Singapore court slaps jail time on employer that forced workers into prostitution
A District Court in Singapore recently dealt with a case involving multiple charges related to vice activities, including managing brothels and living off the earnings of prostitution. The decision highlighted the court's approach to sentencing for such offences in light of recent legislative changes.
The case centred around a 46-year-old Singaporean woman who was involved in managing brothels at various locations across Singapore between 2021 and 2022.
Her offences included procuring women for prostitution, living off their earnings, and managing premises used as brothels. The court had to grapple with how to apply existing sentencing benchmarks given recent increases to maximum penalties for these offences.
The accused faced seven charges under the Women's Charter, with an additional 13 charges taken into consideration for sentencing. Her offences spanned two main time periods - between March and September 2021, and between January and April 2022.
In the earlier period, the accused was involved in managing brothels at two locations in Singapore - 7 Cuff Road and 81 Maude Road. She recruited women from overseas to work as prostitutes, informed them of payment arrangements, collected their earnings, and provided services like checking customer phone numbers.
For the 2021 offences, the accused told one worker she could get her a work permit to work as a beautician in Singapore for two years. In reality, this was a cover for prostitution work. The worker paid about S$4,000 and arrived in Singapore in March 2021. The accused then informed her of the payment arrangements for sexual services and collected her earnings.
The accused also provided a number-checking service for another worker, charging a small fee to run checks on customer phone numbers. This service was meant to ensure the numbers belonged to genuine customers and facilitate the sex work.
For the later offences in 2022, the accused was part of a group that set up a company called Mei Flower Pte Ltd as a front for vice activities. They recruited women from abroad under the pretence of legitimate work as beauticians or masseuses, but then coerced them into providing sexual services upon arrival in Singapore.
The group rented premises at 429A Balestier Road to use as a brothel. They engaged a shadow director for their company to act as a "fall guy" if authorities uncovered their illegal activities. The accused and her accomplices closely monitored the women's activities through CCTV and WeChat groups, and took extensive measures to avoid detection by authorities.
The main challenge for the court was how to approach sentencing, given that maximum penalties for the relevant offences had been increased since the leading case of Poh Boon Kiat v Public Prosecutor in 2014. The judge had to consider whether and how to adjust the sentencing benchmarks established in that case.
The prosecution sought a total sentence of 17 to 20 months' imprisonment and fines, while the defence argued for 14 months' imprisonment and reasonable fines. Both sides agreed the accused's culpability fell into the "Category B" level established in Poh Boon Kiat, but differed on exactly where within that category her actions should be placed.
The judge accepted that an "uplift" to the Poh Boon Kiat sentencing ranges was appropriate to reflect Parliament's intent in increasing the maximum penalties. As he explained:
"It is clear to me from the Second Reading speech that Parliament's intention in increasing the maximum penalties was to enhance deterrence of these offences generally. The increased maximum penalties would better reflect the seriousness of the offences, prevent erosion of their deterrent effect due to inflation and increased earnings from vice crimes, and send a signal to vice syndicates about the seriousness of the offences."
For the 2022 offences, the judge placed the accused at the higher end of Category B culpability and Category 2 harm under the Poh Boon Kiat framework. He cited her close involvement in all aspects of the vice operation, from recruiting women to monitoring their activities and earnings.
The accused and her accomplices set up a company as a front for their brothel operations. They recruited women from abroad under the pretence of legitimate work as beauticians or masseuses.
Upon arrival in Singapore, the women were told they would have to provide sexual services instead. The accused was involved in selecting the women, informing them of the true nature of the work, instructing them on advertising their services, and closely monitoring their activities through CCTV and WeChat groups.
The judge identified several aggravating factors, including efforts to avoid detection by authorities and the transnational nature of the operation.
After a detailed analysis, the judge imposed a total sentence of 18 months' imprisonment and fines totalling $7,950. He ordered three of the imprisonment terms to run consecutively, reflecting the distinct nature of those offences.
The judge also addressed the defence's arguments about the accused's personal circumstances, including her financial difficulties following her husband's death and her need to support her ill mother. However, he noted:
"While I was sympathetic to the accused's situation, it did not rise to the level of being exceptional, and it is well-established as a matter of law that financial difficulties have mitigating value only in exceptional or extreme circumstances, which will be rare."
The judge further remarked that the accused's solution to her financial difficulties - exploiting other women in dire financial straits - was more blameworthy than mitigating.
Overall, the decision provides valuable guidance on how courts may approach sentencing for vice-related offences in light of increased statutory penalties.
