Pleading Guilty In Singapore: Consequences & Withdrawal Of Plea

What Does It Mean to Plead Guilty? 

Pleading guilty means the accused admits to having committed the crime(s) he has been charged with and agrees to the charge(s) which the prosecution has brought against him.

An accused does not need to plead guilty to all charges the prosecution has raised against him and can instead plead guilty to only specific charges.

An accused may be convicted based on the plea of guilt.

Why Might an Accused Wish to Plead Guilty? 

An accused may plead guilty if he is remorseful for the offence committed.

Pleading guilty is viewed as an indicator of remorse and is a mitigating factor when the judge considers the punishment to be meted out to the accused.

This means that pleading guilty can help to lower the punishment received for committing the offence.

Why Might an Accused Wish Not to Plead Guilty?

By not pleading guilty, an accused claims trial, meaning that the prosecution will need to bring evidence to prove to the court that the accused is guilty.

An accused may therefore not wish to plead guilty if he believes that the prosecution does not have enough evidence for him to be convicted of the offence(s) he has been charged with. If there is insufficient evidence, the judge may find him innocent and acquit him of the charge(s).

Due to the difficulty in retracting a plea of guilt, the accused may consider claiming trial if he is unsure of whether there is enough evidence to convict him. This will allow the judge to review the evidence and decide whether the accused is in fact guilty of the offence (all of which will be explained in detail below).

Not Sure What To Do Next?

Get a 20-minute phone call with a lawyer for only $59

Arrange a call now Examples: Advice on drug possession, robbery, voluntarily causing grievous hurt, outrage of modesty, fraud, theft, criminal breach of trust etc. Select Select

Nadia Moynihan

August Law Corporation | 11 years experience | English, Malay

Nadia’s practice encompasses Civil and Commercial Litigation, Matrimonial and Syariah Law as well as Criminal Law. She has experience handling cases from State Courts to High Court level. She regularly advises corporate and private clients on schemes of arrangement, bankruptcy proceedings, trade disputes, employment disputes and other contractual claims. Her… Select

Ray Louis

Ray Louis Law Corporation | 14 years experience | English, Malay

Family lawyer Ray Louis has had 14 years of experience as a family counsellor to assist you with your separation, contested or uncontested divorce, and other family-related proceedings. Clients appreciate his affordable legal expertise and sensitivity to personal situations. He has worked on behalf of many local and overseas clients, in cases that include international… Select

Che Wei Chin

Fervent Chambers | 12 years experience | English, Mandarin

In the field of litigation, Wei Chin was lead counsel for many types of matters and clients such as:

1. Civil and commercial disputes
2. Submitting and presenting mitigation pleas successfully to obtain lighter sentences for clients charged in criminal matters, including non-custodial sentences
3. Divorce and ancillary matters disputes, including helping parties through Court Mediation
4. Private prosecutions for a government statutory board and obtaining deterrent sentences against the offenders
5. General solicitors’ work in extracting Grant of Probate and Letters of Administration
6. General solicitors’ work in managing landlord and tenancy agreements and disputes
7. General Commercial Drafting and Advisory Work

His wide range of experience in litigation includes tenancy disputes, writs of possession, claims concerning breaches of director’s duties, probate matters, criminal matters, matrimonial matters and various other types of litigation work. Wei Chin recognises that not all matters need to proceed for a full-fledged trial. Having taken Mediation & Negotiation modules in NUS, Wei Chin can capably advise on settlement options, achieving an amicable resolution which is more affordable and efficient than going for trial. Wei Chin has also advised government agencies and statutory boards, helping them to resolve disputes through negotiations and litigation, depending on their goals and aims. Wei Chin also takes on commercial contract drafting and contractual negotiation work to protect the interest of his clients when they are entering commercial deals. He has experience being a legal advisor to a local tertiary educational institute and assisted in vetting their intellectual property contracts. Civil & Commercial Disputes

• Lead Counsel in a dispute involving an ex-finance manager of a renowned bakery being sued for breach of fiduciary duties and other money claims – successfully defended the manager such that all claims were dismissed.
• Lead counsel in contract dispute regarding business consultancy agreements, limitation issues and Legal Profession Act.
• Lead counsel in construction dispute with interior designer for defective works.
• Lead counsel in a supply agreement dispute concerning a local beautician boutique.
• Negotiating a successful settlement involving a potentially Michelin-starred restaurant and its renovation contractors, avoiding a lawsuit of close to $0.4 million.
• Lead counsel in a High Court claim for contractual breach: acted for an independent business consultant in suing 3 business owners for breach of consultancy agreement.
• Lead counsel in High Court defamation claim of a manager defaming a director of a listed company.
• Negotiating a successful settlement involving a defamation claim by a businessman against a university professor.
• Assisting counsel in obtaining a Mareva Injunction for a claim amounting to more than S$3 million.
• Negotiating a successful settlement involving an anti-competition lawsuit by a large rice supplier, thus preventing a prohibitive injunction.
• Advising and successfully negotiating a settlement for a government statutory board concerning a dispute with an oil supplier.

Criminal Matters

• Lead Counsel in a disposal enquiry between two victims of a Bitcoin scam.
• Lead counsel in securing an acquittal for client charged with criminal trespass and outrage of modesty in Marina Bay Sand hotel.
• Lead counsel in successfully securing probation for an Uber driver suffering from frotteurism who touched passenger’s thigh. During appeal by the Prosecution, the Accused did not appoint Mr Che as a lawyer (due to financial constraints). Accused’s sentence was later increased to imprisonment when fresh facts arose during appeal.
• Lead counsel in a shop theft matter where Accused took toys without payment from a well-known toy store.
• Lead counsel in various plead guilty matters for offences regarding:
  • Penal Code Section 377BB (voyeurism)
  • Penal Code Section s. 405 to 409 (criminal breach of trust)
  • Companies Act Section 157 (breach of company director’s duties)
  • Road Traffic Act (reckless driving, drink driving etc)
  • Common Gaming House Act (gambling)
  • Animals and Birds Act 1965 (importation of live animals etc)

Select

Gino Hardial Singh

Abbots Chambers LLC | 22 years experience | English

Prior to incorporating Abbots, Gino headed the criminal litigation departments of firms he practiced in. He is an experienced and dedicated trial lawyer who focuses his litigation practice on white collar crimes. He is also confident of fighting for persons accused of committing Murder, Drug Trafficking, Robbery, Rape, Sexual Assault, Rioting and offences against Public Servants and has obtained good results. Select

Ashvin Hariharan

IRB Law LLP | 5 years experience | English, Tamil

Ashvin has represented accused persons in both the State Courts and High Court, in cases spanning a variety of offences, including cheating, criminal breach of trust, rioting, sexual offences, money laundering, corruption and road traffic offences. Ashvin has also assisted numerous clients through investigations and interviews by the Singapore Police Force, Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Select

Ronald Yeo

Yeo Marini Law Corporation | 8 years experience | English, Hokkien, Mandarin

Ronald started off his career as an economist before deciding to pursue a second degree in law. He has worked as a legal counsel in both public and private sector including various international banks. However, the corporate career gave him less satisfaction as compared to helping the layperson. Coupled with his passion to serve and connect with people on the ground, Ronald decided to go back to his original roots and to practise community law. A person-oriented individual with a practical and realistic mindset, Ronald is able to provide advice with sound reasoning, and at the same time, ensure that it is in the best interest for the client. Hardworking and output driven, he is a hands-on lawyer who sees through any matter from start to finish. Ronald has a particular interest in family law. Being a father of 3 children himself, he is a strong advocate of being a present parent and understands the challenges one faces during the course of marriage. He believes that the child’s interest is of utmost importance in any marriage. Ronald is able to empathize and apply his legal mind in matters relating to child custody, care and control, and maintenance quantum for children. When push comes to shove and marriage is no longer possible, Ronald is able to represent clients for any divorce proceedings, both contested and uncontested. Ronald is able to speak both the Chinese and English language. Select

Wilbur Lua

Covenant Chambers LLC | 11 years experience | English, Mandarin

Wilbur commenced his legal career by serving as a State Counsel at the Attorney-General’s Chambers. In 2018, Wilbur left the public service to pursue his passion in helping others resolve challenging legal issues. He practices across a broad range of practice areas, with a special focus on civil and commercial disputes. During his time in practice, Wilbur has successfully guided many clients towards a favourable resolution of their legal disputes. Whether he is serving a corporate client or the man on the street, Wilbur spares no effort to help all clients achieve the best possible outcome for their situation. He is an excellent listener, and his clients can always count on him to provide thoughtful, objective, and practical advice that will help them navigate through their legal challenges. With his keen eye for detail and strong understanding of the law, Wilbur is able to help his clients find the best arguments to present to the adjudicator when an amicable resolution is not possible. In his capacity as an advocate, Wilbur has appeared before various levels of courts and tribunals alike. Wilbur continues to have a heart for serving the public. He is active in pro bono work and does his part to prepare the next generation of lawyers by teaching as an instructor of legal skills at the National University of Singapore and the Singapore University of Social Sciences. Wilbur graduated from the National University of Singapore’s double-degree programme with a First Class Honours in Economics and a Second Class (Upper) Honours in Law in 2014. Practice Areas:  Dispute Resolution / Civil 

• Debt recovery
• Contract
• Equity and Trusts
• Property disputes

Insolvency / Bankruptcy law

• Bankruptcy / Winding-up proceedings and administration
• Debt Restructuring

Community law

• Protection from Harassment Act
• Criminal Defence

Family law 

• Matrimonial proceedings
• Pre and post-nuptial agreements
• Wills and probate
• Lasting Power of Attorney

Sample Cases: 

• Acted as lead counsel for a corporate client who was a victim of a cheating scam involving a six-figure sum. Wilbur assisted the client to substantially recover the monies that were dishonestly appropriated.
• Acted as lead counsel for an investor to seek a refund of a personal investment after it was discovered that the underlying investment was part of a fraudulent Ponzi scheme by a third-party. Even though the defendant was not a party to the scheme, Wilbur successfully assisted the client to obtain relief by relying on the doctrine of “total failure of consideration”.
• Acted as lead counsel for a sole proprietor to seek relief from various onerous obligations imposed by the distributor. Wilbur successfully obtained declaratory relief from the District Court for his client.
• Acted as lead counsel for clients to seek redress for unjustified comments containing defamatory content that were made pursuant to a commercial dispute. Wilbur assisted the clients to resolve the matter amicably and obtain a satisfactory compensation sum.
• Acted for two poultry supply companies (as part of a legal team) in an appeal against a seven-figure fine imposed by the Competition Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) for various alleged anti-competitive practices. This was the first time a trial on liability was conducted before the Competition Appeal Board (CAB). The team was successful in persuading the CAB to overturn CCCS decision on liability for one of the two alleged anti-competitive practices, and the fine was substantially reduced by 71%.
• Acted as lead counsel for the family members of a person who had lost mental capacity in a highly contested appeal involving the issue of appointment of deputies. Wilbur was successful in assisting the clients to obtain the desired deputyship orders from the Family Division of the High Court.

Reported Cases: 

• ExxonMobil Asia Pacific Pte Ltd AB 2012.035
• YCH Distripark Pte Ltd v Collector of Land Revenue AB 2012.036
• UMU v UMT [2018] SGHCF 16
• Gold Chic Poultry Supply Pte Ltd and anor v Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore [2020] SGCAB 1
• VUW and others v VUT and another and other appeals [2021] SGHCF 41
• VUT and another v VUV and another [2022] SGFC 63

Volunteer Work 

• Legal Clinic Instructor, Centre for Pro Bono and Clinical Legal Education, National University of Singapore
• Supervisor, Legal Clerkship Programme, Singapore University of Social Sciences
• Volunteer Instructor, MINDEF Basic Defending Officer Course
• Volunteer Lawyer, Criminal Legal Aid Scheme /
• Law Society Ad Hoc Pro Bono Scheme / Family Justice Support Scheme
• Volunteer Lawyer, Charis Legal Clinic

Accolades & Awards

• Dean’s List (Overall), Law Faculty, NUS
• Dean’s List of the Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences, NUS (Placed thrice)
• Dean’s Scholar’s List of the Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences, NUS
• Lai Kew Chai Prize in Equity and Trusts

When Should the Accused Plead Guilty? 

The accused can plead guilty at any point of the criminal proceedings before the judge has made a decision on whether to convict the accused.

For example, the accused can first plead guilty where he is first officially charged in court. If so, the case can move straight to sentencing.

Even if the accused claims trial, he can subsequently inform the court that he intends to plead guilty during the Case Conference or Criminal Case Disclosure Conference (CCDC, if applicable).

The Case Conference is a meeting between the prosecution and accused before the trial to prepare for the trial and settle administrative matters.

A CCDC may be applied for by the accused during the Case Conferencewherein the prosecution and accused exchange evidence, and only applies for certain categories of offences listed in the Second Schedule of the Criminal Procedure Code.

If the accused states that he intends to plead guilty at the pre-trial stage, the court will fix a date for his plea to be taken.

The accused may also plead guilty at the start of the trial when the charge(s) are read out, or mid-trial after the prosecution has presented its evidence.

Pleading Guilty Electronically 

It is possible to plead guilty electronically for certain offences. This includes offences committed under the Road Traffic Act and Parking Places Act. For example, for speeding or not slowing down at a pedestrian crossing.

For minor offences which are usually punishable by a fine, the accused may be given an “offer of composition” which may be paid at an AXS station. If the amount stated in the “offer of composition” is paid, there is no need to enter a guilty plea, and the matter is considered settled.

However, if the “offer of composition” has expired, the accused may still plead guilty electronically by entering a plea of guilt at an AXS station before 5pm of the day on which he is required to attend court and pay in advance the fine fixed by the supervising Magistrate.

The Registrar of the State Courts will subsequently send to the supervising Magistrate a record of the guilty plea and the fine paid. The Magistrate may then convict the accused and record the fine paid as the sentence for the offence.

What Happens After the Accused Pleads Guilty?

After the accused states that he wishes to plead guilty, a statement of facts detailing the offence will be read to the accused. If the accused disagrees with parts of the statement of facts, the court may adjourn to allow the prosecutor and accused resolve the disagreement.

If the accused fully agrees with the statement of facts and the court is satisfied that the accused understands the nature, consequences and punishment for the offence, the plea of guilt may be accepted and the accused will be convicted.

The court will then proceed to hear arguments from the prosecution on sentencing (e.g. the charges to be taken into consideration), followed by the mitigation plea of the accused, before passing the accused’s sentence.

It must be noted that, the court may however reject the accused’s guilty plea in certain circumstances (explained below).

Accused’s mitigation plea 

During a mitigation plea, the court will hear any plea in mitigating (i.e. lightening) the sentence to be imposed on the accused. The accused should therefore raise any facts in mitigating his plea, including the fact that he had pleaded guilty.

Other facts include any disagreements with the prosecution’s arguments on sentencing and any factors that are relevant to the sentence (for example, the accused making restitution to the victim in a dishonest misappropriation case).

For more information, please refer to our other article on mitigation pleas.

Can the Court Reject a Guilty Plea? 

The court may reject a guilty plea if it finds that the accused’s plea of guilt was:

1. Not made by the accused himself (e.g. it was made by his lawyer instead);
2. Made without understanding the true nature and consequences of his plea; and
3. Not made without qualification against the charges brought against him (e.g. the accused disagrees with the statement of facts as mentioned above).

If a fact raised by the accused in his mitigation plea (mentioned above) materially affects whether he should have been convicted of the offence, the court is also obliged to reject the plea of guilt.

Furthermore, the court can only accept a plea of guilt for offences punishable by death after the prosecution has first proven its case via evidence at trial. (This is unlike offences not punishable by death, where the prosecution need not put forth evidence to prove its case in a trial if the accused decides to plead guilty. The court can then proceed to convict and sentence the accused, as mentioned above.)

What might be the possible outcome(s) of the court rejecting a guilty plea?

Should the court reject the guilty plea, the issue of whether the accused is guilty will proceed to trial, at which point the prosecution will need to adduce evidence to prove that the accused is guilty of the offence(s) charged.

Can the Accused Retract his Guilty Plea? 

In very exceptional cases, it is possible for an accused to retract a plea of guilt by raising facts at the mitigation stage which affect whether he should have been convicted of the offence. If he does so, the court will be obliged to reject the plea of guilt such that the issue of whether the accused is guilty of the charge proceeds to trial.

This can happen if the accused claims that the plea of guilt was not made voluntarily such as due to misunderstanding the charge or if the plea of guilt was made involuntarily under pressure. If the accused does so, he will need to prove that the guilty plea was made involuntarily, at which point it will be retracted.

For example, if the accused thought that he was pleading guilty to a different charge from what he was actually being charged with, this could be found to be misunderstanding the charge such that the plea of guilt would not be valid.

In a previous case, an accused, was initially charged with fraud for filing a claim for a non-existent work accident for his company. After he pleaded guilty however, he stated during mitigation that he might have gotten the date of the work accident wrong when filing the claim.

If this was true, it could have meant that the work accident had in fact happened, just not on the date that the accused had initially provided when filing the claim – and as a result, the accused actually had no intention to defraud his company.

Due to how the mistake affected whether the accused had legally committed fraud, the court allowed him to retract his guilty plea.

It may also be possible to prove that the accused did not understand the nature and consequences of pleading guilty, such that the court should not accept the plea of guilt.

What happens if the accused’s attempt to retract his guilty plea fails?

If the sentencing judge hears the accused’s arguments for retracting the plea of guilt but nonetheless accepts the plea of guilt and proceeds to sentence the accused, the accused can seek for the conviction to be set aside (i.e. cancelled) in a criminal revision.

In a criminal revision, the accused would need to show that the plea of guilt was not taken in a proper manner such as without the accused fully understanding the statement of facts and the charge, or that the plea of guilt was made under pressure.

For more information, please refer to our other article on criminal revisions in Singapore.

When might it be advisable to retract a guilty plea?

It might be advisable to retract a guilty plea where the accused has  clear evidence to support his claim that his guilty plea was invalid. Without clear evidence, the accused’s claim is likely to fail, and he  would then be wasting time and costs.

That said, an accused should still raise all relevant issues at the mitigation plea stage, and the court will decide whether the issues raised affect the validity of the guilty plea.

—

If you have been charged with an offence in Singapore and are unsure if the prosecution has sufficient evidence to prove that you are guilty, it is best to seek legal advice from a criminal lawyer on whether to plead guilty.

The decision should not be taken lightly as once a plea of guilt has been given, it may be difficult to retract it unless there are exceptional circumstances.

Get in touch with experienced criminal lawyers here.

You may also wish to read our other article to gain more insights on whether you should plead guilty or claim trial to a criminal charge.