KUALA LUMPUR – Three Malaysians on death row in Singapore now face another roadblock in their attempt to escape the noose, after its high court dismissed bids made by two King’s Counsels to represent them.
The prisoners are Saminathan Selvaraju, Datchinamurthy Kataiah, and Lingkesvaran Rajendaren, who were given the mandatory death penalty between 2015 and 2018 after being convicted of trafficking heroin.
The court dismissed the bids made by two lawyers, Theodoros Kassimatis from Australia and Edward Fitzgerald from Britain, who sought to be admitted to the Singapore Bar on an ad hoc basis to act for the convicts, the Straits Times reported.
Fitzgerald had sought admission to act for Datchinamurthy and Lingkesvaran, while Kassimatis sought to act for Saminathan and Jumaat Mohamed Sayed, a Singaporean also on death row for drug related charges.
The four had previously appealed against the convictions between 2016 and 2020, all of which were dismissed.
Subsequently, they applied for permission to commence a constitutional challenge against provisions of Singapore’s Misuse of Drugs Act on August 22, 2022, arguing that they violated the presumption of innocence protected under the nation’s constitution.
Their bid, however, was dismissed by the high court on November 25 of the same year, one of the reasons being their application’s subject matter was not susceptible to judicial review.
Kassimatis and Fitzgerald filed written and oral submissions before Justice Woo Bih Li on November 23, 2023, through Datchinamurthy.
Today, The Straits Times reported that while Woo found Fitzgeral to possess special experience in judicial review cases, he did not share the same sentiment with Kassimatis.
For context, foreign counsels seeking ad hoc admission must fulfil certain requirements before the court deliberates whether a special reason is present to admit them, under Singapore’s Legal Profession Act.
Woo also said the fact that the case was of public importance was not sufficient special reason to warrant the lawyers to represent them.
The prisoners argued that they were unsuccessful in finding local Singaporean lawyers to be their representatives, to which Woo said the reasons behind the circumstances were relevant.
Woo said it is unsuitable to admit foreign representatives when Singaporean lawyers themselves view that the facts of four convicts’ cases had no merit.
He added that they have also been able to access legal assistance, despite having no formal representation.
However, foreign counsels are still permitted to take part in the preparation of written submissions. – January 30, 2024