Dear President Tony Tan

We would like to congratulate you on winning the Presidential Election. Thank you for promising to represent all Singaporeans in our hopes and dreams for the future of our country.

As Singaporeans, we support a justice system which is not only effective and fair, but also merciful and compassionate. We want a justice system who punishes criminals, but in a way that fits them as well as their crime.

We are writing to you today on the behalf of Cheong Chun Yin, who is awaiting a response to his plea for clemency. Although we understand that the decision ultimately lies with the Cabinet, we ask you – as the one who signs the death warrant – to consider his case, and urge them to grant him clemency.

Chun Yin was found guilty of trafficking over 2.7kg of heroin, hidden in the false bottom of a black suitcase he had carried from Myanmar to Singapore. However, from his arrest to present day, Chun Yin has always insisted upon his innocence, saying he believed that he had been smuggling gold bars for a friend.

Chun Yin worked with his father in morning and night markets in Johor Bahru, selling DVDs and VCDs. His father, Cheong Kah Pin, describes him as a simple, naive young man, always willing to go out of his way to do favours for others. After Mr Cheong divorced his wife, Chun Yin was the only child who stayed by his side, working with him and keeping him company in his old age.

While working at their stall, Chun Yin got to know a regular customer who introduced himself as “Lau De”. “Lau De” asked Chun Yin if he would be willing to help him bring gold bars in to Singapore. He was told that smuggling gold was a small offence, and that if he were caught, “Lau De” would pay for the fine. Chun Yin refused at first, but was eventually persuaded to do so. “Lau De” then made all the arrangements for him to go to Myanmar and to pick up a case from a man there.

Upon Chun Yin’s arrest, he fully cooperated with the authorities. He described “Lau De” to them, and even gave them both the phone numbers he had used to contact “Lau De”. However, the CNB officers did not attempt to contact “Lau De”, or try to corroborate Chun Yin’s story. In the written judgement, Judge Choo Han Teck said that it was “immaterial” whether the investigating officers had made “adequate efforts” to trace “Lau De”.

The death penalty is a final and irreversible punishment. Once hanged, we will never be able to give Mr Cheong his eldest son back. If Chun Yin turns out to be innocent, nothing we can do will ever erase the fact that we have killed a man. This is why it is of utmost importance for there to be the highest standard of care and proof in cases involving the death penalty.

Although Chun Yin is already in the clemency stage of the death penalty process, many questions still remain. Who is “Lau De”? Where is “Lau De”? If he were found, would he be able to corroborate Chun Yin’s story, thus proving that Chun Yin did not know that he had been carrying drugs instead of gold bars? Why is “immaterial” whether investigating officers have made “adequate efforts” to trace him? Shouldn’t it be crucial that “adequate efforts” are made in investigating all avenues of inquiry?

Until we can give satisfactory answers to all of these questions, we will always be facing the very real danger of executing an innocent man.

In April this year, Chun Yin’s family delivered a petition signed by 8778 people to your predecessor, S R Nathan, asking for Chun Yin’s life to be spared. Today, we repeat that request to you, our new President.

We urge you to speak with the Cabinet on Chun Yin’s case, to communicate all the uncertainties that remain, and to urge them to grant clemency so as to avoid possibly making the terrible mistake of wrongfully executing another human being.