District judge signals sterner penalties for vaping offences, cites public concern

A State Courts judge has signalled possible sterner penalties for vape-related offences in the light of public sentiment.

District Judge Wong Li Tein was on Aug 21 presiding over the case of a woman who is accused of helping another individual to purchase five vape devices through messaging platform WhatsApp.

During proceedings, a Health Sciences Authority (HSA) prosecutor informed the court that the woman had been reminded twice about her court date but had become uncontactable to the investigating officers for her case.

The prosecutor then called for a warrant of arrest after Nicole Lorraine Rodrigues, 32, failed to turn up in court.

In a subsequent exchange in court, the judge said she would have adjourned the case even if the accused had turned up.

This was to allow the HSA prosecutor to relook the submissions for sentencing.

“Cases involving vaping have caught a lot of public attention, and it is no longer feasible to rely on dated precedence,” said the judge.

She noted that even cases that were prosecuted as recently as 2024 are “no longer going to be the same” as the cases that are being tried in court now, due to growing public attention.

The judge said this consideration has to be applied to all vaping cases, not just those involving laced vapes, or Kpods.

“We need to start relooking at the sentencing submissions for these cases as they are currently not in line with public sentiment,” District Judge Wong said, noting that current convictions effectively result in a low jail term or a fine.

“If I were to sentence today, and it is published in The Straits Times tomorrow that a low imprisonment term or fine is given, I’m sure there will be a public outcry,” she said.

“Apart from Kpods – if you look at vaping in general – it is also something the public is now very concerned with, especially with youth being targeted.”

She said that in the interim, the courts will require more statistics and further submissions on whether precedent cases should be relied on when dealing with similar vaping offences.

“We can break ranks with precedent cases from now onwards,” she added.

In the afternoon, District Judge Wong presided over the case of a 44-year-old man who is accused of importing 455 disposable vape devices and offering to sell vape devices and pods through WhatsApp between February 2021 and April 2025.

Tan Wee Siong’s case was adjourned after the prosecutor applied for more time to relook and increase the prosecution’s sentencing position.

The prosecutor told the judge she had consulted her colleague, who had handled Rodrigues’ case in the morning, before deciding to make the application.

In response, the judge said she would allow the application – and had in fact already asked the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) to allow both prosecutors to submit fresh submissions.

“And the reason for that is because in the current climate of vaping offences, which have attracted public disquiet, we have to relook sentencing positions that came from a time when vaping was not such a rampant problem,” the judge added.

“The sentences today have to be enhanced as the vaping issue has become much more serious than before. Based on the current trends and cases, I’ve asked the AGC to allow the prosecution to relook their submissions, which should and will be enhanced.”

Tan, who did not have a lawyer, argued it was unfair that he could be receiving enhanced penalties as he committed his offences only out of financial difficulties and did not contribute to the current climate.

Replying to Tan’s argument, the judge said: “You did not care for the penalty when you committed the offences, which was in April this year when it was already a pandemical situation. This offence was not committed two years ago, so you participated in the rise of the rampant, unregulated news.”

She added that she would be fully justified in ensuring any enhanced punishment has the necessary deterrent effect on society, so other people would not commit the same offences.

On July 16, a Singaporean man was jailed for two weeks after he admitted to smuggling more than 1,800 vapes and pods from Johor Bahru into Singapore in September 2024.

On Aug 28, 2024, a Malaysian man was jailed for 28 weeks after pleading guilty to three charges involving an attempt to smuggle more than 20,000 vaping products into Singapore before trying to abscond from the country.

On Nov 28, 2024, another Singaporean man was jailed for 10 months and fined $14,000 after he admitted to renting a warehouse to store more than $5 million worth of vape products.

Under current laws, those found to possess, use or purchase vapes can be fined up to $2,000.

Anyone who distributes, imports or sells vapes and their components can be jailed for up to six months and fined up to $10,000.

Those found possessing or using vape pods containing etomidate – an ingredient classified as a poison and regulated under the Poisons Act – can be jailed for up to two years and fined up to $10,000.

In his National Day Rally speech on Aug 17, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said tougher action will be taken against vaping.

He said the Government will treat vaping as a drug issue as the imposition of fines is no longer enough.

This comes as people continue to smuggle e-vaporisers into Singapore or find ways around the law, despite vaping being outlawed in 2018.

As an interim measure, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it would list etomidate as a Class C drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

This is expected to take place in the coming weeks.

Once etomidate is listed as a Class C drug, users can be subject to supervision and mandatory participation in a rehabilitation programme or committed to drug rehabilitation centres.

Those who reoffend or commit other serious offences can also be jailed for at least a year.

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

Olivia Lum trial: What counts as non-disclosure?