On the 20th of March 2010, TOC TV headed to Toa Payoh to speak to the heartlanders. We were interested to find out what their understanding of the mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking was, and if they supported it. However, many of the answers we received seemed to pertain to the death penalty in general instead of the mandatory death penalty, because many either did not understand or were not aware of the mandatory aspect of the law.
You can watch the other videos and read the articles in this series on the MDP here
_______________________________________
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Shame on you TOC!
How can you claim people not to be aware of the mandatory aspect, when the video clearly showed the interviewees understanding that the verdict will be hanging beyond a ceratin amount of drugs. They do not need to use or understand the word “mandatory”, but the fact that they know there is a limit before the death penalty becomes ‘compulsory’ is good enough an evidence.
Regardless, it goes to show that many people do agree with the death penalty and the limit before it becomes compulsory, or mandatory death penalty.
What is mandatory Death Penalty? I don’t know..
I only know that you will be hang to death if you carry X amount of drugs into singapore.
I think it’s a good law this death sentence you know.. :) Can you include death sentence for those who purposely beat others to death (example, youths rioting against another group and someone killed someone..).
Shame on you jim (or jym dog).
You are obviously very ignorant or even worse than the auntie or uncles. Your shallow understanding here shows you are unable to differentiate right from wrong.
Another pointless exercise by TOC. If you interview ignorant, uneducated people, you get ignorant, uneducated answers. Does such outcome have any moral bearing on the issue. Does it shed any new light? Does it serve to educate our own views?
Instead, I feel ashamed by the interviewee’s responses being showcased as if they are representative of the nation’s overall viewpoint. What an insulting picture of ourselves! We are better than that, come on, TOC!
Interview some professionals, some executives, some performance artists, some academics, some tertiary students, instead of pouncing on unsuspecting uncles and aunties, instead of carrying on such antics. This is ambush journalism at its most inane. What next: now we interview some drunkards at the pubs and let’s find out what they have to say? Let’s visit the kindergarten and find out what the kids think? Let’s go to Geylang and ask the pimps and their clients what’s their opinion?
Irony,
Ironically, the point is not to show the ‘ignorance’ of the people as you pointed out. The point is that even though many people know that drug trafficking beyond a certain amount carry the death penalty, they do not understand the mandatory aspect of it. Even after we explained to them, it is clear from their answers the idea that the judge has no discretion in sentencing is difficult to grasp. Not that they are ‘stupid’. But because it is common sense to assume that judges are allowed discretion, even for the worst of crimes. The ‘common people’ don’t understand MDP because it is beyond common sense.
“The common people don’t understand MDP because it is beyond common sense.”
Precisely. Isn’t this a tautology? Self-evident? Why is TOC so obsessed with this to devote so much time and resource on this? Would you debate the finer points of fiscal policy with unprepared uncles and aunties to come to the conclusion that hey, the concept of multiplier effect seems to be beyond common sense?
If you used a real-life story, such as Rozman bin Jusoh or even a hypthetical one, you may get dramatically different opinions. Would Jesus be asking uncles and aunties: “Do you support mandatory stoning for adultery”? No, he tells stories and asks people to look into themselves: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.
@ jonny
Instead, I feel ashamed by the interviewee’s responses being showcased as if they are representative of the nation’s overall viewpoint. What an insulting picture of ourselves! We are better than that, come on, TOC!
Interview some professionals, some executives, some performance artists, some academics, some tertiary students, instead of pouncing on unsuspecting uncles and aunties, instead of carrying on such antics. This is ambush journalism at its most inane.
If you look back at TOC TV videos on the MDP, you will see that we have interviewed young people (at Bugis), working professionals (at Raffles Place) and law students (at NUS Law). This latest video is part of the series. In these videos we aren’t trying to push an agenda onto the people we interview, we merely want to see what their understanding is. These answers might not be representative of the overall national viewpoint (I, personally, know that they are not representative of mine) but they are very telling about how certain demographics of Singaporeans might think and feel on the issue, or if they think about it at all.
We would love to use real-life stories and have more time for more detailed explanations, but for shooting vox pops we had to work on a limited time frame. If we had an opportunity to go out again and have a way to spend more time to inform people about the MDP, that would be great.
“Asking people on the spot about issues that never crossed their mind, seems pointless. Such surveys are more suitable for everyday stuff, like bus schedules, taxi fares, increase of electricity tariffs, etc.”
I see… the common, unintellectual less-educated folks should not have an opinion on deeper issues.
TOC; with Heartlanders, conduct your surveys in DIALECTS or Mandarin.
Thanks to Speak Mandarin campaign .. even most of the young struggles to understand this BIG WORD.. Mandatory.
im surprised to see that there are people that do not like the MDP.
however, imposing a life sentence on a trafficker is still the same; his/her life will still be forfeit.
TOC is supporting the drug traffickers, the scourge of our society, and has shown no concern for the drug victims at all. Why? Does TOC support the criminals? I suggest TOC reporters go and interview the drug victims and assess how they are ruined physically, emotionally, financially, broken familities, parents/siblings’ sufferings, etc. You can ask any victims whether they are aware of the death penalty? Any drug trafficker claiming ignorant of the law or death penalty is just humbug and let us not be so guillible. Are you aware that one drug trafficker can harm or kill ten if not hundred of victims and their families? Yet, I have not come acroos TOC supporting the victims. On the contrary, TOC persistently supporting the criminals who kill or ruin our beloved citizens and children.
Devagi,
Asking for a moratorium on a flawed set of laws is supporting the drug traffickers? That’s quite a stretch.
Maybe the best deterrence is to impose DP to the buyers. When the buying stop the trafficking stop. Therefore no business, no drug trafficking, no buyers (victims).
journalistic surveys like these should be taken with a huge dose of salt. they are known to be hugely unrepresentative, and poorly worded in terms of the questions and other forms of measurement.
i’d only bother with surveys that are conducted with proper sampling, take into account error margins etc.
anyone who does a social science research class at tertiary level will know that such surveys are largely worthless.
Devagi,
Let us not jump into a slippery slope argument here.
Drug users have to carry their fair share of the responsibility and not pin all the blame on drugs being available. What makes them take drugs, what makes them turn to consumption of psychotropic substances?
Drugs do not manifest themselves onto people, people have to seek out a source too. That itself is already an act of personal responsibility. If the traffickers are guilty, the addicts and drug users are equally to blame too.
@ Devagi
By campaigning against the MDP, I do not see myself as supporting the drug traffickers, or neglecting the victims. So many of the people who fall under the MDP are only drug mules, and by sentencing them to death under such a flawed set of laws I do not believe that we are solving any problems at all. All we are doing is hurting yet another family – that of the drug mules who are sent to the gallows. What of their parents, siblings and friends? After their death the drugs will still flow into Singapore via even more gullible and under-educated drug mules.
If the death penalty falls upon the head of an established drug lord who is in the centre of all this getting rich off the pain of both the addicts and the mules, then I will have nothing to say. I’m not sure that I would find it in my heart to fight for this person, even if the death penalty is cruel. But if it is simply a young person sent across the border as a drug mule, a youth who has so much life ahead of him in which he can repent and turn things around, then I cry foul at the MDP.
Also, Loyola is right. We cannot absolve the drug addicts of all the culpability in their own addiction, while expecting young drug mules to shoulder all the responsibility. It takes two to tango, and we cannot turn our back on one to give full sympathy to another. We must try to see things as clearly as we can, and try our best to extend help to both sides.
in taiwan, “mandatory death sentence” is known as “唯一死刑”. meaning if you commit this crime, and is found guilty, then the “only (wei2 yi1) punishment”that will be applied is the death sentence.
lobo76
Mar 24, 2010 12:01
The question is not about what constitutes mandatory (duh everyone knows) but rather can the judge decide otherwise. Isn’t it so wrong if judges do not have the free will to decide??? Ignore the first poster, as long as we know we are on the same frequency.
kixies has made one of the most simple and convincing arguments I’ve read so far. Great!
Lobo,
I’m glad you’re now advocating discretion in sentencing.
Discretionary Mandatory Death Penalty? Uniquely Singapore!
The drug mules, young and old, male and female, literate and illiterate, educated and uneducated, including you and me, all know that trafficking in drugs will face death penalty in Singapore. The law is well publicised locally and internationally, including at the various entry points into Singapore. Why then people want to traffick drugs into Singapore if not for greed of huge profit margin and tax-free too or self-interest? As the Malay proverb says “Siapa makan chilli padi, siapa rasa pedas” ie. if you choose to eat chilli padi, you face the consequences. Singapore has low crime and drug addiction rate is not God-mandated if not for our tough law against drugs. Just take a short trip to any of our neighbouring countries and see whether you dare to walk alone at night. Singaporeans visiting our neighbouring countries were even robbed and assaulted at broad daylight. What say you?
Devagi, do you really think that the secure environment we have in Singapore would disappear if drug traffickers were sentenced to life instead of being put to death? Also can you explain why in Europe – a continent where the death penalty has been outlawed for decades, and where soft drugs are legal in some cities – the crime rate is lower than in the US, which still practices the death penalty?
@ Devagi
So are you saying that the fact that Singaporean streets are relatively safe at night is all down to the MDP? That seems to be a strange statement to make, seeing that there are no studies to prove that the MDP even works as a deterrent.
Sitting in our comfortable homes with food in our bellies and money in our banks it is very easy to say that everyone knows about the mandatory death penalty, but you will be surprised at the number of people who don’t. How would an uneducated and illiterate boy (such as Vui Kong) who spent much of his youth with gangs know about this? He can’t read the signs at entry points, and seeing that his gang’s “big brother” wanted him to become a drug mule, they certainly weren’t going to tell him. It is also very easy for us to brand all drug mules as greedy and money-grubbing, but what do we really understand about their lives and their circumstances, and what desperation led them to this deed?
I’m not saying that all drug mules are innocent and simple-minded youths tricked into carrying drugs. I know that there will be some just in it for the money and their greed. I’m just saying that out of all the drug mules, there are some who deserve our sympathy and our help in rehabilitating them and setting them back on the right path in life. Not every single one is a lost cause, and if we can reform a few, who knows what good they will go on to do in lives? There are plenty of people who have taken the wrong paths at some point in their lives, and after getting second chances, completely turned things around and gone on to do great good. However, the mandatory death penalty in Singapore does not allow ANYONE a second chance at all, and that is why I have such a big problem with it.
Deterrence.
Anyone noticed, from all the videos TOC has done of interviews with various segment of Singaporeans?
No one seem even to know about the Mandatory Death Penalty.
And they’re Singaporeans! Living in Singapore! reading Singapore news! Listening to Singapore ministers and MPs!
See, if Singaporeans do not even know about the MDP, how do we expect others, young, ignorant, naive, illiterate, uneducated foreigners to know?
Deterrence only works if people actually know about the MDP, you know?
And please don’t even get me started on the “our streets are safer because of the death penalty” crap. As someone once said, if you want to be safe, eliminate the rest of all humanity.
I guarantee you will have 100% safety then.
Safety is not contingent on how many people you kill.
Safety is dependent on personal responsibility and the efficiency of your police force in its role of policing.
So simple also don’t know?
I kill 10 people, I feel safe.
I kill 100 people, I feel safer.
I kill 1,000 people, I feel safer still.
I kill 10,000 people, I am no different from genocidal maniacs.
See the stupidity of such a line of logic? Sounds very logical but stupid, nonetheless.
i like the idea of a MDP that is regulated with pre-defined mitigating factors, though such a legislative task might well prove to be nigh impossible. Such an attempt will first demand parliament to define, and subsequently categorize, different standards of morality for the appropriate application of the MDP. Disagreements and controversies (from religious communities perhaps?) will surely arise.
The pre-definition of mitigating factors, if too comprehensive, will stall Singapore’s judiciary by torrents of appeals that will be dependent on the defense’s ability to successfully reinterpret PP’s charge(s) in rendering the initial charge(s) obsolete. On the other hand, if the pre-definition is lacking in scope and depth, such an attempt to pass the legislative change would have had lost its initial purpose since the PP’s freedom to prosecute remains nearly limitless.
Arguments for and against the MDP should not be revolving around the sanctity of life or human rights issues per se, but around the perceived need for a legislative change(s) and how to go about with the proposed change(s).
also, since everyone has agreed that the MDP has no definitive deterrent effect, arguments revolving around the deterrent effect should cease. in fact, such arguments are becoming meaningless.
Maybe TOC should engage MPs (probably won’t work given Shanmugam’s recent outburst) to raise this issue in parliament, or at least engage Michael Hwang to give talks in the 3 local universities.
It would also be a bonus if the Chinese community is engaged to conduct internal debates about the MDP, seeing that the Chinese wields considerable influence over the mainstream line of thought.
Apply for a talk on the MDP in one of the SAP schools or something?
Do Re Mi
Mar 25, 2010 22:32
i like the idea of a MDP that is regulated with pre-defined mitigating factors, though such a legislative task might well prove to be nigh impossible.
First, we have to consider the number of crimes that may need MDP. Hopefully, it is not a large list.
Second, the problem with pre-defined factors is that people will argue with them regardless. If age of culpability is pre-defined at 18, people will say, it’s only 1 year difference (in the case of Yong). Hence, I do not think it has to be too comprehensive if the important parts are cover. Certainly, I do not think being poor should be an excuse to commit crime, and so we don’t need to pre-define ‘poor’.
also, since everyone has agreed that the MDP has no definitive deterrent effect…
I just read about a quote by Micheal Crichton which I think is relevant here.
“Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.”
Sad to see that even TOC has picked up the MIW’s habit of labelling Singaporeans. Among the labels stuck on us are heartlander/cosmopolitan, pre65-er, vocal minority …
For those who support the drug traffickers, you will realise the misery if one of your family members is their client or victim. After going through the harrowing experience of dealing with your own family member involved in drug addiction or trafficking and you still think MDP is cruel or harsh, may God bless you. It is always easier for you to talk about human rights, spare a thought for the scum, rehabilitation etc, when you and your family members are not involved. As I said previously, the whole family has been ruined financially, emotionally, physically, psychologically, etc. Just drop by in any Family Service Centre in your neighbourhood and ask the social workers who can enlighten you the untold damages caused by the drug traffickers. Compassion is a virtue if it is shown to the right person at the right time but not the scums who had ruined your family and thousands of other Singaporean families to date.
Whether MDP has a deterrent effect or not, comparison of the drug abusers/traffickers arrested statistics before/after the MDP was introduced is vital. Similarly, comparison of the crime statistics to assess the MDP deterrent effect. I remember reading both the drug and crime statistics sometime ago and both had declined over the years and the National Crime Prevention Council proudly proclaims “Low Crime Does Not Mean No Crime”.
I am a heartlander and i do not support MDP
No studies were commissioned to investigate said deterrent effect of the MDP, nor can it be concluded that the decline in drug trafficking cases could be attributed to the introduction of the MDP during the 1970s.
I suggest people who beg to differ to read up on previous articles under ‘The Mandatory Death Penalty’ by the TOC Editorial, or on ‘Death, Drugs, Murder and the Constitution (2006), Hor’.
I thought it was widely accepted among both abolitionists and retentionists that no substantial case for the deterrent effect of the MDP has ever existed in Singapore. I guess I thought wrong.
just a passing remark, supporting the call for a moratorium =/= supporting the abolition of the MDP.
Similarly, supporting the abolition of the MDP =/= supporting and/or condoning the drug trafficking activities.
Finally, drug and crime statistics =/= drug trafficking statistics, which is the main issue we are dealing with here, that is, a moratorium for the MDP with regards to drug trafficking.
After reading both sides of the story of yong vui kong, think MDP should be modified. the case of yong vui kong made me think otherwise of MDP as i’m almost the same age as him… ignorance can’t be used as an excuse for such things. but to a certain extent, there should be flexibility in the rules that decides upon taking away a person’s life and the son of someone. really feels like a very sad story…
maybe we can hang the drug consumers instead. since it feels like most of the traffickers are often foreigners who are lowly educate and not know a thing. maybe teaching the law in school that consuming drugs has a MDP might do the job in reducing demand to the point there wont be anyone trafficking it in…
A totally biased and unrepresentative of the greater opinion.
Mandatory Death Penalty should continue.
Death sentence is wrong. The power to decide when a person should die should not lie in the hands of any human being. To err is human. A life gone will be gone forever.
Having such a punishment also provides a mean to silent or end someone’s life lawfully.
anyone know what are the 3 words Singaporeans love to say most? its in this page.
Chan yk is right. What a pity many Singaporeans feel different. The death penalty does nothing to avert crime. The US has one of the highest murder rate despite the death penalty. The only place where we can justify the death penalty is where you have a person who might commit a similarly heinous crime again. The death penalty against drug trafficking is just insane, as many of these people are victims themselves.
Will things like service a person has provided be taken into account when sentencing a person found in possession of death-sentence amount of drugs? I mean, will there be discount? I have seen cases where a kind of well known person was given lighter sentence for some kind of service he provided.
-_________-!!!
i got a feeling that all these uncles and aunties dun know wat is the difference between “DEATH” sentence and “MANDATORY DEATH” sentence…
yet yupping away with answers…
perhaps TOC should educated and explain them before interviewing them for an answer…