A 45-year-old Singaporean woman was hanged on Jul. 28, 2023 for drug trafficking.

First female execution since 2004

The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) confirmed with Mothership on the same day that Saridewi binte Djamani's capital sentence had been carried out.

She is the first woman to be executed in Singapore since 2004.

In response to Mothership's queries, the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) said the last capital punishment that was carried out on a female prisoner in Singapore was on Yen May Woen.

The Singaporean was executed on Mar. 19, 2004, for having in her possession 30.16g of diamorphine, or heroin, for the purpose of trafficking.

She was at least 36 years old in 2004 when she was hanged.

Yen was 35 years old when she was arrested and found with the substance at a Toa Payoh taxi stand on May 8, 2002 evening, according to court documents.

She was convicted and sentenced to death on Mar. 21, 2003.

Saridewi binte Djamani

Saridewi was convicted on Jul. 6, 2018, for having in her possession 30.72g of heroin for the purpose of trafficking, according to court documents.

She was found with the drugs during a CNB operation on Jun. 17, 2016, after officers received information that a drug transaction was going to take place at a Sengkang HDB block.

There, officers saw Muhammad Haikal Bin Abdullah handing a white plastic bag to Saridewi, who handed him a white envelope in return.

Haikal was arrested after the deal and the white envelope containing S$10,050 was seized from him.

When Saridewi heard CNB officers closing in on her unit to arrest her, she threw various items out of the kitchen window.

She opened the door to allow the officers in before they could cut through her metal grille gate.

Found with 30.72g of heroin

In the unit, officers seized various items, including packets of crystalline substance, numerous glass tubes, a slab of tablets, numerous empty packets and straws, several unused envelopes, one digital weighing scale, one heat sealer, and a notebook.

Officers also seized four communication devices from Saridewi and recovered the items tossed out of the unit's window.

This included a white plastic bag, that contained two packets of granular or powdery substance analysed to contain no less than 28.22g of heroin.

Including other items, a total of not less than 30.72g of heroin was seized.

Defence: Saridewi's mental ability was impaired when giving statements

During the trial, the prosecution highlighted that the white plastic bag found on the ground floor was the same one Saridewi received from Haikal in exchange for the white envelope containing S$10,050.

The prosecution also pointed out that Saridewi knew of and wholly possessed 30.72g of heroin.

By Singapore's law, anyone found possessing more than 2g of heroin is presumed to possess it for the purpose of trafficking.

Saridewi's defence lawyer claimed that she intended to keep 19.01g of the heroin for her own consumption and admitted that she intended to use the other 11.71g for trafficking.

The latter is below the 15g threshold for triggering the death penalty in Singapore.

Her lawyers also claimed that Sardewi was suffering from drug withdrawals, persistent depressive disorder, and severe amphetamine-type substance use disorder.

A psychologist appointed by the defence suggested that Saridewi might not have had the mental ability to give an accurate version of events during the statement-taking process.

Seven investigation statements were recorded from Saridewi.

Judge found Saridewi not mentally impaired during statement taking

The High Court rejected the claim that Saridewi was suffering from an impaired mental state and persistent depressive disorder during the statement-taking process.

He pointed out that an Institute of Mental Health (IMH) psychiatrist's assessment of Saridewi was more reliable as compared to the defence psychologist's as the former had assessed Saridewi on Jul. 15, 2016, less than a month after her arrest on Jun. 17, whereas the latter only assessed Saridewi after about 1.5 years.

On Saridewi's claims of suffering from drug withdrawals during the statement-taking process, the judge said they were merely "afterthoughts".

He referred to the four doctors who assessed her shortly after her arrest and said none of them noticed any symptoms of drug withdrawal during their examinations.

He further noted that an analysis of Saridewi's conduct during the statement-recording process demonstrated her ability to give an accurate account of events and that she could not refute this in the face of evidence.

Judge rejected claim that heroin was for own consumption

With regard to the claims that Saridewi intended to keep much of the heroin for her own consumption, the judge pointed to evidence showing that the accused had not consumed heroin prior to her arrest.

Additionally, she could not give a consistent account of when she relapsed from consuming heroin and what was her consumption rate.

The trial judge noted that Saridewi raised this argument belatedly after the trial commenced and said it was "yet another contrived afterthought conceived to apportion the amount of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking below the quantity attracting the death penalty".

He noted that Saridewi’s drug trafficking business was clearly evidenced by the communications found in her communication devices, as well as in her notebook, and ultimately found that Saridewi had purchased the white packet containing heroin for the purpose of trafficking.

Appealed against earlier statements

As Saridewi was neither found to be a courier nor issued a certificate of substantive assistance to be considered for an exemption from the death penalty, she was convicted and sentenced to death on Jul. 6, 2018.

She appealed against her conviction and sentence, further arguing against the accuracy of her first four statements from Jun. 21 to 23, 2016.

She reiterated her claims that she suffered from drug withdrawals during the statement-taking process and submitted another expert medical report done by an SPS senior consultant psychiatrist dated Jul. 13, 2019.

On the other hand, the prosecution adduced three additional expert medical reports from IMH.

Due to the new reports submitted during the appeal, the Court of Appeal withheld their judgment and remitted the case back to the trial judge for him to determine if the new reports would affect his judgment on whether Saridewei suffered from drug withdrawals during the statement-taking period.

After consideration, the trial judge found on Jun. 28, 2022, that the IMH consultants' opinion was more measured and objective than the SPS senior consultant psychiatrist's.

While the trial judge accepted that Saridewi was at most experiencing "mild to moderate" drug withdrawals during the statement-taking period, he said she did not raise any reasonable doubt as to her mental state and condition.

He added that even if the four statements recorded from Jun. 21 to 23, 2016 were excluded from consideration, there was still sufficient evidence to support the prosecution’s case.

Conviction and sentence were upheld

The Court of Appeal dismissed Saridewi's appeal on Oct. 6, 2022.

Saridewi's petition to the president for clemency was unsuccessful.

After her capital sentence was imposed on Jul. 28, 2023, CNB wrote in its same-day statement that "Saridewi was accorded full due process under the law and was represented by legal counsel throughout the process".

Saridewi was one of two death row inmates executed in the final week of July 2023.

Mohd Aziz bin Hussain

The other person executed two days before Saridewi was 57-year-old Mohd Aziz bin Hussain.

In response to Mothership's queries, CNB said in its Jul. 26, 2023 statement that Aziz's capital sentence had been carried out on the same day.

He was 57 years old.

Found with 49.98g of heroin

The Singaporean was convicted and sentenced to death for having in his possession 49.98g of heroin for the purpose of trafficking.

The 49.98g of heroin came from three bundles weighing a total of 1,399.7g that were found in Aziz's vehicle after he was arrested during a CNB surveillance on Mar. 18, 2015 morning, according to court documents.

There was also cash amounting to S$24,145 and three mobile phones in his vehicle.

Nabbed during CNB surveillance operation

Aziz, who was 48 years old then, received these three bundles on Mar. 17 and was told to repack them into smaller packets and deliver them to buyers when instructed.

He repacked one bundle, partially repacked another and left the remaining one intact.

He took the repacked and partially packed bundles to a Tampines HDB unit to be repacked, counted, and sorted.

CNB officers were conducting surveillance near the unit as one of their targets at that time was there.

They noticed Aziz leaving the unit and followed him when he got into his vehicle and drove off.

Aziz abandoned his vehicle and started running when he realised he was being tailed.

During the pursuit, he tripped and was consequently restrained and arrested.

He was conveyed to Changi General Hospital (CGH), where he was found to have a fractured right humerus.

Disputed statements' admissibility

When giving his contemporaneous statement at CGH, Aziz admitted that the items in his van were heroin and claimed that he was only helping to deliver them to its owner as a favour, for which he would not be paid.

He subsequently changed his account when he gave seven more statements during investigations.

Before his trial, Aziz admitted that his contemporaneous statement was given voluntarily but challenged the admissibility of the seven statements as evidence, claiming that the investigation officer had induced and threatened him into making them.

He also claimed that the investigation officer promised to charge him with only possessing 14.99g of heroin, below the death penalty threshold.

During an ancillary hearing before the trial, the judge found that Aziz gave all seven statements voluntarily after the investigation officer denied all of Aziz's claims.

All eight statements were then admitted as evidence.

Defence contested statements' voluntariness

During the trial, Aziz sought to disavow the seven investigation statements, which formed the primary basis of his defence.

The defence claimed that there was no evidence suggesting that Aziz possessed the drugs and that he did not know that he had drugs in his possession.

The defence disputed Aziz's voluntariness when giving the seven statements, claiming that it was "illogical and irrational" for Aziz to completely change his account to incriminate himself from what he had stated in his first contemporaneous statement when he said the drugs did not belong to him.

The defence argued that no rational person would accept the blame for possessing drugs that would make him face capital punishment unless he had been "subjected to external pressure".

Judge found otherwise

The trial judge reiterated his earlier finding that Aziz gave the seven statements voluntarily and said he saw no reason why the seven statements should be impugned.

He added that he saw no logical difficulty in accepting that an accused person who initially denied committing any offence could subsequently come clean.

He pointed out that, including the contemporaneous statement, all of Aziz's statements demonstrated that he knew that he had heroin in his possession.

He added that Aziz could not explain why he abandoned the vehicle and fled on foot when he realised CNB officers were following him.

He said there was logically no reason for Aziz to run if he was "genuinely innocent and wholly uninvolved with the large quantity of drugs in his van", as claimed.

On whether Aziz was in possession of the drugs, the judge referred to one of Aziz's statements, where he admitted that he had gone up to the HDB unit to continue repacking the drugs as he was tired of doing it in his vehicle.

He referred to the waiting CNB officers' statements, as well as that of two witnesses, who saw Aziz leaving with the bundles and said Aziz was undoubtedly in physical possession and custody of the drugs at all material times until his arrest.

Accorded full due process under the law

The trial judge ultimately found that Aziz was in possession of the drugs and knew the nature of the drugs, all of which were for the purpose of trafficking.

Aziz was neither found to be a courier nor issued a certificate of substantive assistance and was convicted and sentenced to death on Dec. 14, 2017.

He mounted an appeal against his conviction and sentence.

He continued to argue against all of his eight statements by claiming material inconsistencies, but his appeal was dismissed on Nov. 15, 2018.

Aziz’s petition to the president for clemency was unsuccessful.

After his capital sentence was imposed on Jul. 26, 2023, CNB wrote in its same-day statement that "Aziz was accorded full due process under the law and was represented by legal counsel throughout the process".

Top image via