The Court of Appeal (CA) judgment in Muhammad bin Kadar v Public Prosecutor created quite a stir in Singapore. The case pertained to a murder involving two suspects, and its resolution took almost six years, with many twists and turns as to the actual facts. The CA attributed the confusion in part to questionable practices adopted by the police and the prosecution at various points in the proceedings, and reserved strong words for them in its judgment. It also established new requirements for the prosecution regarding its duty to the court to disclose relevant material not favourable to the case it seeks to present. This piece focuses on these new requirements, and suggests that the premises invoked by the court to impose disclosure obligations on the prosecution are not completely consistent with what it concluded. It is also suggested that the court was at cross purposes with some of the arguments raised by the prosecution.
Asian Studies | Legislation
Law, Society and Governance
Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal
The Prosecution's Duty of Disclosure in Singapore: Muhammad bin Kadar v Public Prosecutor  3 SLR 1205. (2011). Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal. 11, (2), 207-216. Research Collection School Of Law.
Available at: http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/1247
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.