Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

A man was executed at dawn in Singapore on Apr. 26, 2023.

Sentenced on Oct. 9, 2018

The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) wrote in its Apr. 22, 2023 statement that the execution of a 46-year-old Singaporean Tangaraju s/o Suppiah was scheduled for Apr. 26, 2023.

Tangaraju was sentenced to death on Oct. 9, 2018.

He was convicted of abetting the trafficking of 1,017.9g of cannabis sometime between Sep. 6 and 7, 2013.

This amount was more than two times above the 500g threshold that called for the mandatory death penalty, based on the Misuse of Drugs Act.

CNB stated that the amount of cannabis was sufficient to feed the addiction of about 150 abusers for a week.

Arrested on Mar. 3, 2014

According to court documents, Tangaraju was charged with abetting in the trafficking of 1017.9g of cannabis.

He was arrested for failing to report for a urine test and for drug consumption on Jan. 23, 2014 but released on bail on Feb. 3, 2014.

At that time, the authorities had not linked him to the cannabis trafficking on Sep. 6 and 7, 2013.

He was denied bail and arrested on Mar. 3, 2014 after he continued to fail to report for his urine tests while out on bail.

Sometime in March 2014, Tangaraju was in remand when he was identified as a person potentially linked to the cannabis trafficking on Sep. 6 and 7.

Conspired with Mogan, who brought in 1,017.9g of cannabis

He had conspired with a man named Mogan Valo to deliver the cannabis to himself sometime between Sep. 6 and 7, 2013.

On Sep. 5, 2013, Tangaraju instructed Mogan to deliver ya lei (Tamil for leaves) to himself from Malaysia to Singapore.

Mogan understood that ya lei referred to cannabis, and that he will be paid S$900 to bring the cannabis to the car park of PSA Vista, or, failing which, the McDonald's outlet at West Coast Park.

At around 9pm on Sep. 6, 2013, Mogan drove into Singapore with his girlfriend via Woodlands Checkpoint.

Mogan was on his way to PSA Vista when he realised he was being tailed.

He attempted to leave Singapore via the Tuas Checkpoint, but was arrested by CNB officers at around 10:10pm.

The CNB officers found two rectangular-shaped blocks of vegetable matter wrapped in white packaging in Mogan's vehicle. It was later found to be 1,017.9g of cannabis.

Arranged for Suresh to receive the cannabis on his behalf

Mogan admitted that he was instructed to deliver the cannabis and agreed to assist in a follow-up operation against the recipient of the packages at the toilet in West Coast Park's McDonald's.

There, CNB officers arrested Suresh s/o Subramaniam, who was walking out of the toilet at around 1:19am on Sep. 7.

However, Suresh was unknown to Mogan, who said he did not know the former nor had any contact with him.

According to court documents, Suresh was Tangaraju's friend.

The pair met each other by chance on Sep. 6 evening and realised that they both were due for a urine test at Clementi Police Station on that same day.

He planned to give Tangaraju a lift to the police station, but the latter did not reply his message.

Suresh and his friend went to McDonald's to buy dinner after.

He informed Tangaraju that he was at West Coast Park's McDonald's sometime during Sep. 6 night.

Suresh found to not have coordinated transaction

From 11:27pm on Sep. 6 to 1:19am on Sep. 7, Suresh and Tangaraju communicated via a series of phone calls while the former was at McDonald's.

Suresh said Tangaraju called him at 1:19am and asked him if there was anyone in the McDonald’s toilet.

Suresh said he had to use the toilet at the time, so he decided to go to the toilet and check.

He replied Tangaraju that there was no one in the toilet.

CNB officers arrested Suresh when he was walking out from the toilet and seized his mobile phone.

The defence argued that Suresh was the person who coordinated the transaction.

However, Judge Hoo Sheau Peng ruled this out in his written grounds of decision.

She explained that Mogan continued communicating with Tangaraju over the phone for five times between 1:20am to 2am on Sep. 7, after Suresh was arrested and his phone was already seized.

She also noted that there were calls made between Mogan and a mobile phone number, followed quickly by calls between that same number and Suresh's mobile number.

Hoo said that there was "no reason in fact or logic" to believe that Suresh would have made multiple calls to himself after each call with Mogan, therefore Suresh and the user of the aforementioned number are not the same person.

Judge threw out Tangaraju's claims

Furthermore, Suresh was found to be using a different phone number from the one used in the calls with him and Mogan.

That phone number – referred to as the first number in court documents – was one of two numbers that Mogan and Suresh were found with.

Denied having links to two phone numbers

Tangaraju denied having anything to do with the first number.

He also claimed that he stopped using the second number after he lost the mobile phone corresponding to it on Aug. 7, 2013.

However, Judge Hoo noted that Tangaraju's claims of losing the mobile phone with his second number only came in response to two questions that he was asked during his final statement on May 23, 2014 and not during his earlier statement on Apr. 24, 2014.

Repeated requests for interpreter denied

Tangaraju alleged that his repeated requests for the assistance of an interpreter during the recording of his Apr. 24, 2014 statement was denied.

As a result, Tangaraju claimed he did not fully understand the questions he was asked, as well as the recorded statement when it was read back to him.

Judge Hoo said she found this rather disingenuous given Tangaraju admission's that he had made no such request for any of the other statements subsequently recorded from him.

She ultimately found that both numbers belonged to Tangaraju, who used both to communicate with Mogan and Suresh from Sep. 6 to 7.

Imposed mandatory death sentence

Judge Hoo also found that Tangaraju had conspired with and coordinated the delivery by Mogan, as well as the receipt by Suresh, who was to collect the cannabis on his behalf.

Since the amount of cannabis is "many times what a typical addict would be able to consume on a daily basis", Judge Hoo stated that the "large amount" of cannabis was not intended for Tangaraju's own consumption but for the purpose of trafficking instead.

Tangaraju was convicted of abetting in the trafficking of 1,017.9g of cannabis.

Judge Hoo noted that the alternative sentence was not applicable – life imprisonment and 15 cane strokes – as Tangaraju was not found to be a courier nor was he given a certificate of substantive assistance.

She imposed the mandatory death penalty on Tangaraju.

Accorded full due process under the law

CNB said in its Apr. 22 statement that Tangaraju was accorded full due process under the law, and had access to legal counsel throughout the process.

It also addressed Tangaraju's claims regarding the interpreter and reiterated Judge Hoo's findings.

"During his trial, Tangaraju claimed for the first time that his repeated requests for the assistance of an interpreter during a recording of his first statement had been denied.

The High Court said this was a "bare allegation" raised for the first time during his cross-examination, which the judge found disingenuous given Tangaraju’s admission that he had made no such request for any of the other statements subsequently recorded from him."

The Court of Appeal dismissed Tangaraju's appeal against his conviction and sentence on Aug. 14, 2019.

His petition to the president for clemency was unsuccessful, and his applications to seek permission to review the Court of Appeal’s decision were dismissed on Feb. 23, 2023 and Apr. 25, 2023.

Tangaraju was executed at dawn on Apr. 26.

The execution is the first reported case in 2023.

The last execution took place six months ago in October 2022.

MHA: Evidence clearly showed that Tangaraju coordinated the delivery of drugs for trafficking

Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said on Apr. 25 that the evidence clearly showed that Tangaraju was coordinating the delivery of drugs for trafficking.

The High Court found that Tangaraju had an intention to traffic in the cannabis, and the Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court’s findings and upheld the conviction against Tangaraju, MHA noted.

MHA's statement was made in response to British billionaire Richard Branson's latest blog post on Tangaraju, as he asserted "Why Tangaraju Suppiah doesn't deserve to die".

Related story

Top image from Kokila Annamalai/Facebook