ROSLAN BIN BAKAR v ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF SINGAPORE

[2024] SGCA 51 Court of Appeal 14 November 2024 CA/OAC 1/2024 25 min read
18 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court Court of Appeal
Decided
Judge Tay Yong Kwang
Charges / claim Constitutional Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel Attorney-General's Chambers, Christina Koh, Daphne Lim

Source: [2024] SGCA 51, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (3)

Parties (2)

Case Significance

Roslan bin Bakar v Attorney-General [2024] SGCA 51 was decided by the Court of Appeal on 14 November 2024 in OAC No 1 of 2024, with Tay Yong Kwang JCA delivering the judgment. The application was made by Mr Roslan Bin Bakar, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment, under Division 4 of Part 5 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969, seeking permission to make a post-appeal application in a capital case (a "PACC application") with his execution scheduled for the following day, 15 November 2024. Mr Roslan sought a stay of that execution pending determination of the permission application, permission to file a PACC application seeking a prohibiting order against the execution and a quashing order of the notice of execution dated 11 November 2024, and any other relief. The judgment records that Mr Roslan was tried jointly with Pausi bin Jefridin in CC 35/2009 on two charges: a capital charge of trafficking in not less than 96.07g of diamorphine and a non-capital charge of trafficking in not less than 76.37g of methamphetamine, both under s 5(1)(a) read with s 33 of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The catchwords concern equal protection of the law, fundamental liberties and the right to life and personal liberty, and stay of execution.

[2024] SGCA 51 explained

ROSLAN BIN BAKAR v ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF SINGAPORE ([2024] SGCA 51) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 14 November 2024. It is categorised under Constitutional Law and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2024] SGCA 51 about?

ROSLAN BIN BAKAR v ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF SINGAPORE ([2024] SGCA 51) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Constitutional Law — Equal protection of the law”, “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Stay of execution”, and “Constitutional Law — Fundamental liberties — Right to life and personal liberty”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2024] SGCA 51 consider?

The judgment refers to Applications in Capital Cases Act, Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Misue of Drugs Act (Cap 185), and Misue of Drugs Act, among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2024] SGCA 51 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGCA 40, [2024] SGCA 39, and [2024] SGCA 38, and 1 more. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2024] SGCA 51?

Within this corpus, [2024] SGCA 51 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

In this application, the applicant, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment whose conviction for drug trafficking and death sentence had been upheld on appeal, sought permission to make a post-appeal application in a capital case together with a stay of his execution scheduled for the following day. He relied on a separate constitutional challenge (OA 972) concerning provisions of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act and the Criminal Procedure Code. The court held that those provisions came into force long after his conviction and could not affect his case, and it dismissed the application summarily without an oral hearing, finding no basis to grant permission or to stay the execution.

What did Roslan bin Bakar seek in [2024] SGCA 51?

Roslan bin Bakar sought permission to make a post-appeal application in a capital case under Division 4 of Part 5 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969, a stay of his execution scheduled for 15 November 2024, and a quashing order of the notice of execution.

What charges did Roslan bin Bakar face according to [2024] SGCA 51?

The judgment records that Roslan bin Bakar was tried jointly with Pausi bin Jefridin in CC 35/2009 on a capital charge of trafficking not less than 96.07g of diamorphine and a non-capital charge of trafficking not less than 76.37g of methamphetamine under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (18)

SG (9)
[2010] SGHC 121 [2017] SGHC 291 [2022] SGCA 20 [2022] SGCA 26 [2022] SGCA 46 [2024] SGCA 38 [2024] SGCA 39 [2024] SGCA 40 [2024] SGHC 122
SLR (9)
[2011] 2 SLR 1189 [2016] 3 SLR 1023 [2021] 1 SLR 809 [2022] 2 SLR 1018 [2022] 4 SLR 934 [2022] 5 SLR 93 [2024] 1 SLR 1127 [2024] 1 SLR 414 [2024] 4 SLR 331

Cited By (1)

Related cases

Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.

Referenced in

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2024] SGCA 51)