Parts of Misuse of Drugs Act unconstitutional, law don argues in inmates' appeal

Deputy A-G counters that presumption of innocence not provided for in Constitution

- Selina Lum

A law don argued before the Court of Appeal on May 7 that provisions in the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), which place the onus on the accused person to rebut presumed facts, are unconstitutional.

Assistant Professor Marcus Teo from NUS, who is also a practising lawyer, was arguing for four convicted drug traffickers in their appeal.

He led the oral arguments alongside Mr Eugene Thuraisingam and Mr Suang Wijaya.

The High Court dismissed the death row inmates' constitutional challenge in 2022.

Prof Teo argued that the MDA presumptions infringe the fundamental rules of natural justice, which include the presumption of innocence.

But Deputy Attorney-General Goh Yihan countered that presumption of innocence is not provided for in the Constitution, and thus the MDA presumptions cannot be invalidated for being unconstitutional.

After hearing more than three hours of arguments, the five-judge court, led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, reserved judgment. The court will give its decision at a later date.

The case centres on legal presumptions in the MDA that impose a burden of proof on the accused person to rebut them once the facts triggering the presumptions have been proved by the prosecution.