Moad Fadzir Bin Mustaffa v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

[2024] SGCA 24 Court of Appeal 30 July 2024 • CA/CM 29/2024 • 17 min read

11 cases cited

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	30 July 2024
Judge	Tay Yong Kwang
Charges / claim	Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Ong Ying Ping Esq, Ong Ying Ping, Sarah Siaw, Wong Woon Kwong

Source: [2024] SGCA 24, Court of Appeal, decided 30 July 2024 — eLitigation. Updated 25 June 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Criminal review

Practice Areas

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Tay Yong Kwang Delivered

Counsel (5)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Ong Ying Ping Esq Firm Ong Ying Ping Counsel Applicant Sarah Siaw Counsel Respondent Wong Woon Kwong Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa Applicant

Case Significance

Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 24 was a single Court of Appeal judgment delivered on 30 July 2024 by Tay Yong Kwang JCA, following a hearing on 26 July 2024. The proceeding, CA/CM 29/2024, was a criminal motion brought by the applicant, Mr Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa, described in the judgment as a prisoner awaiting capital punishment. The catchwords classify the matter as Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Criminal review.

The judgment explained the procedural history: on 19 April 2024 the applicant had filed CA/CM 15/2024 under s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (2020 Rev Ed) seeking permission to make a review application in respect of an earlier Court of Appeal decision, Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor and other appeals [2019] SGCA 73, delivered on 25 November 2019. That motion was dismissed summarily on 21 May 2024 in [2024] SGCA 20. In the present application, CM 29, the applicant sought a review of that CM 15 Judgment, purportedly pursuant to s 60D(c) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 (2020 Rev Ed). The applicant was represented by Ong Ying Ping of Ong Ying Ping Esq, while the Attorney-General's Chambers, with Sarah Siaw and Wong Woon Kwong, acted for the respondent.

Summary

In this criminal motion (CM 29), the applicant, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment, sought a review of an earlier decision that had summarily dismissed his application for permission to make a review application in respect of his conviction. The court found that the application contained fundamental flaws that had been highlighted to the applicant's counsel and that it was clearly prohibited under the Criminal Procedure Code. The court dismissed CM 29 summarily as patently unmeritorious and an abuse of process, and ordered the applicant's counsel to pay costs of $5,000 personally to the Prosecution.

What was Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 24 about?

[2024] SGCA 24, decided on 30 July 2024 by Tay Yong Kwang JCA, concerned CA/CM 29/2024, a criminal motion by Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment, who sought a review of an earlier decision ([2024] SGCA 20) purportedly under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.

Which earlier decisions did Moad Fadzir bin Mustaffa seek to review ([2024] SGCA 24)?

Per [2024] SGCA 24, the applicant filed CM 15 under s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to review the Court of Appeal's decision in [2019] SGCA 73 (delivered 25 November 2019); that motion was dismissed in [2024] SGCA 20, which he then sought to review in CM 29.