Prosecutors and defence counsels for John Soh, Quah clash over amendment of charges

Section 120B states, "Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence."

Under Section 120B, the accused would receive either the same punishment as under Section 109 or under Section 116 which carries a lighter punishment.

The amendment to Section 120B was challenged by the defence.

Soh and Quah’s defence counsels each took turns voicing their issues with the amended charges.

Soh’s counsel, N Sreenivasan, senior counsel, Straits Law, as well as Quah’s counsel, Sui Yi Siong, senior associate, Eversheds Harry Elias, threw barbs at the prosecution as they made their oral arguments.

Both accused the prosecution of making vague charges with no specificity for them to frame their defence.

This led deputy public prosecutor Nicholas Tan to fire back in his oral arguments, saying he took exception to the language used by the defence counsels.

“These statements are inaccurate and unhelpful,” said Tan.

The defence had argued that amending the charges would affect the defence strategy and that the charges should then be reduced due to the lack of specificity.

However, Justice Hoo Sheau Peng sided with prosecution’s arguments, allowing the charges to be amended. Hoo also agreed that the prosecution was right in framing the multiple charges and had sufficient particulars in the charges.

“While the application is made after 20 days of trial, parties are aware this is going to be a long trial, prosecution case has not closed, defence can meet and defend the case,” said Hoo.

The trial will resume on Sept 30, when the court will take the defendents’ pleas.

The first tranche of witnesses were cross examined in court from March 11 to May 24.