MR SAMAT DUPREE (Investigation into confession of murder)

Assoc. Prof. Walter Woon asked the Minister for Home Affairs, in the light of the report in the Straits Times of March 18th, 1993, that a Mr Samat Dupree had been acquitted of murder when the prosecution withdrew the charge -- Mr Samat apparently confessed to the murder, but it was found that the confession was not true -- will he say whether an investigation has been made into the circumstances under which Mr Samat's confession was obtained and, if so, the result of that investigation.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Prof. S. Jayakumar): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member says that it was found that the confession was not true. He has been misinformed. There was no such finding by the Court.

Assoc. Prof. Walter Woon: Sir, will the Minister say whether he is satisfied that there was no impropriety in obtaining the confession?

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am completely satisfied. First of all, as we have pointed out publicly, neither counsel in this case nor Samat raised the question of voluntariness of the confession until 24 months after the arrest. Even when the issue of voluntariness was raised, no allegation was made as to assault, threat or inducement, etc. In fact, all that the counsel said when it was raised 24 months later was, and I quote:

'We are instructed by our client that his statements were not voluntarily given. Our client learned of the details of the murder from his wife who had learned them from the Crime Watch programme of the offence.' The Crime Watch programme was telecast in June. One month later, in July, the wife supposedly told Samat of the details. She could remember all the details. Two months later, he was arrested. Three months after the Crime Watch programme, he was able to recount the details. This is the only thing that was said about the confession. Thirdly, as I said publicly, all the proper procedures were followed. Samat never complained before or after the recording of the statements. Finally, Sir, it was not just Samat who was arrested and questioned. Three other suspects were also arrested and questioned, and were released.

Mr Ling How Doong (Bukit Gombak): Sir, in view of this case, would the Minister consider that, in future, all capital cases, if there is a confession to be made, should be referred to a Magistrate instead of a police officer?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, I do not see any need for doing that. All the proper procedures provided by the law were followed.

Mr Chia Shi Teck (Nominated Member): Sir, can the Minister say whether there is a compensation law for those who were subsequently found innocent?

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, the question of compensation is not provided for and does not arise. The man was acquitted because the Attorney-General withdrew the charge. A common perception on the part of many people is that this means a finding of innocence. It does not necessarily follow. In this case, the Attorney-General withdrew the charge for the reasons we have stated.