Tito Isaac & Co LLP acted for a young offender, Mr Seyfqan Nazeer Caffoor, in his appeal against sentence in the Singapore High Court. The High Court’s decision offers an important reminder that while scam-related offences must be taken seriously, young offenders should not automatically be deprived of the opportunity for rehabilitation.

At the age of 18, Seyfqan was lured by the promise of easy money and agreed to hand over access to a bank account he had opened after being offered $800 through Telegram. He never received the promised payment. The account was subsequently used in connection with scam activities.

In its seminal judgment, the High Court set out the sentencing framework for young offenders in scam cases. The Court reaffirmed that rehabilitation remains the presumptive primary sentencing consideration for young offenders, even in the context of Singapore's growing battle against scams.

While acknowledging the need for deterrence in sentencing scams-related offenders, the Court rejected a "one-size-fits-all" approach. Instead, it emphasised that each case must be assessed individually, taking into account factors such as the offender's age, culpability, family support, risk of reoffending, and rehabilitative prospects.

In Seyfqan's case, the High Court found that this was a single isolated incident, that he had no antecedents, posed a low risk of reoffending, and had strong family support. Accordingly, the Court overturned his sentence of Reformative Training and substituted it with probation and community service, allowing his rehabilitation to be conducted within the community.

As scam-related offences continue to proliferate, many young people are being recruited through social media and messaging platforms with promises of quick cash. This judgment underscores an important principle: while the law must deter scams, it must also recognise that youthful mistakes, particularly where genuine rehabilitative potential exists, should not automatically define a young person's future.

The challenge for courts is to protect the public while ensuring that young offenders who demonstrate real prospects for reform are given the opportunity to rebuild their lives. In this regard, the High Court's decision provides valuable guidance on striking that balance.