Search

In 2012, Singapore amended its Misuse of Drugs to give courts hearing capital drug trafficking cases the discretion to replace the default death penalty with life imprisonment and caning, provided that the accused person can show that he was merely a drug courier and the prosecution certifies that he had substantively assisted the authorities in disrupting drug trafficking activities. The Singapore High Court and Court of Appeal have since made important pronouncements on the 2012 amendments, but several challenges remain: first, whether the privilege against self-incrimination has been further eroded; secondly, whether an accused person can invoke the statutory relief of being a courier only at sentencing; thirdly, whether it is appropriate to leave the certification decision solely to the prosecution; and finally, whether guidelines as to when the death sentence is appropriate should have been prescribed. These challenges ought to be given serious legislative or judicial consideration as the criminal justice system in Singapore continues to evolve in response to changing public perceptions of due process and crime control. The first three challenges, in particular, may have important ramifications for potentially innocent accused persons as it is submitted that the law as it stands may incentivise some of them to plead guilty from the outset to maximise their chances of avoiding the death penalty. As there are still a number of jurisdictions that retain the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking offences, this article may also be of comparative interest, especially since there appears to be a dearth of literature on the discretionary death penalty for drug offences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although sentencing of drug offenders in federal courts is complicated by minimum penalties, which trump the guidelines, the mandatory penalties can be avoided if offenders receive substantial assistance departures. Nagel and Schulhofer contend that substantial assistance departures are used to mitigate the sentences of “sympathetic” and “salvageable” offenders. The authors tested this contention, using data on drug offenders facing mandatory minimum sentences in three U.S. district courts. Results reveal that substantial assistance departures are used to reduce the sentences of certain types of offenders facing mandatory minimum penalties: females, U.S. citizens, employed persons, those with some college, those with dependent children, and those who played a minor or minimal role in the offense. Findings also revealed that racial-ethnic differences among male offenders were masked by the racial-ethnic similarities among female offenders in the full model and that the effect of gender was confined to Black and Hispanic offenders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides an update on criminal law legislation. Topics discussed include the Royal Assent received by the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 on January 28, 2016 which introduces a widely defined ban within Great Britain on the production, distribution and sale of psychoactive substances and the amendment of Rule 3.24 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2015 to set time limits for starting a trial in the Crown Court.