Current Affairs
Netizens back Punggol residents’ actions against troubling teenagers, criticize police inaction
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/08/19163732/punggol-sZyGBK.jpeg)
SINGAPORE: Several frustrated residents in Punggol have taken matters into their own hands after months of alleged harassment by a group of teenagers in their neighborhood.
According to Shin Min Daily News, the situation escalated last Tuesday (13 Aug) when residents confronted one of the boys near the playground under Block 226A Sumang Lane.
A female resident recounted a disturbing encounter with the teenagers on 10 August.
She was in a lift with four boys when they kicked the lift doors before they fully closed, causing a loud noise that frightened her.
The lift then unexpectedly opened on the third floor, prompting her to quickly exit in fear. She expressed relief that she was not trapped inside and that her young children were not with her at the time.
The incident left the woman’s husband angry, but they chose not to call the police, deciding instead to confront the teenagers directly.
On Tuesday evening, the woman’s husband spotted one of the boys involved in the previous incident.
When he approached the boy, the teen ran away, fell, and scraped his knees.
The husband reportedly chased after him, grabbing his clothes to prevent him from escaping.
This confrontation led to a heated dispute when the teenagers’ parents arrived at Sumang Lane.
The neighbourhood committee intervened and called the police.
When a reporter arrived at the scene, one of the boys was seen sitting on a stretcher with a bandaged right knee.
Several residents claimed that the group of teenagers had been causing trouble in the neighbourhood for more than six months, with some of them not even living in the estate.
In July, the teenagers reportedly played football, rode scooters, and broke into the top floor of a Punggol car park.
The police confirmed they were alerted to the alleged dispute at Block 226A Sumang Lane at around 6:45 p.m. on Tuesday.
They reported that a 12-year-old boy sustained minor injuries but did not require medical attention.
A 44-year-old man is currently assisting with investigations for criminal force against a person under 14.
Police investigations are ongoing.
Netizens defend man’s actions
Many netizens have voiced their opinions on Reddit regarding the recent incident in the estate under the Punggol West SMC, where a group of teenagers has been causing disturbances.
Numerous users defended the actions of the 44-year-old man involved, arguing that the teenagers needed to face consequences for their behavior.
Some Punggol residents expressed frustration, sharing that they had previously complained to the police about the teenagers but felt that no action was taken.
One resident recounted an incident where a teenager attempted to spit on their father’s head from the second floor and another where a resident nearly got burned by a sparkler thrown from above.
They lamented that despite repeated complaints, the police seemed to dismiss the issue, citing the teenagers’ young age as a reason for leniency.
Another user expressed scepticism about relying on the police to address such issues.
They expressed relief that the residents took matters into their own hands, given the lack of effective intervention from law enforcement.
Calls for accountability
Some Redditors argued that teenagers should face legal consequences proportional to their actions.
One user stated that even young people should face law enforcement, depending on the severity of their crimes, and warned that unchecked behaviour could lead to more serious issues as they grow older.
Others suggested that parents should face penalties if their children are not held accountable, proposing fines for parents as a means of encouraging better supervision.
Frustration grows over perceived inaction by authorities
Many Reddit users have questioned the effectiveness of law enforcement in handling the situation in Punggol.
Some expressed frustration over the lack of action, despite complaints about the teenagers’ behaviour.
One user criticized the authorities for their perceived leniency, wondering why heavier penalties, such as fines or caning, were not imposed.
They argued that the lack of enforcement has allowed such behaviour to persist, forcing citizens to take matters into their own hands.
Another user acknowledged that while the 44-year-old man’s actions were not ideal, they were a result of months of unaddressed complaints.
They suggested that without this confrontation, the harassment by the teenagers would likely have continued.
The irony of the inaction is striking, given that the SMC is headed by Ms Sun Xueling, who has been the Minister of State for Home Affairs since 2022.
Lack of playgrounds blamed for teenagers’ misbehaviour
One netizen argued that the teenagers’ actions might stem from a lack of recreational spaces, such as playgrounds.
They pointed out that today’s children are often deprived of opportunities to play and socialize, with facilities like basketball courts being locked even during daylight hours.
The post Netizens back Punggol residents’ actions against troubling teenagers, criticize police inaction appeared first on Gutzy Asia.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2023/03/26202010/TOC_newlogo_small.webp)
Current Affairs
Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech
Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2020/09/27020206/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg)
by Alexandar Chia
This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.
Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.
Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.
Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.
As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.
Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.
Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.
If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?
In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.
Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.
And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.
This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.
These are how I suggest it is to be done –
- The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
- Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
- A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
- A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
- Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
- All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.
Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.
Current Affairs
Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun
A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/09/03132151/PHONE3.jpg)
SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.
The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.
The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.
Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.
The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.
The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.
If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.
In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.
They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.
The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.
The investigation is ongoing.
Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.
Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.
The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.
Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.
However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.
The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.
-
Singapore4 days ago
Singapore woman’s suicide amidst legal battle raises concerns over legal system
-
Diplomacy7 days ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Opinion1 week ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Parliament2 days ago
Minister Shanmugam rejects request for detailed information on visa-free visitor offences: Cites bilateral considerations
-
Parliament3 days ago
PAP MPs attack WP Gerald Giam in Parliament over NTUC independence from ruling party
-
Politics6 days ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Food1 week ago
NTU stall food prices questioned after parent pays S$6.30 for meal
-
Civil Society1 week ago
CIVICUS Monitor labels Singapore as ‘repressed’ for crackdown on civic freedoms