ITE slasher has rehabilitative potential, says judge who overturned jail sentence
TODAY file photo
SINGAPORE — In dealing with young offenders, their rehabilitation will be the priority if they demonstrate good prospects for turning over a new leaf, a High Court judge said yesterday.
Explaining why he overturned a district court’s decision to sentence a 17-year-old to 18 months’ jail and six strokes of the cane for slashing another teenager, Justice Chan Seng Onn said that as young offenders are in their formative years, the chances for successful rehabilitation are better.
In his written grounds issued yesterday, he added: “Compassion is thus shown to them on the basis that the young ‘don’t know any better’, and to keep them away from the ‘corrupt influence of a prison environment and the bad effects of labelling and stigmatisation’.”
Muhammad Zuhairie Adely Zulkifli, who slashed another teenager at ITE College West early last year, is such a case, but the lower courts had given his rehabilitative potential insufficient weight, said Justice Chan.
While agreeing with the prosecution that Zuhairie’s offences were “serious and egregious”, Justice Chan — who commuted the sentence to reformative training in April — found that Zuhairie had demonstrated genuine remorse and was not a “hardened and recalcitrant” offender. Reformative training is a structured regime aimed at rehabilitating young offenders behind bars that can last between 18 months and three years.
In March last year, Zuhairie had slashed Ahmad Nurthaqif at ITE College West with a 35cm-long bread knife over a dispute involving the latter’s girlfriend. The incident, which happened in front of other students, was caught on video and widely circulated over social media.
Apart from having knife wounds across his back, the 18-year-old victim, a part-time cook, also suffered fractures on his forearm and three fingers, and a cut behind his ear.
Justice Chan said that since the offence, Zuhairie had taken active steps towards changing his lifestyle, such as by keeping away from late night activities and peers of bad influence.
“Notably, (Zuhairie) had also indicated that he wanted to start his life afresh after serving his sentence, and wanted to continue his education, hoping that it would help him lead a pro-social lifestyle in the future,” said the judge, noting that Zuhairie had surrendered himself to the police.
In his 28-page written judgment, Justice Chan cited portions of various positive testimonies by Zuhairie’s former principal, staff from the Muhammadiyah Welfare Home (MWH), and a senior probation officer, who had assessed him to be a “resilient, mature, and intelligent youth who accepted responsibility for his actions”.
The judge also considered Zuhairie’s troubled family background, a point highlighted by defence lawyers on appeal.
Zuhairie grew up in an unstable home witnessing domestic violence between his parents, who were in and out of jail numerous times for drug and property offences.
“Consideration had to be given to (Zuhairie’s) unfortunate background which had resulted in his ... antisocial behaviour, and had led him to understand relationships through hostile attribution and physical aggression,” said Justice Chan.
Due to his “high-risk” family background and lack of proper supervision, Zuhairie was placed in the care of the Salvation Army Gracehaven in 2011 and MWH in 2012.
The judge also noted Zuhairie’s good academic performance and regular attendance in school despite his troubled family background.
With programmes to help him overcome his underlying violent behaviour, strengthen his family network and employment skills, reformative training was the most appropriate option for Zuhairie, ruled Justice Chan. The “corrupt” and “potentially unsettling” influence of a prison environment would thus not be desirable for Zuhairie to realise his reformative potential, he added. KELLY NG
