~by: Ravi Philemon~
I refer to the Law Ministry's media release refuting Human Rights Watch's (HRW) country report for Singapore. In its media release the Law Ministry said, " HRW also made false assertions. For example, contrary to assertions in its news article1, capital punishment is not prohibited by international law".
Although I did not find that particular assertion in HRW's country report, I found this, ' Singapore continued to implement mandatory death sentences for some 20 drug-related offenses in the face of repeated criticism by UN human rights bodies and experts'.
Another report published by International Harm Reduction Association, 'The death Penalty for Drug Offences and International Support for Drug enforcement' (which is linked in HRW's website) states, '"The death penalty for drug offences is a violation of international human rights law. Although capital punishment is not absolutely prohibited under international law, its application is limited in significant ways. Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that the penalty of death may only be applied to the ‘most serious crimes’".
HRW's assertion on the death sentence in its country report, is I believe, meant to draw attention to the 'mandatory' aspect of the death penalty and how it is applied to drug related offences here in Singapore.
In its media release the Law Ministry said, ' A large number of countries, including many modern, developed countries (like the US) impose the punishment. In Singapore, capital punishment has contributed to low rates of crime and drug use; and is overwhelmingly supported by Singaporeans.'
It's true that although 16 states and the District of Columbia have abolished death penalty in the United States of America, it is still practiced in the other states of the USA. The mandatory death penalty though has been ruled as unconstitutional since 1976 in that country.
Only 5 countries in the world have mandatory death penalty – Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, Japan and India. In India it is reserved for murder by a convict serving a life sentence. In Japan it is limited to instigation to a foreign aggression. In Taiwan the mandatory death penalty has recently been relaxed to a large extent. Which means that Singapore and Malaysia remain the only two countries which have not set aside or relaxed the mandatory death penalty.
Professor Michael Hor who teaches at the National University of
I agree with Professor Hor. There is no convincing reason to believe that mandatory death penalty has contributed to low rates of drug use; or that it is overwhelmingly supported by Singaporeans.
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
omg! when u have a vry peaceful and safe country like Sg, u complain! when u have a good country with little crime, u complain and when no one abuse or take drugs u also complain! Sg pple go eat shit la! safe country and when drug mules try to make fast buck risking the life of Sg and pple and future generation, u act like 'big bro' fighting for them not to be hanged when in the very first place is known as a tough law..i think u all should all immigrate to Batam or even johor…low class Sg pple everyday complain and maybe rapists should be spare of cane, & robbers should be given permission to carry knifes and so on…i hope whoever write this articles or those who strongly support drug mules to carry drugs into sg and have pple consuming it … all these 'good thins' should happen firstly to their EVERY OWN FAMILY..then u shall know how "wiine" taste like!
Being true to our pledge to build a society "based on justice and equality", we must ask further, even if death for drug offences "works" as effective deterrent, whether it is fair and not grossly disproportionate to the offence, and if not, how much justice we are sacrificing in order to get the practical benefits of the deterrence. The latter is a measure of the sort of human beings we make ourselves to be by the pragmatism.
Just to draw everyone's attention to another offence: we also have the mandatory death penalty for murder.
Although there is the separate offence of culpable homicide, the charge may only be reduced when a partial defence is made out (e.g. diminished responsibility) or the requisite intention for murder is not found (i.e. death is not only a probable result but the most probable result).
Because of the lower mens rea for murder in Singapore (no motive required), we should abolish the mandatory death penalty for murder if it is a first offence, at least.
So Ravi can you prove to us a country that is so successful in reducing drug usage all because they don't have death penalty? Where's the proof?
I am all in for death sentences. Murderers n drug traffickers are too dangerous for a small island as ours. And they get the death penalties only after sufficient evidence without any reasonable doubt. The interrogations are done efficiently and meticulously. A murderer robs it’s victim’s families of a future, hope and leaves behind a mass of destruction. A drug trafficker is worse. Ruin hundreds of lives, not just the addicts but their families too, for his own monetary gain. The amount of narcissism and lack of concern for other human lives involved is appalling.
So death penalties is neccessary to uphold and maintain the peace of this island.
My vote is for not to abolish the Death Penalty for Drug Traffickers. Although it is cruel but it should act as severe deterrent for those who think of making quick monies through trafficking. Their act will simply ruin the lives of a few hundred more.
I think the issue is not to abolish the death penalty but to abolish the mandatory element of it.
I am not sure death penalty will reduce drug traffickers as claim. But i do know it increases hand in hand with other vices gambling,prositution and poverty
Perhaps you all see and yet not see. Ravi is speaking up not against the death penalty. But against the mandatory death penalty, where the judge cannot exercise any discretion, even in deserving cases. That is the reason why many countries even if they have retained the death penalty, do not make it mandatory. Can anyone disagree that judges should have discretionary powers when it comes to capital punishment? Well done Ravi! In calling the Law Ministry's bluff.
Other countries would call a whole bench of jury to decide if it must come down to taking a person's life. In Sg it is down to one judge, oops, oh no, not even a judge, it is MANDATORY, no judging.
Thought only Saddam would say:
"The law is what I write on a piece of paper"
If there is no proof that it works or does not work and that it is supported by majority of Singaporeans then it should bne abolished. On this issue it is better to err on the side that saves a life instead of taking it.
How can you ever proof a thing like this? There is no way we can know the data of how many drug abusers there were before MDP and after, in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd year up till now. And then there are other variables, like awareness of consequence of drug abuse, social stigma, police records etc. that cause cases of drug abuse to go down, not necessarily MDP. As I said, we have scholars but their approach to many things are anything but scholarly.
Death penalty has contributed to low rates of drug use?
………………………………..
when all the drug users/mules been hung where to find fresh supplies?
opps can buy from the IT bit ch who slept with the CNB Commandant….
If only one judge is required in Singapore to pass the death sentence, and the arrested is presumed guilty to begin with (and the onus is on the defence to prove otherwise), how can one confidently proclaim that no travesty of justice has ever occured? That there was no resonable doubt (what does this mean anyway? resonable as judged by whom?)
And all those who claim that drugs destroy hundreds of lives etc etc, and therefore the law has to come down extremely hard on the traffickers, well, the same argument can be made against alcohol for starters. And do tell me at the same time the background of those that are actually marched to the gallows.
Unless there are statistics or studies to show otherwise, I remain unconvinced that death penalty is or can be a deterent.
I want the death penalty to stay. It is a deterrgent. Everyone knows that if the punishment is lax, drug abuse would go sky high. Can't stand it that this keeps coming up again and again. Abolishing it will not make Singapore a better place. I have children. I don't want them to be lured and exposed to drugs like candy. Addiction comes with rehabilitation. I don't want tax payers' monies to be wasted in rehabilitating a nation of drug abusers.
Death penalty stays. Singapore must stand up to external activists' pressure.
Just so everyone knows, the western countries YES, even the US secretly wish they have the death penalty for serious crimes. They have prison over-crowding. Every prisoner cost tax payers' monies to keep them in prison.
If the drug traffickers are mainly foreigners, that's even worse for Singapore. Using Singaporeans' tax monies to house foreigners on our island and feed them for years!
Get your head around this, will you!
Is that an Aspiration or Perception or Believe ?
Yes, we believe they should have no trouble proving what they CLAIM.
We believe them Absolutely for 50 years.
丿 乙
I am curious. For a death penalty case, Won’t it be a heavy burden being placed in the hands of the judge if the sentence is left to his discretion. One judge may not want to mete out the death penalty even though the amount of drug trafficked is hugh because he did not want to be known as a hanging judge. He may also be worried of revenge by the trafficker’s family if he decides to choose death instead of a life sentence. Even in the US of A, it is the members of the jury that decides whether the prisoner gets the death penalty or life in prison and not the judge. But let’s say, another judge (in S’pore of course) decides to sentence a drug trafficker to hang even though the amount trafficked is small because he felt it was an appropriate sentence. then how? In the subordinate courts, i have been told that there had been cases where an accused person purposely claims trial in one court only to plead guilty in another court because he knows or had been duly advised that the judge whose court he was going to plead guilty, is not a “hanging ” judge so to speak. then how? do we really want to pass this heavy burden to our judges?
These cases are tried by the High Courts, no? By the more senior and experienced Judges?
District court judges are younger, junior and less experienced.
I have read Alan Shadrake's book. I was shocked that Singapore has hidden many cases from the public for many years. I began to see there is more than meet the eye. Singapore is not as white as I use to believe.
@Justice is blind
You can join Alan Shadrake in UK, is a much better country. Everything Nichole Seah wish Singapore to be is there in UK, you will love it. Giving up S'pore red IC also allow you to withdraw all your CPF.
The UK is broken. Bankrupt. What is it there that Nicole Seah wants? She has very good potential as a young aspiring young MP. Please don't destroy my thus-far opinion of her.
@Smack Forehead
Don't you know that all the opposition including TOC is fighting for you so that your country improve in the direction of UK, Canada, Holland? If you say UK is broken than which country is a better country we can become? Can't be China I guess, not Malaysia certainly.
If you can accept in the face "explanation" from civil servants or private sector service providers that there is no recourse to your problem because rules say so and he is not empowered to exercise any discretion, and you do not raise the matter with his superior or attempt to show him the stupidity of the situation, then I can understand.
@Stranger
Thank you for clarifying. We are not law experts and was not able to catch Ravi's poit of view.
I was under the impression the Judge has the freedom on the issues of the death sentence. Since it is MANDOTARY it does not give any discretion to the judges hearing the case.
Ok I got it. Well I can live with such non-mandatory clause for drug trafficking.
@ smack forehead
Hey bro we in Singapore is not even worth one museum of history they have about South East Asia.
Your English, Education System (now the local talents has improved or destroyed it we don't know), civil service, Public administration, Parliment and the uniformed groups all originated from the British.
They are our lau pey and how can we dispise them. They are also master strategists, shrewd politicians who ruled 60% of the world.
In one of my recent visits the Museum Curator showed me to a treasure of Singapore History which had been declassified. Go and read it cause I don't think Papies would like the Singaporeans to know them.
Most Singaporeans are not against capital punishment but against the way capital punishment is caried out in Singapore. Lately a man named Roslan who was not at the scene of the crime and yet was sentenced to death based on the confession provided by his accused friends. Lately also, the AG arbitrarily divided the weightage of drugs, allocating more of it to Ramalingam who was thus over the limit allowed by Law and so sentenced to death and his partener in crime got a jail sentence. I am personally in favor of capital punishment because the criminal mind fears no less. But in a judicial system like in Singapore where the judges crumble under orders of their political masters and the AG is nothing but a stooge for the PAP to wipe out their enemies, the jury system also absent , I think capital punishment is just in the wrong hands and bring havoc to society.This Govt is not fit to wield capital punishment.
Even the President is given a dud right of waiving the death sentence. The appeal to the Presidentl comes right back to the Cabinet.. The legal system in Singapore appears designed to carry out the Law according to political imperatives, not legal imperatives in pursuit of justice. I suppose the system is fashioned this way to ensure that the enemies of the PAP has no escape once they are caught in the legal net. Unfortunatelu as a by product, Justice is shackled for everyone even non political cases like Roslan and Ramalingam.
I think we have to have strict laws against drug trafficking. The author wants proof that MDP will deter death penalty – why risk what is common sense? It is obvious to me that if MDP is replaced by life imprisonment, the drug trafficking problem will come back.
interesting title Mr Ravi,
"Death penalty has contributed to low rates of drug use."
this article is related to VK? its worth looking at the demand side, why current laws do not seem to deter the illegal consumption of illegal drugs. like the vice trade or gambling, it always start with having a sizeable demand before the supply chain starts chugging.
its the same with consumer goods & services, no company would set up business if its not viable. & its only natural for businesses to fold due to a lack of demand. example, few people use pagers anymore, hence, few brands are available today. supply of illegal drugs also follow the rule of demand & supply.
common sense?
Common sense? If MDP is such a good deterrent, then apply MDP to gambling operators, brothel operators, human traffickers etc because all these wreck families too. Sure work huh, Sg will be squeaky clean & all Singaporeans will live happily ever after.
There is no evidence that the death penalty (mandatory or otherwise) has any effect on crime rates. I would call for the immediate abolition of it – for a fairer and healtheir society.
There is probably no evidence that a sentence of 5 years vs 4 years has any additional effect on would be criminals. For that matter 6 strokes of cane vs 5 strokes and so on. So what, everything that is 'heavier', we should abolish?
Then can any of you knowledgable and highly educated souls show me the proof that abolishing capital punishments will maintain the status quo or even improve our environment?
Prisoners COSTS the govt money, get rid of them, right?
but what about druglords who live and launder money in Singapore?
Drug business can make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Go figure. MDP is to stay whether that crime goes up or down. I hope the new chief will perform even better. A little lax in this law and enforcement and you will see more and more getting involved in drugs. Toughen on addicts also. No market,no supply. It’s about time for us to set the standard for the world to see and not the other way around.
The pertinent question one has to ask is whether mandating the death penalty for drug traffickers has eradicated the menace of drug abuse in this country.
Going by the statistics of drug abusers in this country, and year on year, the number of drug abusers is rising and not going down. The law to send the drug traffickers to the gallows as a form of deterrence is totally futile and ill contrived.
Sadly most of the drug traffickers are mules, idiots who are misled for a variety of reasons and the real culprits, the drug kingpins, are still operating their illicit business in the comfort of their palatial fortresses with total impunity from the law. The law enforcement personnel should go after these big fish, alas, that is easy to say than to execute.
Lets have compassion for these idiotic drug mules and put them away behind bars for long period of time.
Sending these foot soldiers to the gallows, is the most inhumane act and I sincerely hope our law makers would act to repeal this barbaric and cruelly savage law without undue delay.
So idiotic to not report to their respective authorities..? Or maybe they feel their authorities can’t help.. Man this is huge.. If these ‘idiots’ feel they will die if they never traffic,why should our law make them feel they have a chance even if caught? And the best part.. Our people suffer because of ‘idiots’.. We are already suffering from smart people up there..
singapore is a small place.where drugs Addict (DA) is concern,we do not need the DP.why,if CND is more vigliant,they can indentify DA easily by their looks,dressing and hangout and the millions of dollars they spend on intelligence.But the problem is that they like the easy way out…CHOP!
Should we Punish Teenagers With Death for Making a Mistake?
Yong Vui Kong, a Malaysian from the state of Sabah, was sentenced to death on 4th December 2009 for trafficking drugs in Singapore. He was arrested in June 2007 and charged with trafficking 42.27 grams of heroin, when he was 19 years of age.
On 4th April 2011, the Singapore Court of Appeal, Singapore's highest court, dismissed Yong Vui Kong's appeal. He is now at imminent risk of execution.
===
Dear Editor,
Many people continue to condemn Yong Vui Kong, saying that "supporting him means supporting recreational drug use." People who think this are missing the point.
Support for Vui Kong does not mean support for recreational drug use. The key issue here is that Vui Kong is being condemned to die for making a teenage mistake. Vui Kong was only 19 at the time of his arrest–when he wasn't even old enough yet to vote in Malaysia or Singapore.
The main point people should be considering is: Is it right to punish youths with death for making a mistake? Who hasn't made a stupid mistake or decision as a teenager?
Consider this: It's a scientific fact that the teenage brain is still developing, especially the prefrontal cortex area which is responsible for impulse control and executive/logical decisions. Until this area of the brain is properly developed in adulthood, the amygdala (which is responsible for emotions) has a stronger influence and teenagers tend to make impulsive decisions based on emotion and basic drives. Knowing this, how can we in good conscience condemn Vui Kong to death for making a teenage mistake?
Furthermore, while many people continue to condemn Vui Kong for being a drug mule, addictive substances like cigarettes and alcohol are RIGHT NOW being freely sold at convenience stores everywhere. Recent scientific studies show that alcohol's effects are much more harmful than recreational drugs like heroin and cocaine. Cigarette use is known to lead to lung and other forms of cancer. So why don't the authorities ban the sale of alcohol and cigarettes?
Also, addictive activities like prostitution and casino gambling are easily accessible in Singapore and Malaysia (prostitution is legal in Singapore). Prostitution degrades and exploits both men and women while posing a health risk to the community in the form of sexually transmitted diseases. Gambling addiction leads to broken homes, massive debts, and suicides. So why don't the authorities stamp out prostitution and close down the casinos?
Is is not hypocritical of us to condemn Vui Kong with death for being a drug mule, when "legally" addictive and harmful substances/activities are so easily available all around us?
Yes, Vui Kong committed a crime, so punish him–-but not with death. Give him a second chance to make amends and contribute something useful to society.
Vui Kong has shown clear proof of reforming and educating himself while in prison–-this should be taken into account. If he was not sincerely remorseful and wanted to make amends, he wouldn’t have made an effort to improve himself while in prison. Given all Vui Kong has been through, it’s likely that he will make a valuable contribution, if given a second chance.
Mahatma Gandhi once said: “A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members.” We should ask ourselves if the society we live in meets this standard of greatness.
As it is, punishing Vui Kong's mistake with death will not send the right message to youths, does nothing to solve the supply and demand of recreational drugs, and does not in any way help move our society forward.
Rules and laws are there for a reason. In general, they work well enough to keep public law and order–but they are not perfect. When the laws stop making sense–like punishing teenage mistakes with death–leaders of society have to intervene with common sense and compassion to effectively resolve the issue.
So give Vui Kong and all other teenagers like him a second chance. Tell our youth it's OK to make mistakes, as long as you learn from them and don't repeat them. Help them learn from their mistakes and move forward, so they can one day become valuable members of society.
The govt can mitigate demands for a revocation of the MDP by allowing juries to decide on guilt or innocence of an accused (like how they do it in civilised Western countries). In essence, even if the MDP remains, and if a jury decides that the accused does not warrant a death penalty they could return a not guilty verdict and the judge and the govt will be absolved from sending someone to the gallows. But will this happen in a one-party Singapore? Never, sadly.
I value a drug offender's life. But I value the lives of others who might be messed up because he brought in drugs. So the drug trafficker jolly well give up his so others will be spared.
For all that nay-sayers about giving Vui-Kong a second chance, this is my view:
Vui-Kong knew he is going to get rich if he wasn't caught. As a 19 year old, did you think he was stupid? Did he have mentally challenged IQ? Give me a break. He knew that the drugs hitting the streets will destroy many young lives. Did you think he cared about that?
He knew the death penalty. C'mon give me a break. Stop all these nonsense about giving him a second chance.
Did you think those lives addicted to drugs had a second chance when they overdosed and killed themselves? Support Vui-Kong in what, pray tell me? Whatever time he has now, use it wisely and teach others not to be like him.
Yes they can repent, but that doesn't mean he doesn't need to pay for his crime. Some things in life do not have second chances. And we cannot afford to give second chances.
That goes for phidophile and sex offenders. Cane them, castrate them even.
Many of you commenters don't know what you are asking until you have a child who is addicted to drugs, or your child is a victim of a sex offender.
Then you'll be singing a different tune.
For this I support what the Singapore government has put in place – laws to protect the citizens, not the criminals. And yes captial punishment does contribute to low drug offences. Go figure.
'Nuff said.
Kaffein
Typo – should be aye-sayers, not nay-sayers
a 19 year old rape a girl, later, when discover of his crime, he raped the elder sister of the victim and he was caught but HE WAS YOUNG, ONLY 19, and could not even vote both in Singapore and M'sia..in China, at 13 you could already be a FATHER! so, u think 19 is young and tender age?!! and cuz he has humble and 'broken' background?! imagine, if your son is to take drugs at 19 (national service age)…who's fault is it? surely u will blame the govt for not tight controling drug and crime "laws"…soon, all 19 years old could blame the 'tender age' for all the crimes like even hooliganism and that is why LKY is so right! ABOUT POOR PEOPLE PRODUCING "BAD EGGS" FOR THE SOCIETY cuz, they are humble and broken background?!! NO IS IN THE GENE SO…GO HANG THEM ALL!
It seems to me that the Attorney General can become the only judge in cases of his own choosing because he can direct a case to be pursued or stopped and even make a judgment in the total privacy of his chambers. Even the President cannot reverse his decision. Why invest such power on a single individual if it is not to facilitate political convenience and certainty against opposition members.. Unfortunately non political cases are also fair game for the AG's hidden judging, recall the recent Ramalingam case. In this case the AG is known to have allocated by fiat the weights of the drugs carried by each of two people, resulting in the death sentence of only one of them, Ramalingam.
I think that the Death Sentence shuld be upheld. But not if the only judge is the AG in Chambers whereby the act of judging is unseen. Who knows the AG may be instructed by his political masters how and what to to judge in the dark recesses of his Chambers. Here we have the recipe for deep injustices unless you can tell me that whoever is the AG has exceptional nobility and he is controlled by the exceptionally noble. Even the doing away of the jury system seems to me a step in the direction of political contrivance.
@Lee tok kong
Careful what you wish for, you won't have anybody left to do your bidding if you hang them all, you will also then become the LOWEST of the highs. You will be in the gallows when the next call comes to 'hang them all'.
Capital Punishment should be retained but not to be mandatory nor decided by the AG alone.
It will come a time when the AG becomes the only judge in the Land. All courts will be closed, law firms dismantled.Only three people need to be working: on criminal cases : the public prosecutor, the AG and the Hangman.
Somehow I have a hunch that HRW and its supporters are more interested in totally banning capital punishment rather than mere mandatory part of it, regardless of Singapore’s view.
@Lee tok kong
it's funny you bring up the issue of rape, because despite rape being such a horrible crime and destroys lives, rapists do not get the death sentence. So being a drug mule is worse than rape? I don't think so.
In any case, I really feel sorry for your children and family. From the way you write, you are clearly an unhappy and hostile person–the unstable type that is obsessed with sex, and ends up beating up women and abusing children. I predict you will end up in jail one day, quite soon in fact, if you carry on the way you are. Then you can say hi to Vui Kong in prison.
I agree with phd researcher, Vui Kong should be punished for his crime but not with death. No one is saying to let him off scot free.
singapore too damn strict what. sometimes being too strict no good lah. if steve jobs was born in Singapore, sure kena hang as teenager for taking LSD. in the end, no apple and no iphone. give yong vui kong a break coz his punishment don't fit his crime. one day he could do somethign great or invent somethign new like steve jobs. if want to punish him send him into hard labour or something.
So many are thinking out of the box here, it is the Govt who cannot venture out of the box. Sad.
Want to tackle drug abuse, you need to do many other things, not just keep hanging traffickers:-
- Send ex-abusers to talk in school assemblies about how they got into wrong or bad company and how they suffered & caused family to suffer, how they turn their life around.
- Get children to talk about the effects of drug abuse. Why they think young people abuse drugs etc.
- Do an exhibition with powerful photos & video of the horrible effects of drug abuse.
- Schools to send letters home to parents to ask them to talk to their children about it too.
However two immediate amends got to be abolishing 'mandatory' and execution by lethal injection (not hanging). How can we expect society to be civil when the authority behaves so uncivilised?