The High Court dismissed an application made by Healing the Divide's founder Iris Koh to proceed with a judicial review to quash the Attorney-General's decision to intervene in her appeal to a dismissal of her magistrate's complaint against police officers.

Koh was arrested and charged in court on January 2022 for allegedly conspiring to cheat the Ministry of Health (MOH) by submitting falsified vaccination records.

Made an initial complaint

According to a judgment made publicly available on Aug. 17, 2023, after Koh was arrested, the police seized her various digital devices, including a laptop and handphone.

She then filed a magistrate's complaint against the police in November 2022, alleging that they had breached protocol as they stored her electronic devices in envelopes instead of being sealed in tamper-proof bags.

She claimed that false evidence might have been planted in her devices, and since the chain of evidence had been compromised, the devices should be "inadmissible".

She also asserted that the police officers had committed an offence by wrongfully remaining silent when she had asked a member of the Attorney-General's Chamber's (AGC) team a question about the legal professional privilege review during a meeting in November 2022.

Complaint was dismissed

A Senior Magistrate dismissed her complaint as he found no credible evidence that the police officers had committed an offence.

Koh then filed a notice of appeal to High Court on Dec. 6, 2022, against the dismissal of the complaint.

On Feb. 9 2023, the Attorney-General, acting as the Public Prosecutor, wrote Koh a letter informing her that her appeal was legally unsustainable as she did not have a right to appeal against the dismissal of a Magistrate’s Complaint.

A week later, he wrote to her again, and invited her to withdraw the appeal.

As Koh didn't reply to both letters, the Attorney-General informed the High Court on Mar. 13, 2023, that he would intervene to discontinue the appeal.

However, Koh then applied to the High Court for permission for a judicial review to quash the Attorney-General's decision to intervene.

High Court Justice See Kee Oon dismissed her application on Jun. 30, 2023.

High court's decision

According to the judgment, Koh claimed that the magistrate had not adhered to "requirements" in the Criminal Procedure Code before dismissing her appeal.

See disagreed as the "requirements" that she pointed out were not mandatory but were "entirely a matter of judicial discretion".

Koh also claimed there was "procedural impropriety" due to the Attorney-General's decision to intervene as she would be denied her "her right to a fair hearing".

However, See pointed out that the Attorney-General had given Koh a "fair chance to be heard on her representations" when she replied to him through her lawyers after he informed the court of his intervention.

After she replied, See noted that the Attorney-General also wrote to her explaining why he made his decision.

See added that he saw "no cogent reason" to differ from the magistrate's decision to dismiss the complaint as there was no apparent error in his findings.

See also pointed out that Koh was afforded a full and fair hearing by the magistrate, who had duly explained why her complaint was dismissed.

Ordered Koh to pay legal fees

See highlighted that the appeal was not the proper forum for Koh to raise claims of alleged police impropriety.

He also pointed out that the "real purpose" of her complaint was to challenge the admissibility of the evidence found in her devices and believed the appeal did not appear to have been pursued in "good faith".

See said the issue of admissibility should be raised at her trial instead.

He ordered Koh to pay S$5,000 to the Attorney-General in legal costs.

Top photo via Google Maps