Connect with us

Law & Order

Penal Code Review may have a chilling effect on private citizens

Published

on

The nature of laws is that it is never static. Laws need to be reviewed and amended in line with changing social norms. Given that laws are put in place to protect the values of society, changes in public attitudes would necessitate laws to be periodically updated to be kept up to date with the current values of society.

The review of the Penal Code is Singapore is therefore welcomed. To that end, a Penal Code Review Committee (PCRC) was set up in 2016 to update and refresh our Penal Code. The PCRC has recently submitted its report to the Minister for Home Affairs and the Minister for Law.

The report is lengthy and detailed. It deals with a whole raft of matters ranging from the minutiae to more substantial matters.

One of the areas for concern is the proposal to amend the definition of “public servant” within the Penal Code (Recommendation 21). It has been proposed that the definition of “public servant” be extended to include persons employed by private contractors, and performing a law enforcement role.

The logic behind this alteration is ostensibly to afford greater protection to those who may be performing roles related to public duties but who may not be directly employed by the state. While this may afford the “public servant” greater protection, it has a flip side – it also imposes additional duties and obligations on individuals who may not wish to have such additional obligations.

The Penal Code sets out the code of behaviour that public servant must abide by. Are hitherto privately employed individuals happy to suddenly become public servants governed by this code of behaviour?

It is also noteworthy that offences committed on “public servants” attract much more severe penalties than the same offences committed on the mere general public. This could have the chilling effect of controlling the behaviours of people who may simply be exercising their rights as citizens. How will “law enforcement” be defined? Also, will it be extended to private security forces?

For example, if I was standing outside a condominium with 5 friends complaining about something and the security guard comes out and decides to lay hands on me. If I threaten to retaliate if he persists, will this be treated as threatening a “public servant” which could then land me in jail for 2 years?

Do we really want the definition of “public servant” to be so wide? Is it open to easy abuse and misuse?

Secondly and on a much wider policy point, I note that the abolition of the death penalty and the decriminalising of gay sex were not within the ambit of this report. This is disappointing as it would have been illuminating to hear the views of the PCRC on these issues.

There is growing momentum on the abolition of both of these which in turn signify a change on public perceptions and viewpoints. Should these not also be taken into regard and discussed by the PCRC? Overlooking these issues seems like an unhelpful refusal to deal with them.

Lastly, this 502-page report was only published on 9 Sept and consultation will end on 30 Sept. Does it make sense for a report which took two years for a dedicated committee to produce, to be scrutinised over a period of less than a month?

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

AFP

Marcos says Philippines is ‘done talking’ with ICC

President Ferdinand Marcos announced that the Philippines will no longer cooperate with the International Criminal Court’s probe into the drug war, asserting that the alleged crimes should be handled domestically.

The ICC resumed its inquiry despite the country’s withdrawal in 2019. Thousands have died in the anti-narcotics campaign under both Duterte and Marcos’ administrations.

Published

on

MANILA, PHILIPPINES — The Philippines will no longer deal with the International Criminal Court, President Ferdinand Marcos said Friday after The Hague-based tribunal rejected Manila’s appeal to stop a probe into a deadly drug war.

Thousands of people have been killed in the anti-narcotics campaign started by former president Rodrigo Duterte in 2016 and continued under Marcos.

“We’re done talking with the ICC,” Marcos told reporters during a visit to the southern island of Mindanao, according to an official transcript.

“The alleged crimes are here in the Philippines, the victims are Filipino, so why go to The Hague? It should be here,” he said.

The ICC launched a formal inquiry into Duterte’s crackdown in September 2021, only to suspend it two months later after Manila said it was re-examining several hundred cases of drug operations that led to deaths at the hands of police, hitmen and vigilantes.

ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan later asked to reopen the inquiry in June 2022, and pre-trial judges at the court gave the green light in late January — a decision that Manila appealed shortly afterwards.

A five-judge bench on Tuesday dismissed Manila’s objection that the court had no jurisdiction because the Philippines pulled out of the ICC in 2019, some three years before the inquiry was resumed.

Marcos said Friday the government would take “no more actions” regarding the ICC ruling, but would “continue to defend the sovereignty of the Philippines and continue to question the jurisdiction of the ICC in their investigations”.

Thousands killed

More than 6,000 people were killed in police anti-drug operations during Duterte’s term, official government figures show, but ICC prosecutors estimate the death toll at between 12,000 and 30,000.

The drug war has continued under Marcos even though he has pushed for more focus on prevention and rehabilitation.

More than 350 drug-related killings have been recorded since Marcos took office last June, according to figures compiled by Dahas, a University of the Philippines-backed research project that keeps count of such killings.

Opened in 2002, the ICC is the world’s only permanent court for war crimes and crimes against humanity and aims to prosecute the worst abuses when national courts are unable or unwilling.

Manila argues it has a fully functioning judicial system, and as such, its courts and law enforcement should handle the investigation into alleged rights abuses during the drug war — not the ICC.

Only four police officers have been convicted for killing drug suspects in two separate cases since the start of the crackdown in 2016.

Rights groups allege the killings were carried out as part of a state policy, and that Duterte had publicly encouraged them with incendiary rhetoric during his public comments.

During his presidency, Duterte openly encouraged law enforcers to shoot suspects in anti-drug operations if the lawmen felt their own lives were in danger.

— AFP

Continue Reading

AFP

US slams Hong Kong bounties as ‘dangerous’ precedent

The US condemns Hong Kong’s bounties on democracy activists abroad, warning of dangerous precedent and human rights threats.

Published

on

WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — The United States on Monday condemned Hong Kong authorities for issuing bounties linked to democracy activists based abroad, saying the move sets a dangerous precedent that could threaten human rights.

Hong Kong police offered bounties of HK$1 million (about US$127,600) for information leading to the capture of eight prominent dissidents who live abroad and are wanted for national security crimes.

“The United States condemns the Hong Kong Police Force’s issuance of an international bounty” against the eight activists, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said in a statement.

“The extraterritorial application of the Beijing-imposed National Security Law is a dangerous precedent that threatens the human rights and fundamental freedoms of people all over the world,” he added, saying China is engaging in “transnational repression efforts.”

“We call on the Hong Kong government to immediately withdraw this bounty, respect other countries’ sovereignty, and stop the international assertion of the National Security Law imposed by Beijing.”

The national security law — which has reshaped Hong Kong society and eroded the firewall that once existed between the special autonomous region and the mainland — has the power to hold accused people across the world accountable.

All eight activists are alleged to have colluded with foreign forces to endanger national security — an offense that carries a sentence of up to life in prison.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) also weighed in from its New York headquarters to attack the bounties as “baseless” and an expansion of China’s “political intimidation campaign beyond its borders.”

“The Hong Kong government increasingly goes above and beyond to persecute peaceful dissent both within Hong Kong and abroad,” Maya Wang, HRW’s associate Asia director, said in a statement.

“Offering a cross-border bounty is a feeble attempt to intimidate activists and elected representatives outside Hong Kong who speak up for people’s rights against Beijing’s growing repression.”

— AFP

Continue Reading

Trending