A Child in Chains: Reflecting on Zin Mar Nwe’s Case

In August 2025, the Court of Appeal (CA) allowed the appeal of Zin Mar Nwe, a former migrant domestic  (MDW) from Myanmar.  Zin was initially found guilty at the High Court of one charge of murder. The victim was her former employer’s mother. 

On appeal, the CA allowed her partial defence of “grave and sudden provocation”, and her charge was reduced from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Consequently, her sentence was reduced from life imprisonment to 17 years’ imprisonment. 

Brief Facts 

What was the “provocation” that Zin experienced? According to the CA, shortly before the attack, she was told by the employer’s mother: “Tomorrow. You. Go. Agent.” which was understood by Zin to mean that she would be terminated, sent back to her agency and subsequently repatriated to Myanmar. Additionally, the court heard that this threat was told to Zin after several instances of abuse experienced by Zin earlier that day, where the deceased grabbed Zin’s hair, scolded her, slapped her, and knocked her head. 

The CA also noted that if not for the threat uttered by the deceased to send her back to the agency, Zin would not have stabbed the deceased. 

The CA also considered the following factors in allowing the defence of grave and sudden provocation to be applied:

• Zin’s young age (she was 17 at the time of the offence); 

• the challenges of adapting to living and working in a foreign country;

• Her indebtedness to her employment agent (she had worked for three employers in about four months); and

• Fear of being repatriated in debt. 

Threats and MDWs 

Threats are not uncommon amongst the domestic worker community. In 2024, 199 out of 462 of HOME’s shelter residents complained of having received threats and intimidating remarks from their employers or agents. Verbal abuse, of which threats and intimidating behaviours is one example, remain one of the top complaints by MDWs in HOME’s crisis shelter. 

MDWs face threats in a variety of circumstances. Some are threatened to be repatriated when asking for better working conditions: more frequent rest days, access to their phones so that they can speak to their families and children, better quality food, better living conditions. Sometimes, they are threatened to be sent home when they refuse work that is illegal: working in more than one household or doing dangerous work. Like Zin, they are also threatened with termination if their employers are unhappy with their work performance. 

Employers also frequently threaten to “blacklist” workers (i.e. prevent workers from seeking future employment in Singapore, even though they do not have the authority to do so) or leave feedback on the Work Permit system. 

Threats to report MDWs to the police are also commonplace: MDWs are sometimes told that if they contravene rules imposed by employers, no matter how unreasonable, the police will be called by them (for example, if they speak to individuals outside the household). 

Why is Zin’s case significant? 

This is the first time that the CA has recognised an employer’s threat of termination towards an MDW as a provocative act. In other words, the courts have acknowledged that such threats have an impact on the mental state of MDWs.  

The CA also explicitly recognised the other vulnerabilities that Zin experienced: challenges in adapting to life in a foreign country, commencing employment in debt, and job precarity. 

Many of the vulnerabilities experienced by Zin are not uncommon amongst MDWs. They face challenges adapting to life in a foreign country, begin employment with high recruitment fees (ranging between 4 to 8 months of their salaries), and due to the disproportionate power imbalance between them and their employers, they can be repatriated at a moment’s notice, having to return home in debt. 

In recognising these vulnerabilities in totality, including the fact that she was 17 years of age at the time of the offence, the CA allowed her defence and commuted her sentence. 

Taking a Victim-Centered approach

Many of the migrant workers assisted by HOME face circumstances similar to Zin’s: burdened by debt, bound to their employers or agents for work, and navigating life in a foreign and unfamiliar environment. 

In numerous cases encountered by HOME, migrant workers are penalised for labour infractions, such as engaging in work beyond the legally permitted scope. Some are compelled to commit offences at the instruction of those in power over them (employers and agents) — such as working beyond the scope of their permitted duties or without a valid work pass — out of fear of losing their jobs and being forced to return home still indebted. Some commit offences out of desperation, driven by employers who withhold wages and deny work, leaving them with no choice but to seek alternative means of survival. 

The seriousness of Zin's offense is undisputed, and it clearly exceeds the scope of more common labor infractions, underscoring the complexity of her circumstances. Most pertinently, Zin was 17 years of age at the time of her offence. Internationally, she would have been recognised as a child. Singapore is a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which defines a “child” as a person below the age of 18. Her age was falsified in order to allow her to work in Singapore. For such individuals, the risk of being trafficked or being in situations of forced labour is significantly heightened, as their inability to give informed consent leaves them more exposed to exploitation and abuse. Such individuals are also disincentivised from seeking help for fear of being investigated or persecuted for falsifying their applications, which may result in a ban in future employment. 

We therefore urge the authorities to show compassion in cases where migrant workers break the law as a result of their vulnerable circumstances — particularly when the offences involve labour violations, just as the CA did in Zin Mar Nwe’s case. While it is reasonable that serious crimes be met with appropriate legal response, it is equally important to recognise and address the exploitation and coercion that often lie at the heart of such transgressions.

Other underlying factors that may push migrant workers to commit extreme actions should also be addressed and tackled, such as (1) better job mobility; (2) eradicating recruitment fees; (3) weekly 24-hour rest days for MDWs to enable them to seek help and get respite from their work.