range of activities. In a series of authoritative decisions since 1994, this has also included the act of safekeeping drugs for another.\n However, the Singapore Court of Appeal revisited this definition in the recent decision of Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor [2019] 1 SLR 1003, finding that the act of safekeeping drugs does not fall under the definition of “trafficking.” As this paper argues, this new definition is an attempt by the Court of Appeal to better delineate the varying roles and culpability of those involved in the drug trade, but will have future implications for drug prosecutions and enforcement.","PeriodicalId":44796,"journal":{"name":"New Criminal Law Review","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2021.24.1.90","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Singapore is well known for its harsh stance against drug traffickers, with drug trafficking carrying some of the most severe penalties available in law. This includes the mandatory death penalty where the weight of the drug exceeds a statutory threshold. The act of trafficking is also broadly defined in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 and can encompass a wide range of activities. In a series of authoritative decisions since 1994, this has also included the act of safekeeping drugs for another. However, the Singapore Court of Appeal revisited this definition in the recent decision of Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor [2019] 1 SLR 1003, finding that the act of safekeeping drugs does not fall under the definition of “trafficking.” As this paper argues, this new definition is an attempt by the Court of Appeal to better delineate the varying roles and culpability of those involved in the drug trade, but will have future implications for drug prosecutions and enforcement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
安全保管是毒品走私吗?新加坡上诉法院试图界定贩毒罪行的角色和罪责
新加坡以其对毒品贩子的严厉立场而闻名,毒品走私会受到一些最严厉的法律处罚。这包括在毒品的重量超过法定阈值时判处强制性死刑。贩运行为在《1973年滥用药物法》中也有广泛的定义,可以包括范围广泛的活动。在1994年以来的一系列权威决定中,这也包括为他人保管药品的行为。然而,新加坡上诉法院在最近的Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor [2019] 1 SLR 1003的决定中重新审视了这一定义,认为保管药品的行为不属于“贩运”的定义。正如本文所论证的那样,这个新的定义是上诉法院试图更好地界定参与毒品交易的人的不同角色和罪责,但将对毒品起诉和执法产生未来的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Focused on examinations of crime and punishment in domestic, transnational, and international contexts, New Criminal Law Review provides timely, innovative commentary and in-depth scholarly analyses on a wide range of criminal law topics. The journal encourages a variety of methodological and theoretical approaches and is a crucial resource for criminal law professionals in both academia and the criminal justice system. The journal publishes thematic forum sections and special issues, full-length peer-reviewed articles, book reviews, and occasional correspondence.
期刊最新文献
Algorithmic Decision-Making When Humans Disagree on Ends Editor’s Introduction The Limits of Retributivism Bringing People Down The Conventional Problem with Corporate Sentencing (and One Unconventional Solution)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1