Are criminal cases harder to prove than civil suits?: askST

A woman pursued her claim against her former romantic partner for sexual assault in the civil courts, after the authorities assessed that a criminal case could not be made out.

The two, who were colleagues in the Ministry of Defence, had been dating between June 2015 and December the same year. Though the romantic relationship ended, they had remained friends.

In July 2016, the woman invited the man over to her place for sex but changed her mind after she sobered up. Instead of leaving, the man sexually assaulted her, she claimed.

She eventually made a police report in 2021. Police said investigators interviewed several witnesses but did not take action against the man over the incident.

A police spokeswoman said that in consultation with the Attorney-General’s Chambers, it was assessed that the evidential threshold for criminal prosecution was not met.

The woman then filed a claim for battery against the man. A district judge in May awarded her more than $45,000 in damages.

Legal experts say the legal thresholds for pursuing criminal charges are significantly higher than those for civil proceedings.

Q: How do civil and criminal cases differ?

Legal experts note that the criminal justice system generally aims to maintain public safety by punishing offenders to deter crime.

That is why sentences are penal in nature, such as fines, imprisonment, caning or even death, said Mr Alfred Lim, the managing director of Meritus Law.

On the other hand, the aim of a civil suit is often to resolve disputes between private parties.

A civil action is concerned with the rights and obligations of the parties involved, said Mr Darren Tan, the deputy managing director of Invictus Law Corporation.

Mr Lim said the objective of a civil case is for the claimant to be compensated in monetary terms, or with court orders.

Q: How is evidence considered differently in a criminal court and a civil court?

In civil cases, claimants have to prove that their version of events is “more likely than not” to have taken place, say lawyers.

In layman’s terms, this means that there is a greater than 50 per cent chance that the claimant’s claims are true, said Mr Tan.

In a criminal matter, a prosecutor has to prove the case “beyond a reasonable doubt” for a guilty verdict – a higher threshold.

Ms Sophia Ng from law firm Eugene Thuraisingam said a reasonable doubt is a doubt that is based on reason and supported by the evidence.

The prosecution has to present strong evidence to prove its case to a high degree of probability, said Mr Lim, a former prosecutor.

There is also a presumption of innocence in favour of an accused person, said Ms Ng.

Mr Cory Wong, a director at Invictus, said the standard of proof is higher because criminal convictions lead to loss of liberty, physical punishments and possibly lifelong criminal records.

He added that generally, in cases where it is an “I say, you say” situation without external evidence, the complainant must also be unusually convincing.

“It is not what you claim or believe, but what you can prove,” added Mr Wong.

Q: What are the considerations before criminal charges are filed?

A wide range of factors is considered in deciding whether to bring a criminal charge. These include witness recollection and the available documentary evidence, said Ms Ng.

If time has passed between the purported offence and the making of a police report, the prosecution may consider that the interval could lead to difficulties in witnesses’ ability to accurately recollect events.

“In such a circumstance, establishing a case against the individual may be more difficult,” said Ms Ng.

Mr Lim said that while there is no limitation period for criminal offences, a huge time gap means the investigator may have difficulties collecting evidence and locating witnesses.

He added: “If there is solid evidence to establish that a criminal offence had occurred, the time gap between the date of offence and date of reporting should not matter.”

Mr Lim also noted that for most offences, the prosecution must prove two elements: the actual act of committing the crime, known as actus reus, as well as the intention of the accused person, known as mens rea.

The available evidence may not be sufficient for the elements of a criminal charge to be made out, he said.

However, multiple victims making the same accusation can strengthen the case against an accused person, said Mr Lim.

Q: How common is it for individuals to pursue civil action to seek redress over criminal acts?

Ms Ng said she has had several clients who commenced civil actions after their criminal complaints did not lead to prosecution, but such cases are generally rare.

“Cost is definitely a concern, and has to be weighed against the potential success of a civil lawsuit, as well as the amount of damages that can be awarded by the civil court,” she said.

Aside from costs and the emotional toll of dealing with a lawsuit, people should also be aware that a civil claim is ultimately still decided on the strength of evidence, as is the case for criminal matters, said Ms Ng.

Mr Lim gave the example of a road traffic accident as an act that may encompass both a criminal offence and civil claim.

The errant motorist may be charged by the Traffic Police with offences such as dangerous driving.

Other road users who were injured can also commence a civil claim against the errant motorist to recover compensation for pain and suffering, medical expenses, and so on.

The most common reason for starting a civil action is monetary compensation, but there are cases where a claimant does so purely as a matter of principle or for other tactical considerations, said Mr Tan.

He added that it is not uncommon for an individual to conduct a civil suit without legal representation.

However, he cautioned that while the courts are generally sympathetic to self-represented claimants, a claim may still fail on “technical grounds”, such as failing to set out the material facts in the claim document.

Mr Tan said: “A claimant cannot unilaterally decide to discontinue a civil action midway – he or she would have to bear costs consequences – so it may be worthwhile to think things through prior to starting the action.”

Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.

Encourage more people to attend public court hearings: Forum