s 60M Power of Court of Appeal to make finding of abuse of process when dealing with application or action
60M.—(1) When dealing with any application or action, the Court of Appeal may, on its own motion or upon the application of the Attorney‑General or the Public Prosecutor, decide whether to make a finding that a PACP, or a counsel for a PACP, has in the commencement, continuation or conduct of the proceedings relating to the application or action —(a) committed an abuse of process, in the case of a relevant application; or (b) committed an abuse of process in order to delay or frustrate the carrying out of the sentence of death imposed on the PACP, in the case of an application (other than a relevant application) or action. (2) In deciding whether to make a finding under subsection (1), the Court of Appeal may inquire into and take into account the following matters:(a) in relation to an application for PACC permission —(i) whether the PACC application to be made is based on material (being evidence or legal arguments) that, even with reasonable diligence, could not have been adduced in court before the relevant date; (ii) whether there was any delay in filing the application for PACC permission after the PACP or counsel for the PACP obtained the material mentioned in sub‑paragraph (i) and the reasons for the delay; and (iii) whether the PACP has complied with section 60G(4); (b) in relation to a PACC application —(i) whether the PACC application was based on material (being evidence or legal arguments) that, even with reasonable diligence, could not have been adduced in court before the relevant date; (ii) whether there was any delay in filing the application for PACC permission after the PACP or counsel for the PACP obtained the material mentioned in sub‑paragraph (i) and the reasons for the delay; and (iii) whether the PACP has complied with section 60H(2); (c) in relation to an application for review permission —(i) whether the PACP has complied with the conditions or the requirements in sections 394G, 394J and 394K of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010; (ii) whether the application for review permission was filed within a reasonable time after the PACP or counsel for the PACP had obtained the material mentioned in section 394J(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010; and (iii) whether the PACP has complied with section 394H(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010; (d) in relation to a review application —(i) whether the PACP has complied with the conditions or the requirements in sections 394G, 394J and 394K of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010; (ii) whether the application for review permission granted in respect of the review application was filed within a reasonable time after the PACP or counsel for the PACP had obtained the material mentioned in section 394J(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010; and (iii) whether the PACP has complied with section 394I(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010. (3) Despite section 50(1), where a relevant application is heard before a single Judge of the Court of Appeal, a finding under subsection (1) may be made by that Judge. (4) In deciding whether to make a finding under subsection (1), the Court of Appeal may, if it thinks additional evidence is necessary —(a) where the relevant application is being heard by a single Judge of the Court of Appeal — take such evidence itself; or (b) where the relevant application is being heard by 3 or any greater uneven number of Judges sitting in the Court of Appeal — either take such evidence itself or have such evidence taken by one of those Judges.[Act 41 of 2022 wef 28/06/2024]