SINGAPORE — Instead of a fine, the default starting sentence for motorists who cause death by negligent driving will now be a jail term of up to four weeks. This is before the extent of their negligence and other factors are taken into account, three High Court judges ruled in a landmark judgment issued yesterday.
However, such traffic death cases — which fall under s 304A(b) of the Penal Code — will not carry an automatic custodial sentence as the court will examine the circumstances of each case. The sentencing benchmark for such offences was set out by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who led a specially-constituted three-judge panel in hearing an appeal by prosecutors to impose jail time on a sleepy driver who killed one and injured 11 others.
In upping her sentence from a S$10,000 fine to four weeks’ imprisonment, the judges agreed that Hue An Li, who did surveillance at a casino and had gone without sleep for 24 hours prior to the accident, had demonstrated egregious negligence.
Detailing the grounds of what the judges called a “significant change in the law” yesterday, CJ Menon distinguished between rash and negligent driving in the written judgment.
Different maximum penalties were prescribed for death caused by rashness and negligence, in amendments made to the Penal Code in 2008.
In general, a rash offender is aware of the potential risks that could arise from his conduct, he wrote.
In sentencing Hue to four weeks’ jail, the court had paid heed to the hitherto entrenched position that a fine would usually suffice for such traffic death cases. She would have received a much longer prison term had the judges not taken past cases into account, he said.
CJ Menon added that speeding, drink-driving and sleepy driving would call for a starting point of between two and four months’ jail, with the extent of harm caused to be taken into account during sentencing.
The judges cautioned unfit drivers against taking the wheel: “We would like to take this opportunity to signal to drivers the consequences of the tremendous risks that they take on, not only to themselves but also to other innocent road users, when they drive despite not being in a fit condition to do so.”
In Hue’s case, the 27-year-old went out to meet a friend after a 12-hour work shift on March 14 last year, only going home 12 hours later.
She blanked out at the wheel and crashed into a lorry ferrying foreign workers near Simei.
Yesterday’s ruling was not the first time CJ Menon has clarified sentencing principles for offences. He did so previously for first-time drink-driving and cigarette smuggling.
However, such traffic death cases — which fall under s 304A(b) of the Penal Code — will not carry an automatic custodial sentence as the court will examine the circumstances of each case. The sentencing benchmark for such offences was set out by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who led a specially-constituted three-judge panel in hearing an appeal by prosecutors to impose jail time on a sleepy driver who killed one and injured 11 others.
In upping her sentence from a S$10,000 fine to four weeks’ imprisonment, the judges agreed that Hue An Li, who did surveillance at a casino and had gone without sleep for 24 hours prior to the accident, had demonstrated egregious negligence.
Detailing the grounds of what the judges called a “significant change in the law” yesterday, CJ Menon distinguished between rash and negligent driving in the written judgment.
Different maximum penalties were prescribed for death caused by rashness and negligence, in amendments made to the Penal Code in 2008.
In general, a rash offender is aware of the potential risks that could arise from his conduct, he wrote.
In sentencing Hue to four weeks’ jail, the court had paid heed to the hitherto entrenched position that a fine would usually suffice for such traffic death cases. She would have received a much longer prison term had the judges not taken past cases into account, he said.
CJ Menon added that speeding, drink-driving and sleepy driving would call for a starting point of between two and four months’ jail, with the extent of harm caused to be taken into account during sentencing.
The judges cautioned unfit drivers against taking the wheel: “We would like to take this opportunity to signal to drivers the consequences of the tremendous risks that they take on, not only to themselves but also to other innocent road users, when they drive despite not being in a fit condition to do so.”
In Hue’s case, the 27-year-old went out to meet a friend after a 12-hour work shift on March 14 last year, only going home 12 hours later.
She blanked out at the wheel and crashed into a lorry ferrying foreign workers near Simei.
Yesterday’s ruling was not the first time CJ Menon has clarified sentencing principles for offences. He did so previously for first-time drink-driving and cigarette smuggling.
