Current Affairs
Shanmugam : Singaporeans must vote for president to have real power
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2015/02/27073203/shan2.jpg)
Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam stated on Thursday (8 September) that a president must be voted by Singaporeans in order for him or her to have real power against the Government.
Mr Shanmugam had a meeting which involved some 600 participants including representatives from voluntary welfare organisation and grassroots leaders from North West Community Development Council held at Chong Pang Community Centre.
The report of Elected Presidency review had been released by The Constitutional Commission headed by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon on Wednesday (7 September) after six months of deliberation based on feedback from four public hearings and more than 100 written submissions.
On Wednesday (7 September), the Constitutional Commission set up to review specific aspects of the EP where a panel presented an idea to just appointed a group of experts to handle the custodial functions, then appointed a president to handle the ceremonial roles as unifying symbols.
However, Mr Shanmugam said, “If you look at the commission’s report, the commission recognise that if a person or body is not elected then they cannot really say no and block the Government.”
The commission also recommended that before exercising his discretion on all fiscal matters the President must consult the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA). However, with the level of CPA support making a difference to the Parliament majority needed, the Parliament is able to ignore the President’s decision.
Mr Shanmugam pointed out that since the body is not elected then it can only delay the decision and the Parliament can still override. “You have to ask yourself, do you want to give real power to an individual or a group. If you want to give real power then they have to be elected,” he said.
One of the participants asked him whether the Government would reversed to appointyed the President. Mr Shanmugam responded that the Government would unlikely to do so. He said, “Every single one of you probably voted in the 2011 Presidential Election. If I now come and tell you, you cannot vote any more, would you be happy? You will think the Government is trying to be funny.”
Some participants said that this EP were politically moved. Mr Shanmugam rejected the statement by pointing out that the commission was headed by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and public hearings were conducted. He said, “All sorts of statements can be made but (I think they should) get back to basics and look at logic.”
Some were discomfort by the recommendation that if there is no president from a particular racial group for five continuous terms, the next presidential election should be reserved for candidates from that group.
Responded to this, he said that people would just need sometime to understand its nuances and clear up misunderstandings since the review had just been introduced for less than a week.
He said, “Some people were saying it will affect meritocracy. As the commission made clear, whichever race the candidate is from, they have got to fulfil the same criteria. So there is no question of lowering the criteria for a particular race.”
Talking separately in an interview with Channel NewsAsia’s Talking Point broadcast on Thursday (Sep 8), Mr Shanmugam said, “I think if you agree that there should be a criteria then the criteria should reflect the state economy.”
He said that the Commission’s report stated that under the new recommendation that the presidential candidates from the private sector must be at least CEOs of companies, there are more than 2,000 people would qualify.
He also stated that if the shareholders’ equity is to be raised to $500 million or more, there would be nearly 700 companies would qualify under this criteria.
He added, “The commission has heard representations, it’s received more than 100 submissions, it held public hearings extensively reported, so there is a considerable… not detailed understanding, but knowledge that these things are happening and I’m sure Singaporeans will pay attention to the Commission’s report, the logic behind the report and the government’s White Paper.”
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2023/03/26202010/TOC_newlogo_small.webp)
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.
Current Affairs
Consumers Association of Singapore fined S$20,000 for PDPA breaches following two data security incidents
![](https://theonlinecitizen.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/2024/08/30113758/case-fined-Ja2vq4.png)
The Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) has been fined S$20,000 by the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) for breaches under the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA).
According to a judgement which was published on 28 August, the fine was imposed due to the consumer watchdog’s failure to implement reasonable security measures to protect the personal data in its possession and to establish necessary policies and practices required under the PDPA.
The breaches resulted in two significant incidents, one in October 2022 and another in June 2023, where the personal data of up to 34,760 individuals was potentially compromised.
Both incidents were handled under the Expedited Decision Procedure (EDP) at the request of CASE, with the organization admitting to all the facts and contraventions of the PDPA, leading to a faster resolution of the case.
The First Incident: Phishing Attack in October 2022
The first incident occurred in October 2022 when a threat actor accessed CASE’s email accounts and sent phishing emails from its official email addresses.
On 8 October 2022, some consumers received unsolicited emails from “[email protected],” which falsely claimed that their complaints had been escalated to the “collections and compensation department” and that they were eligible for compensation.
The recipients were asked to provide their banking details by clicking on a chat icon.
The following day, similar phishing emails were sent from “[email protected],” an account used for complaints that had progressed to mediation. CASE later discovered that the phishing emails had affected up to 22,542 email addresses.
Further investigations revealed that the phishing emails likely resulted from the threat actor obtaining login credentials from a CASE employee via a phishing attack.
The compromised accounts led to the sending of 5,205 phishing emails to 4,945 recipients. Although CASE acted swiftly to suspend the affected accounts and reset all administrator passwords, three consumers reported that they had clicked on the phishing links and collectively lost S$217,900. CASE subsequently lodged a police report.
The Second Incident: Data Breach During Vendor Migration
While PDPC was investigating the first incident, a second breach came to light in June 2023. On 22 June 2023, PDPC received a complaint about a phishing email that replicated a consumer’s complaint previously submitted to CASE.
This led to the discovery that the personal data of 12,218 individuals, including names, email addresses, contact numbers, and complaint details, had been exposed. The PDPC concluded that the breach likely occurred during a data migration exercise conducted by CASE between December 2019 and January 2020 when CASE switched vendors.
Investigations revealed that CASE’s contract with one of its vendors, Total eBiz Solutions Pte Ltd (TES), did not stipulate clear security responsibilities. This lack of contractual clarity contributed to the data breach during the migration process, highlighting CASE’s negligent vendor management.
PDPC Findings and Penalties
The PDPC found that CASE had failed to enforce its password management policy, with some passwords not meeting minimum length and complexity requirements and others remaining unchanged for up to four years. Furthermore, CASE’s vendor management was deemed negligent, as one of its contracts did not specify clear security responsibilities, putting personal data at risk.
CASE admitted to not conducting regular security awareness training for its staff, with the last session held five years before the first incident.
The PDPC also noted that CASE lacked an Information and Communications Technology (ICT) policy, particularly in relation to patching and maintaining IT systems. The absence of a documented IT infrastructure management plan, insufficient logging and monitoring practices, and the lack of security reviews over the three years preceding the first breach were significant failures highlighted in the judgment.
In assessing the financial penalty, the PDPC considered the nature and gravity of the breaches, the duration of non-compliance, and CASE’s annual turnover. The fine of $20,000 was determined to be appropriate in light of these factors.
Remedial Actions by CASE
It is said that CASE, which is headed by Mr Melvin Yong, People’s Action Party Member of Parliament for Radin Mas, has implemented several measures to enhance its cybersecurity in response to the breaches.
These include introducing multi-factor authentication for all web-based applications, strengthening password complexity requirements, decommissioning end-of-life devices, and implementing patch management software for security updates.
CASE has also revised its contracts with outsourced vendors to include data protection clauses and mandated annual data protection training for all staff members.
CASE is working towards obtaining the Cyber Essentials Mark and the Data Protection Trust Mark to reinforce its commitment to safeguarding personal data and complying with PDPA obligations.
The PDPC has directed CASE to review and update its data protection policies, rectify all identified security gaps, and report back within one week of completion. The organization has also been instructed to conduct a penetration test after addressing the vulnerabilities to ensure no further security gaps exist.
The post Consumers Association of Singapore fined S$20,000 for PDPA breaches following two data security incidents appeared first on Gutzy Asia.
-
Opinion4 days ago
Singaporean voters and the ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’
-
Diplomacy3 days ago
India PM Narendra Modi meets with PM Lawrence Wong; Four MoUs signed
-
Food3 days ago
NTU stall food prices questioned after parent pays S$6.30 for meal
-
Politics2 days ago
PAP adopts SDP policies after criticizing them: Dr Chee urges Singaporeans to see through tactics
-
Civil Society4 days ago
CIVICUS Monitor labels Singapore as ‘repressed’ for crackdown on civic freedoms
-
Opinion6 days ago
Is the shuttle bus service at Marine Parade town cluster just a S$1 million political ad campaign?
-
Economy4 days ago
IRAS reports S$80.3 billion in tax revenue for FY2023/24, a 17% increase from the previous year
-
Economy6 days ago
Singapore faces 25% increase in bankruptcy filings during first half of 2024