Chandra Mohan K Nair
Singapore
“Therefore, in the case, for example, which he mentioned, if a person lends a vehicle to another person and there is no reason for him, having known that person and having carried out sufficient checks as to why he wants the vehicle, and he tells him a very plausible story to suspect that he would use it for some crime which makes the car…”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, whilst all these avenues are very commendable, I would still like to ask whether we could formalise by having a student form of Parliament. The perception in Singapore is that the youngsters may not be that actively involved in politics.”
“Sir, may I declare my interest in the matter. I am a Council Member of the National University of Singapore. I am also the Honorary Secretary of the National University of Singapore Society, the Guild House. I am also an old graduate from the Bukit Timah campus. With that, could I ask this question, Sir?”
“Therefore, in passing this Bill, I hope that the enforcement agencies will take note of the points that have been raised here. I would also like to add that I am involved in this Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act.”
“I believe that some of these countries do allow but there may be stumbling blocks by way of immigration and work permit or employment pass restrictions.”
“Lastly, Sir, are there facilities within the prison for work-related activities and facilities for studies for prisoners? We must do our level best to give these prisoners a second chance in life. Perhaps the Minister could give us an update of the new Changi Prison Complex.”
The complete record
Every one of 244 lines we hold for Chandra Mohan K Nair, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 5.
“If such measures can promote a better multi-racial and multi-religious society, which Singapore always boasts of, let us test it seriously, unless of course the leadership feels that race should not be mixed for whatever reasons. Are there statistics on the number of inter-racial and/or inter-religious marriages for, say, the last 10 years?”
“Sir, Singapore is a multi-racial and multi-religious society consisting mainly of Chinese, Malays, Indians and Eurasians, and most of them are either Buddhists, Taoists, Christians, Muslims or Hindus. Fortunately, Singapore has experienced a great deal of racial and religious harmony in the last 30 years, or so. So are the programmes in place for racial and religious harmony amongst our people? As for students, I trust schools and other educational institutions have in place such programmes. If so, could the Ministry tell us about these programmes? As for adults and citizens in the workforce, could the Ministry tell us of the programmes available, if any? Has the Ministry conducted research and studies on racial and religious harmony being improved in the following cases: (a) through inter-racial marriages; (b) through inter-religious marriages; (c) through inter-racial and inter-religious adoption of children, if any; and (d) do the offsprings of these marriages, as compared to children from one-race couple, show that they are more tolerant of different races? Do we have any precedent or studies done in other countries from which we can learn our lessons? If there are indications of children and other citizens being more Singaporean through inter-racial and/or inter-religious marriages and their offsprings being likewise, should the Ministry promote such marriages? If so, and if it is a necessary enticement, should our Government consider, as examples, granting of tax incentives for inter-racial and inter-religious marriages and also priorities for entry to primary schools, as has been done in other situations?”
“Sir, with your permission, may I take the two cuts together.”
“If the Ministry does not agree with this perception of control and if it is of the view that politics and the media in Singapore are as liberal as it can possibly be, may I invite the Ministry to seriously have a dialogue session with interested and concerned Singaporeans and stakeholders to revisit and analyse critically what needs to be done in terms of the pieces of legislation on politics and the media, including the Internet laws, the composition of senior officials in the mass media and the avenues available to the citizenry to be involved in politics and the media, not by politicians, but by the ordinary citizens. As our citizens become more educated and assimilate ideas and freedom of the press in the western democratic countries, and with the easy access to information from the Internet and various publications, and the variety of newspapers available in the global arena, it may be advisable for us to be more liberal in order to create a more vibrant political spirit in Singapore. Would the Ministry, on the assumption that they are not directly involved, relay the message, indirectly through their great influence to the mass media, especially radio and TV, to foster greater political debate and discussions amongst Singaporeans and have more political programmes? 2.00 pm”
“Sir, I wish to discuss on politics and the media. Politics in Singapore has been dominated and controlled very clearly and convincingly by the People's Action Party since our independence in 1965. It can be argued, Sir, that the PAP, through the Government, has in many ways, been very successful in controlling or influencing the mass media, directly or directly, through legislation, rules and regulations, or appointments in senior positions, be it on radio, TV, newspapers and the relevant Ministries, including the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts. Is the Ministry interested in the thinking of our people on politics in Singapore who may not be connected to the PAP or, for that matter, any political party in Singapore, eg, political scientists in the universities and think-tanks, like the Institute of Policy Studies, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore Institute of International Affairs, etc, the various non-governmental organisations and civic groups, the undergraduates and even commentaries and reports of local and international publications, and reports by the foreign press, TV and radio broadcasters, like the British Broadcasting Corporation? The perception is that there is still a very strong control from the political leadership and the OB markers, as far as politics and the media are concerned, seem to be one of less tolerance compared to the other activities in Singapore. As a result, the citi- zenry would remain passive when it comes to discussion on politics. Could the Minister also confirm that our journalists, political news commentators on TV and publications are given freedom to write critically on political matters in Singapore?”
“Does the Ministry also encourage exchange programmes between our students, especially junior college and tertiary levels, with other countries, especially our ASEAN neighbours? We could send some of our students, especially during school and university holidays, on a voluntary basis, to neighbouring ASEAN educational institutions, and vice versa. These programmes could enhance our students' perception of our standard of education and that of our ASEAN neighbours and promote friendship and care for each other.”
“Sir, for the long term survival of Singapore, we must learn to live in harmony with our neighbours, our other ASEAN countries and also globally. We must enhance our international links through various sectors, including through our educational institutions. Has the Ministry considered opening up more places in our schools and institutes of higher learning, and invite more students from Malaysia, Indonesia and other ASEAN countries and from as many countries as possible to study here? These foreign students should be encouraged, upon completion of their tertiary education, to return home so that they can be our friends and ambassadors, as they will have a soft spot for Singapore as long as they had good experiences and fond memories whilst they were studying in Singapore. Could the Ministry tell us how many foreign students are studying in primary and secondary schools, junior colleges, polytechnics and universities, and the breakdown of students by countries? And how many of them leave Singapore and go back to their respective countries on completion of their studies? Sir, how many of our Singaporeans are studying abroad at the equivalent of "A" and tertiary levels? And how many of them do come back to Singapore to work? Which countries do they go to study mainly? Is the Ministry looking into the possibility of utilising the Internet and teleconferencing amongst junior college students of Singapore and equivalent levels in other countries in some subjects for a start, so that there can be a productive exchange of views and comparison of educational standards? I believe this is, to some extent, being done at our university level.”
“Sir, the Ministry's Desired Outcomes include, amongst other things that our young would be respectful of family, community and country; and be citizens who believe in our principles of multi-racialism and meritocracy. Does the Ministry have programmes to bring about an ideal environment for social cohesion, including racial and religious integration? To appreciate the different ways of major races, namely, Malay, Chinese, Indian, Eurasian, and also other races in Singapore and to respect their different cultures, social and religious habits and practices, could the Ministry consider greater social cohesion in primary, secondary, post-secondary and tertiary institutions by having the following programmes: (1) from Primary 1 to Primary 6, perhaps, have simple and basic classes on origins of different races, their respective countries, interaction between these countries with Singapore, etc; (2) visit each other's homes to learn and appreciate each other's ways of living and growing. Even better, let them stay with each other during weekends or during school holidays. Secondary schools, junior colleges and polytechnics should conduct multi-racial and multi-religious classes and have spiritual and religious-based courses. This will improve the knowledge and basics of the holy books, like the Bible, the Koran, Bhaagavad Gita and Ramayana, and teachings of Buddha, Taoism and many other religious teachings. They should visit religious and spiritual institutions to educate themselves and, perhaps, also the New Year celebrations of as many races as possible should be encouraged amongst the different races and religions, eg, Hari Raya Puasa, Hari Raya Haji, Chinese New Year, Deepavali, Christmas, etc.”
“How do we measure the effectiveness and achievements of the NEP? The success of the programme must be measured against the desired outcomes. Are there benchmarks and how well have we achieved our objective? I would also be grateful if the Minister would let us know whether there are plans to revise the NEP to take into account recent events and issues, such as terrorism and international relations. While NEP is not part of the core subjects, we must not take the subject lightly. The effectiveness of the NEP will determine whether we will succeed in developing a strong and cohesive people. 5.45 pm”
“Are there programmes in place for character development dealing with ethical and moral values on criminal laws, so that they would know what our standards of behaviour should be in life, and of right and wrong on financial matters, including value of money, respect for acquisition of wealth honestly and through hard work? Do we have classes for character development which will improve their responsibility and duties at home to carry out household work and responsibilities, cooking and cleaning of homes, gardening, etc, duties, respect and care for the elderly, their parents and grandparents especially, duty to care for the less privileged and sick, and duty to protect and care for animals? If all the above programmes are available or, in some way, enhanced, our children would be good citizens with good character, and that will be good for Singapore in the long term. Mr Gan Kim Yong: Madam, the National Education Programme (NEP) is also an important part of our curriculum. Through the NEP, we endeavour to inculcate a sense of belonging, a sense of ownership and a sense of responsibility towards the nation. Through the NEP, we cultivate a desire for peace and harmony in a multi-racial and multi-religious society. The NEP is a key instrument through which we create a national identity among the young Singaporeans. For these reasons, I would like to ask the Minister to elaborate on the NEP programme. How is the subject delivered in the schools? Has our method of delivery been effective? It is good to have a comprehensive NEP programme. But if the delivery process is ineffective, the efforts would be in vain. How are the teachers trained to deliver the subject? The NIE would have included this in the teachers' training. But is the training appropriate and adequate?”
“Madam, the Ministry's mission statement states, amongst other things: 'to bring out the best in our young by developing them into useful and responsible individuals and citizens.' And the Desired Outcomes include, inter alia, 'that our young will be morally upright, culturally rooted, constituents of a gracious society'. Character development among students is the responsibility of (a) the student himself; (b) the parents and family members of the student; (c) his peer groups; and (d) the teachers of the student. Could the Minister tell us what are the programmes, if any, being conducted for character development of students, qualities such as honesty, integrity, kindness, graciousness, loyalty and generosity? Do we have programmes to groom our children to be gentlemen and ladies, eg, on social graces like table manners, how to conduct decent conversation between students and adults, boys and girls, for higher secondary and junior college or polytechnic students, and also issues on romance and sexual matters? Should our students be encouraged to sing, dance, try out public speaking and participate in drama and debates? How about encouragement in the learning of languages to create the Singapore character of our students, like learning Malay, Mandarin and dialects, Indian languages, including Tamil and other dialects? How about languages of ASEAN countries like Thai, Vietnamese, Tagalog, etc, to get to know ASEAN languages and cultures, so that we have a variety of options?”
“--- have migrated because of the second language rules in schools.”
“What has the Ministry done to ensure this? Sir, being a multi-racial and multi-religious society, there must be fairness in the education system for one and all. There must not be any form of discrimination, real or perceived, based on race, religion or sex. The Constitution of Singapore enshrines these matters. One could argue that SAP schools might favour the Chinese students. Should there not be similar schools for Malays and Indians, etc? If SAP schools are good for the Chinese, why not for the others? Why is it good for the Chinese? Do SAP schools create in the students studying there to be isolated from other races? SAP schools may not foster racial integration. Is the Ministry looking into this matter and what is the follow up on this? What are the benefits and advantages, as compared to the disadvantages of having the SAP schools? In fact, would the Ministry also look into the whole issue of second language? There should be less emphasis on second language as a compulsory subject to progress from O-levels to A-levels and to universities. Many families, I understand ---”
“Sir, the Ministry's mission statement and the desired outcomes demand that a holistic education system be adopted so as to bring out the best in our students. Sir, education is about creating opportunities for the young to acquire knowledge, both science and the arts, and knowledge about life and its skills. It must therefore follow that the Ministry must provide as best as it can a balanced education and create a vibrant and enquiring mind in the child. As he grows, he must specialise, but only at the tertiary level and not too early in life. There must be variety in the education system. Could the Ministry tell us what are the indicators used to measure the value of a good education? We seem to score well in mathematics and science subjects with our top students, but not in English or other subjects. How much of what our children learn in schools serve them later in life? Where are our inventors and risk-takers? Would the Ministry also allow private primary schools? If not, why not? This option will bring in creativity, variety and choice for our children. Our education system must adopt a holistic approach and let the child mature with a thinking mind, independent enough but not too individualistic, without care for the community. The system must be flexible and not be rigid. There cannot be creativity, if there is so much conformity in schools. The child must be happy with what he is learning, and there should not be an over-emphasis on anything that will create unbearable tensions in his learning process. The nation must not treat him as an economic digit. Education must pave the way for him to dream and be practical at the same time. There must not be set ways, and there must be an open mind about the values of education.”
“Sir, Singaporeans are reasonably health-conscious, both in terms of making sure they are healthy, and also in terms of knowing more about health matters. Our Government, especially the Ministry of Health and the medical fraternity, has done a great deal to try and enhance health promotion and dissemination of health-related knowledge. We all know that prevention is better than cure. In this connection, Sir, what more can the Ministry of Health do to bring about greater health promotion, ie, having a healthy nation of citizens, and propagate knowledge on health, diseases, etc? Would the Ministry consider stepping up the use of the mass media, eg, newspapers, TV, radio, Internet and the MOH website, and also the schools and workplaces, to promote knowledge on health matters on a higher scale? For example, there should be more TV shows and radio talks to educate our people about diseases and health care in simple language in the four major languages. A great deal can be done in our primary and secondary schools, and our tertiary institutions too, to promote health, guidance on healthy living, knowledge on health, preventive measures to avoid or reduce health problems. There should be well-organised healthcare and health knowledge classes. Health promotion may be enhanced also if there is less tension in life. In this connection, does the Ministry of Health do progressive research in and work with other Ministries, eg, the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Manpower and the Ministry of Community Development and Sports, to coordinate health promotion through education, proper lifestyle, sports and recreation?”
“Does the Ministry of Finance expect the Ministry of Health to recoup all or most of the cost and be in the black within a time limit, resulting in medical cost going up and making the patients pay more? (4) Does the Ministry try to have rules and guidelines to ensure that specialist doctors are directed to assist by not charging too high consultancy fees? (5) Does the Ministry have rules and regulations on pharmaceutical companies and medical equipment companies to reduce the cost of supply of drugs and medical equipment?”
“Sir, I share the concerns expressed by Mdm Halimah Yacob and Dr Ong Seh Hong, and also the other Members of this House on healthcare costs. What has the Ministry done to try and reduce healthcare costs? I am confident that the Ministry of Health would have seriously considered various avenues available to try and reduce or minimise healthcare costs. However, many lower income, average Singaporeans and Singapore residents have shown deep concern about the increase in and escalation of healthcare costs. As the standard of healthcare rises, healthcare costs would tend to rise also. Cost of medical equipment, scientific and medical examination, professional and staff costs and other expenses must inevitably increase as the years go by. What are the positive steps taken by the Ministry to try and reduce healthcare costs? Do we need such high class hospitals like Singapore General Hospital, National University Hospital and Tan Tock Seng Hospital, as they appear to reach almost five-star hotel status? What patients and their families generally expect are as follows: (1) A simple, clean and comfortable hospital bed and hospital surroundings. Forget about the luxuries and frills. (2) Caring and kind nurses and doctors and hospital staff ready with a smile and words of comfort, confident and professional looking to give patients peace of mind and some form of happiness whilst in hospital. (3) Does the Ministry have rules and guidelines to reduce the possibility of resorting to a hasty need to do too many medical tests on patients, using a lot of complex medical equipment? And medical equipment purchased by the Ministry may be expensive. Does the health authority have, as their goal, recouping of capital expenditure as soon as possible and expeditiously?”
“I understand our President does not stay at the Istana. I take it that no one in high office stays at night. If so, could we have a portion of Istana converted and used as a beautifully-lit park for Singaporeans to enjoy? Security measures, if any, could always be taken.”
“" The Ministry's desired outcomes include, inter alia, a vibrant, central area contributing to a world-class city, sufficient land for development and provision of optimal greenery, parks and recreational space for quality living. In line with the desired outcomes of the Ministry, my query is whether there is currently a maximum utilisation of the grounds of the Istana. Would it be better if part of the Istana were to be transformed into a public park for the better utilisation of the same by the people of Singapore and, for visitors to Singapore, as a tourist attraction? Currently, the Istana is not open to the public, except during the occasions of Istana Open Houses, for instance, on New Year's Day, Labour Day, National Day, Deepavali, Chinese New Year and Hari Raya Puasa. One would put up a case for and recommend that such a beautiful and tranquil place, which could give peace of mind and happiness to many in Singapore, should be enjoyed by more people frequently.”
“Sir, the Istana, located along Orchard Road, is the official residence of the President of Singapore where he receives and entertains State guests. The office of the President is also at the Istana. The entire domain of the Istana occupies over 100 acres. The Istana Building, which was known as Government House, was completed in 1869. The Building is dominated by a three-storey 28 metre high tower block, and there are two-storey side wings. There are extensive grounds and a nine-hole golf course. Sri Temasek is a 19th century bungalow which was built in 1869. It was the Colonial Secretary's residence. The Villa was built in 1908, and is the official residence of the Aide-de-Camp. It later became the Private Secretary's bungalow in 1916. Thereafter, in 1958, it became the Attorney-General's house. It is now used mainly for functions. In the past, the Villa was used to house many foreign dignitaries while they were guests of the State which included Dr Mahathir, Mr Deng Xiaoping, President Suharto and Ex-President George Bush. The Military Guardroom was built in the early 1900s. Sir, there is a great deal of dignity and pride in the office of the President. And we, citizens, have great respect for our President. I wish only to raise an important issue about the maximisation of the use of the physical land space in the Istana. I do recognise the tranquility and the lovely ambience of the Istana. I do hope, if changes do take place, it would not affect the overall ambience of the Istana. The Mission Statement of National Development is, and I quote, "To create the best physical and living environment for building a robust economy, a vibrant city and cohesive communities.”
“I think it is important to bring about a synergy of the people through these organisations with the powers that be, so that they can be given a chance to do community work and special projects as per the aims and objects found in their respective constitutions. On the issue of public expressions and speaking rights, Sir, there have been recent developments, especially on the issue of potential US-Iraq war. We have seen a lot of peaceful demonstrations throughout the world but, in a sense, Singapore has not shown active participation in that area. Some would complain that because of the requirement for a police permit, it does curtail any form of initiation by civil groups to do such things. It may be argued that it is not necessary but, sometimes, it is important to express one's feelings, not just in newspapers, but in the form of peaceful demonstrations. Generally, Singaporeans are peaceful people. There should not be the perceived fear that there would be violence and things would go wrong. Citizens must be given the right to do these things. We have a strong police force that can easily contain, if at all, problems should arise. I would encourage the Government to be a bit more liberal about these things and certainly be more liberal about the granting of police permits, and better still, why the need for such police permits at all. No doubt, in terms of expression, we have the Speakers' Corner. I must admit in this regard that the citizens have not responded very positively. Perhaps, this should be reviewed. Is it because of the location itself and the forms of restrictions imposed on people to speak up?”
“I would like to ask whether the Ministry would consider taking steps or initiatives - and I hope they would - to organise a forum, seminar or even a closed-door session to review the Societies Act and related statutes and rules and regulations, together with interested parties, such as registered societies, especially civic and non-governmental organisations, to see what needs to be done so that there is a more active and vibrant civil society, and greater voluntary activities in Singapore. We ought to tap the great reservoir of energy of voluntarism from them, and I hope we will certainly want to do this. Could the role of the Registrar of Societies also be expanded to task him with creating a greater level of participation on such matters? There needs to be a rethinking on this. I would like to ask what are the duties and roles of the Registrar currently, and what can be done in order to vest him with greater powers to bring about greater interaction by the Registrar of Societies with civic organisations, so that there is greater participation by the community in governmental affairs too. How can the Registrar enhance the activities of non-governmental organisations and civic societies in Singapore as a whole? Perhaps, the Registry could also look at possibilities of financing some of the common projects that can be enhanced to bring about a greater image as a caring, people-oriented group to help the Government and the community in various projects and provide some form of meeting place for seminars, forums as most civic groups and organisations lack the facilities and finances to do so. What is the experience of other jurisidictions, as far as NGOs go and civic organisations in other countries?”
“Sir, the Societies Act governs the registration of societies and associations. There are about 5,500 registered societies in Singapore, including civil and non-governmental organisations, sports and recreation clubs, members' clubs, welfare and religious organisations, etc. The members and participants are mainly Singaporeans doing voluntary work on various aspects of life in Singapore. The Constitution of Singapore, under Article 14, provides for the freedom of speech, assembly and association. If I could just quote, it says in Article 14: "Subject to clauses (2) and (3) - (a) every citizen of Singapore has the right to freedom of speech and expression; (b) all citizens of Singapore have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; and (c) all citizens of Singapore have the right to form associations." And there are some restrictions to that under Article 14(2) and (3), especially on the full licence of freedom in terms of what needs to be done in order to protect the security of Singapore, public order or morality. Many in Singapore do complain that there are many restrictions imposed by the Government although there are fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Constitution of Singapore. If there are too many restrictions or exceptions which affect Article 14 of the Constitution, then the citizens may be justified in complaining that their fundamental rights have been curtailed.”
“Sir, may I be permitted to take the three items together?”
“Therefore, it is important, where possible, to avoid criminalisation of our citizens. Perhaps these areas could be addressed by the Minister. Assoc. Prof. Ngiam Tee Liang (Nominated Member): Sir, I would like to add to the comments that hon. Member, Mr Chandra Mohan, has just mentioned. Over the years, the Ministry has progressively taken innovative steps to improve the rehabilitation programmes in the prisons, reformative training centres and drug rehabilitation centres. These programmes, if effective, should help to reform the offenders. These programmes too should also be able to help different categories of offenders under the charge of the Prisons Department. One such group are those who commit offences of a sexual nature arising from some psychological disorder, offences such as outraging of modesty, exhibitionism and sexual assaults including rape, for example. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister (1) what has been done; and (2) is enough being done by way of specialised therapeutic treatment and other rehabilitation programmes for such incarcerated offenders, so that there is minimal danger and, ideally, no danger of them repeating their offences upon discharge from the penal and correctional institutions.”
“Sir, on the prison system. Our Prisons Department's mission is "A key partner in criminal justice. We protect society through the safe custody and rehabilitation of offenders, cooperating in prevention and aftercare." Sir, we have a secure and exemplary prison system. The Prisons Department has done a good job over the years. I believe there are many rehabilitation initiatives conducted by the prison authorities. Could the Minister elaborate on some of the main initiatives being taken? Rehabilitative measures adopted by the prison authorities are commendable, and I hope they will continue to rehabilitate our prisoners in order that convicted persons can be fully or partially rehabilitated and, upon release from prison, would get a second chance in life to be law-abiding and good persons serving their families and Singapore within their own capabilities. Sir, are there studies being carried out relating to sentencing of accused persons found guilty in court, detention of drug addicts and the effect of imprisonment on these persons and avoiding commission of further crimes by them? In other words, has the deterrent form of sentencing through imprisonment been effective? What is the effect of imprisonment on families, their employment problems, social and matrimonial problems, etc? Perhaps I could suggest that there be a joint study done by sociologists, prison authorities, Ministry of Home Affairs and the legal fraternity to conduct studies on the efficacy of rehabilitation of criminals in our sentencing and prison system. If available, what are the findings in other jurisdictions on such matters? Are there lessons to be learnt by us? In terms of criminalisation, citizens who are convicted may not be able to go abroad because of their criminal records.”
“Again, on the efficacy of the ISD, what is the yardstick to measure the efficacy of the ISD, since all other Ministries are being questioned? Perhaps the ISD could reveal some of the information. On the issue of espionage, Sir, how many Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans have been detained under the Internal Security Act in the years 2000, 2001, 2002 and currently, and for what reasons? And how many of them are non-Singaporeans - Malaysians, Indonesians and from other ASEAN countries? 11th September 2001 was, Sir, a sad and tragic day for the USA and the world at large. Singapore faces its own problems. Fifteen persons were detained in December 2001 - and it was reported - for their participation in terrorist-related activities. Thirteen of them, we are told, are cell members of the clandestine organisation - Jemaah Islamiyah (JI). Unfortunately, this has raised the problem of Muslims somehow being connected to this group, rightly or wrongly. I would like to ask, Sir, based on ISD's collection of information, what is the feel on the ground amongst Muslims and non-Muslims in Singapore? Are they concerned and disillusioned by all this? Do Muslims feel that they are being discriminated against by the Government and/or other citizens?”
“Sir, the Internal Security Department was established in February 1966. Its predecessors were the Ministry of Interior Defence in 1965, after becoming independent from Malaysia; the Special Branch in 1948; and after World War I in 1919, the British colonial government in Singapore called it the Special Branch. That was how the Internal Security Department transformed. ISD has over the years become more sophisticated and professional. They have ensured safety for our nation through information gathering and detention of undesirable persons. However, Sir, Singaporeans know very little about the ISD, and Singaporeans, in fact, fear the ISD. Rightly or wrongly, intellectuals and some politicians would be fearful of them if they are seen or perceived to be anti-government or have views that are controversial. ISD should, like the CPIB, as I have suggested, give annual reports to Parliament so that there is more transparency in what they are doing. In terms of reporting lines, I believe the ISD is part of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Does the ISD report to the Minister for Home Affairs and any other persons? Does it report to any Ministry or Minister? Who gets information about ISD, besides the Ministry of Home Affairs? What is the level of cooperation between the ISD and equivalent agencies in ASEAN countries, especially Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines? Do we cooperate fully with the Special Branch of the ISD in Malaysia? Do we have full cooperation between our ISD and international agencies of an equivalent nature? What is the budget of ISD and how transparent are we with regard to this matter? How much is really spent and on what? Can the Minister give some sort of a breakdown on the activities and the amounts spent on each sector?”
“And through this process, defence budgets could be drastically reduced and made available to other Ministries and for the good of our people.”
“My guess is that we fear aggression from Malaysia and Indonesia; Malaysia fears Singapore, and Indonesia and perhaps Thailand; Indonesia fears Singapore, Malaysia and perhaps Australia. We all fear each other in our minds. Are these fears real or perceived? Are all the three or four countries that I have talked about and their top military generals and Defence Ministers theorising a lot? Are they being realistic? Am I being realistic? Probably since the 1960s, after our independence in 1965, which has been about 37 years, the generals have been harbouring this fear, I believe. In a sense, it makes them all relevant and feel important. There should be a new thinking by political, military, and spiritual leaders, and our citizens should play a greater role in being critical of people who talk about war and conflict. They must justify their actions and remove all the secrecy which does not help at all for either Singapore, Malaysia or Indonesia. Individually, all of us are peace loving. Our Ministers, military generals, defence officials and citizens all want peace and harmony, a decent job and a happy family. That is all we ask for. That must be the same with Malaysia and Indonesia, is it not, and USA, UK and Iraq or any country for that matter? But when individual human beings take on important roles in the institution of government, things strangely change. How come? Please review all our positions and search our souls to do good for Singapore and other nations. I therefore urge our Ministry of Defence to initiate this process of creating a Ministry of Peace, and for the United Nations and the rest of the world to seriously consider and come up with workable solutions.”
“I take it that there is no real or perceived threat from any other external forces, no other ASEAN country or any other foreign country, except perhaps in today's context, terrorists, depending on how we define this term. There is so much talk about war and terrorism these days. It is all gloom and, added to that, the economic gloom. Why is there so little talk of peace and harmony by our leaders and all the international statesmen and spiritual leaders - if they are speaking about good and peace for the world? Please give it all the prime time airing. And I urge the press, radio and television to report them, instead of months of Bush and Saddam conflict. It may not even be US-Iraq conflict, mind you, and Prime Minister Tony Blair of England, and it may not even be England that wants to go to war. Ideally, in my view, all countries should have a Ministry of Peace, and not Ministry of Defence. And Ministers all over the world should make it their primary objective to reduce conflict, reduce build-up of armaments, nuclear weapons or any form of arms build-up and accessories, including war planes, warships, army tanks, artillery and a whole host of weaponry. And that is what causes the increase in defence budget, is it not? And who benefits economically - the big corporations, manufacturers of armaments, builders of planes, ships, etc, USA, France and the big powers? I am not sure whether Singapore is involved. If so, let us reflect and search our souls. Of course, the increase in military personnel in the Army, Air Force and Navy and support administrative staff goes to increase the budget. Hopefully, all the computerisation would reduce the cost but, then, computerisation is expensive too.”
“Sir, with your permission, I would like to take the three items, (d), (e) and (f), together. The mission statement of the Ministry of Defence is "to enhance Singapore's peace and security, and should deterrence and diplomacy fail, to secure a swift and decisive victory over the aggressor". The defence budget for 2003 is over $8 billion and for 2002 it was also over $8 billion. This is a lot of money. It is the largest budget compared to the next Ministry, which I believe is that of Education, having a budget of about $6.5 billion. All of us would like to see this money being available for use for good deeds - I am not saying that the Defence Ministry is not one - including for poor people and retrenched workers during this time of retrenchment and slow growth in Singapore. But this is not to be. We are aware that the defence of a country is important and money is required for this. However, I ask the Ministry of Defence: do we need to spend so much? Can the sum not be reduced during these difficult times? Would it be dangerously and critically insecure for Singapore if the budget is reduced, even reduced drastically, and if so, why? Please give us the reasons why this sum cannot be reduced. We are all aware of the need to have a deterrent force, fully ready for the worst scenario. However, we have never had a war on major conflict since independence in 1965. The last was in the 1960s during the Indonesian Confrontation. It has been 40 years since then, and we have had peace all along, both in Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia. I take it that we are always concerned about, if at all, Malaysia and Indonesia.”
“I would encourage the Ministries to try and assist in this matter so that we, in the legal profession in Singapore, could regionalise and internationalise and get involved in international law work. As regards foreign lawyers, Sir, the Attorney-General's Chambers is the department that deals with granting of foreign licences. I would like to know how many foreign law firms there are now in Singapore and those that are in partnership with local law firms and what has been the experience. Has it succeeded to a large extent? Is there also cooperation between foreign law firms and Singapore law firms? Has there been dissemination of legal expertise to the local lawyers so that we can improve on our regionalisation and internationalisation of our local law firms? Sir, on recognition of law degrees, I see now there is recognition of - back to the old days - the Australian, Canadian and some other law degrees and perhaps even the US degrees. I would like to know whether our local law degree, NUS law degree, would be recognised in other countries also as a reciprocal arrangement.”
“Yes, I will try and move fast. Sir, my cuts are on international law, foreign lawyers and recognition of foreign law degrees. I am informed, Sir, that, currently, not many Singapore lawyers and local law firms are involved in international law practice. It is mainly the American, the British and perhaps the Australian who were practising in foreign law firms in Singapore. They practise international law. If possible, we should try to change this. A lot of the international law is handled by State lawyers at the AG's Chambers and they have an International Division over there. Perhaps, something could be done where there could be some synergy between the practising lawyers and the AG's Chambers to work out something so that they could try and embark into international law practice which, I believe, has been long overdue. When I was the President of the Law Society, I understand, for instance, when Australia was trying to assist the Vietnamese in some drafting of legislation, they got involved and they begged the Australian lawyers to legislate and to get the drafting done. So in that sense, the Government was helping the Australian law firm to get the legal business and coming to a stage where they could practise international law. So I think it is important if the Government agencies, especially the AG's Chambers, the Ministry of Law and the Law Society could work together and see what is possible. Here, I would like to declare my interest also. I am in the International Relations Committee of the Law Society and, in fact, one of the things being discussed is to even have a legal tour of the United Nations and see what can be done. We could work perhaps with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and see what is possible.”
“Sir, on the issue of alternative dispute resolution, I think, in Singapore, there is an increase in interest shown for alternative dispute resolution. The Singapore Mediation Centre in Singapore under the Singapore Academy of Law has, over the years, done quite substantial work in trying to get mediators to do service as a form of alternative dispute resolution. I also believe that the Ministry of Law has done quite a bit, and I think this is very good for the community. In the old days, we had the penghulus amongst the Malay/Muslim group; the Chinese clan associations to help disputes amongst Chinese people; and the panchaya amongst the Indians. I think we have seen the modern form of these transforming into modern mediation. I would like to ask the Minister for Law whether there are any enhancing techniques being adopted now or in the near future to increase the alternative dispute resolution, besides arbitration and, of course, as compared to litigation in the courts.”
“Sir, I too share the concerns of Assoc. Prof. Chin and my two colleagues from the legal profession, Mr Ravindran and Ms Indranee. I think it is timely to know what is available from the survey and what steps can be taken to increase the low spirit of the legal profession, generally speaking. Very often, I go to the bar rooms, mainly the bar room of the Subordinate Courts where lawyers rest for a while before their case, and I can say that the last 2-3 years especially, the mood is one of gloom, and I am sure it is multi-factored. But, realistically speaking, I think we must be very realistic and truthful about what the problem is. Surveys may give a form of perception of things, but I think the reality from the bar room talk, at least, is that the mood is just not right. And I think all branches of the legal fraternity got to be cross-examined, so to speak, and scrutinised to see, in reality, what can be done. I think the dignity of the lawyers, the self-esteem, has been affected fairly adversely, and I think it will take quite a lot of changes before they come back into the profession with some form of satisfaction and happiness. As indicated also, perhaps there are better options available these days, but I think what is important is to look at things very critically and even cynically to find out exactly what is wrong, so that lawyers an have a better profession in future.”
“I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $88,558,410 for Head E ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $103,096,400 for Head E ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head R -”
“Seen in perspective, Singaporeans who have a need to seek redress, first of all, need not necessarily go to the courts, and even if they do, there are means by which they can control costs.”
“Having said this, let me add that a survey was done some time ago, about 2-3 years ago on hearing and filing fees, court imposed fees, and it was found that court fees only constitute about 7-8% of the total fees a litigant has to pay in the High Court. That is the perspective. No doubt, parties have to pay fees in court but it is not as though it is a large percentage of the total cost he has to pay. With the lawyers' fee being contained - for example, conveyancing fees, we know that with the lifting of the scale fees, quite likely conveyancing fees will stabilise or come down and also, with lawyers having to look for work, for example, divorce cases, I am sure that lawyers doing divorces will tell you that again it is very competitive - the situation is not alarming, as some may feel. I do not think Mr Mohan painted that picture, but certainly Singaporeans can now shop around for lawyers who will give good quality services at fair rates. The other point, of course, is that Government has introduced various measures so that Singaporeans who have rights to ventilate or grievances to air will have these other avenues to turn to. For example, MinLaw initiated 4-5 years ago Community Mediation Centres, so that minor disputes on the ground, relational disputes, should not end up in court. They can settle them quite easily and quite cheaply if the parties are agreeable. Small Claims Tribunal was started about 10 years ago. We have enhanced the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Tribunal and made them more accessible to Singaporeans. So, with this and other avenues, mediation now is becoming more popular. CASE, for example, would be mediating some of the disputes arising from the Office of Fair Trading.”
“So, we should leave it as that because tough sentences which are meted out are meted out for a reason, in particular, to reflect the seriousness of a particular offence or the gravity of the circumstances of the crime or the prevalence of the crime. The last point that Mr Chandra Mohan makes is on legal costs. First, I should say that, compared to quite a few countries, legal costs in Singapore have not gone up very much. In fact, Mr Mohan would probably know that over the years, because of competition, because of the fact that there are more law firms, more lawyers, and the pie is growing smaller, there is a need to do other kinds of work and so lawyers are quite prepared, they give good services but at competitive prices. So from that point of view, lawyer's costs have not gone up exponentially as much as other jurisdictions. How about the courts? Mr Mohan is probably alluding to fees introduced by the courts - hearing fees and court fees - which again are not only done in Singapore. Hearing fees were introduced in 1992 for good reasons - to make sure that those who hoard court's time will have to pay for it and also to dissuade parties from stretching their cases. The fact that the first day of hearing is free means that, if lawyers are mindful of structuring their arguments and preparing their cases well, then costs for their clients can be minimised or reduced. And, here again, hearing fees is something which other countries also have. Recently, of course, the courts increased the hearing fees. We have debated in this House the reasons for that. I gave the reasons why. The courts themselves have given the reasons why hearing fees have to be increased.”
“And, I would like to attribute this also to an initiative of the AGC and MinLaw where we conduct constitutional and administrative law seminars for our senior civil servants once a year - we have done four now - so that our civil servants who are helping Ministers to devise policies and help to implement them would be mindful that they should not do anything that will breach the Constitution. The third point that Mr Mohan makes is sentencing. Again, as a senior practitioner of the courts, Mr Mohan will know that sentencing policy is really under the ambit of the courts. Whilst Parliament passes laws and when we pass laws, the legislation will set the range of punishments, in terms of what punishment to exact in a particular case that will be decided by the Judge who hears the case. This must be so because he hears the case, he knows the facts, he looks at all the other factors, including mitigating factors. He has to find guilt first. If there is guilt, he decides where he should punish the person on the continuum, the range of sentences that Parliament has set. So, the courts have got sentencing guidelines which is important, because they will contribute towards greater consistency. This is one feature of a good system, where despite the fact that different judges may hear different cases, if the facts are similar, or if the offence committed is committed under similar circumstances, if the factors are similar, the sentences should not vary too much. That is why the courts have put a lot of efforts into this matter, including, I understand, publishing a book. The Subordinate Courts have published a book on sentencing practices, which is written by the judges in their free time. I am told, and I think it is probably true, this is a first in the world.”
“I think that is quite a novel suggestion. But will it result in abuse, because then people who feel that their rights have been breached, rightly or wrongly, would come to the court? The question really to ask is: what happens now? Is it because Singaporeans have no recourse? No place to go if they want to vent their rights, vis--vis constitutional provisions or to seek judicial review of executive actions? Like other Commonwealth countries, not all of whom have Constitutional Courts - I think Mr Mohan mentioned Taiwan, Thailand also has it - every country has to determine its own path. That is an important point. So, for us in Singapore, our constitutional structure and legal system is such that issues pertaining to constitutional laws can be decided by the ordinary courts, and indeed this has been done. I am sure Mr Mohan will know in the law reports there have been parties, either by bringing up judicial action for mandamus, certiorari or habeas-corpus, or as a defence in the prosecution, will raise the argument that his or her constitutional rights have been breached. The court will then examine the issue. Hence, the recourse is there. Also, the question will be asked: are there so many cases that surface that we need a separately-constituted Constitutional Court? Even though the recourse is there, the cases are not that many over the years. So one reason could be that in Singapore the rule of law does prevail. Our policy makers and our civil servants, when we make policies and we implement them, we are mindful of the need to keep within the Constitution.”
“So what better system can there be because the Chief Justice would be somebody who has interacted with these future judges at close quarters, either as members of the Bar in arguing cases before him, or members of the Legal Service, with whom he also has interactions, particularly as Chairman of the Legal Service Commission. So, I am sure Mr Mohan is not suggesting that the quality of our High Court Judges is not up to the mark, because he will know recently there was a fresh spate of appointments in the High Court, some of whom had served a few years as Judicial Commissioners, and indeed a few of whom had very varied experience in the Bar. They were top litigators in various fields. So, we have a Bench which is very diverse, coming from different backgrounds, different expertise, and all helping to uphold the standard of justice in Singapore, and also to help build Singapore up as a place where people can do business and also in terms of us being a financial and investment centre. The rule of law is important. The quality of our judiciary is important. I am sure Mr Mohan will know about the many surveys and polls that have been conducted by reputable outside bodies, the Swiss-based Institute of Management Development's World Competitiveness Report, and the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy Report, which is Hong Kong-based. This shows that, not only Singaporeans, but also people who use our services, who are businessmen from outside Singapore, rate our judiciary highly. So that is the first point. Sir, the second point relates to the Constitutional Court. I think Mr Mohan asked why not have a Constitutional Court where Singaporeans and other litigants or people who feel that their constitutional rights have been breached can use free of charge.”
“There is also, on the issue of legal costs, the talk that litigation costs are going up all the time. May I ask if we could do a study to find out whether the litigation costs, both in the private sector and, in terms of courts, whether these have gone up with the revamping of the court system, the computerisation that we have in Singapore, and what is the feeling of citizens? They all seem to complain, rightly or wrongly, that costs have gone up, and sometimes the impression is created that it is the lawyers who are charging more. It may be feasible to do a study on this matter to find out what it is and how we can try and contain legal costs, if they are on the rise, as best as we can. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: First, on the point about appointing judges. Sir, we have a system which is not unlike other Commonwealth countries where there is no public hearing. I think Mr Mohan talks about the US where judges, before they are appointed, are subject to a public hearing, as a result of which, good candidates sometimes also get knocked off. Even then, with the hearings, you cannot ensure that the judges would be top quality or, indeed, whether or not they would be politically inclined, as we saw from the last Presidential elections in the US. Then, the Florida Court had to decide on certain important issues where the position of the judges and their inclinations were put in the limelight. So I think what is really important is the care with which our judges are appointed. 4.15 pm Here, as Mr Mohan has mentioned, under the Constitution, for High Court Judges, the President appoints on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, who consults the Chief Justice.”
“On the issue of revamp of the court system, criminal justice system and litigation costs, may I say that when we look at the court system in Singapore, many people argue that legal costs are going up and litigants may be fearful of litigating because of the legal costs involved. On issues of criminal law, constitutional law and administrative law, it may be useful to consider having what is known as a constitutional court. I believe that in some jurisdictions, they have, including Taiwan, where, if there is a constitutional issue to be decided, there must be a machinery for the litigant to raise the constitutional issue at minimal cost. Because, very often, when you have to raise such issues, it may be an expensive affair. And I think in some jurisdictions, you have a constitutional court which would decide on the constitutional issues of that case because, based on the constitutional findings, the case might go on or not go on, especially in criminal matters. So, I would like to suggest that the authorities look into the possibility of having a constitutional court which provides for this service free where a litigant can bring it to the court and get a ruling from the court before it is proceeded with. In terms of the other aspects, Sir, may I also propose that the criminal justice system be revisited to look into the effectiveness of the various sentencing principles and systems that we have got in Singapore, to see what is the best system to be adopted, and how effective the sentencing system has been, in terms of the increase or decrease of the crime rates in Singapore for the past 5-10 years. And from this, perhaps lessons could be learnt for the whole legal fraternity and for the citizenry at large.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head E of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Articles 93 to 101 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore provide for the appointment and other aspects of judges of the Supreme Court. In Article 95, the Chief Justice, the Judges of Appeal and the Judges of the High Court shall be appointed by the President of Singapore, if he, acting in his discretion, concurs with the advice of the Prime Minister. A person is qualified for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court if he has an aggregate period of not less than 10 years been a qualified person within the meaning of section 2 of the Legal Profession Act or a member of the Singapore Legal Service or both. I would like to raise the issue of appointment of judges of the Supreme Court. Would it be useful to consider, in the course of the appointment of judges, to make an assessment of these persons who are qualified and to be interviewed by a panel to see what their views are on certain aspects of life, including important aspects that would reflect on the mind of the judge? For instance, in America, before a judge is appointed, I understand that there is such a course where an assessment is made of his views on matters, prejudices, etc. In our case, I believe that there is no such machinery. Would this be an improvement in the system of appointment of our High Court judges?”
“I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State. Sir, I beg to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $45,579,750 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,304,700 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head E -”
“And in Singapore, as we know, we do have judges who are very serious in what they do. And the quality of judgment, for example, of the Subordinate Court judges has gone up over time. I understand that now, the average experience of the Judicial Officers in the Subordinate Courts would be about 13 years. I think that is an important point to clarify.”
“So he may have dealings with the person he is prosecuting, quite unlike the full-time Deputy Public Prosecutors who would be legally under a professional obligation to remain detached, not just in terms of court proceedings, but also in terms of his professional dealings with people who are being prosecuted. Here again, I think it is a well-meaning suggestion but not practical nor necessary. This last point that Mr Mohan makes is a point which we have debated several times before in this House. But let me first say that it is not a question of the Attorney-General having a second right of appeal because, when the Attorney-General makes a reference under section 60 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, it is not an appeal as such, since the outcome of the reference would not jeopardise the accused person if it is found in favour of the Attorney-General. I think that is an important point. That is the practice that has been taken by the Attorney-General in making such references. It is important for him to have this access to the Court of Appeal under section 60 reference because, as the chief advisor to the Government, it is important that any doubts arising from the High Court's decision - when the High Court decides an appeal - should be clarified. And that is why the law gives him this opportunity, this ability, this avenue, where he can make a reference. Of course, the question therefore would be: why not make two tiers of appeal available to everybody? Here again, we have debated this point in extenso before. It is not just a matter of how many tiers of appeal there are but, really, how seriously the appeals are taken, the quality of the judgments that are rendered, both by the first instance judge and also by the Appeal judge.”
“Over the years, as Mr Mohan would know, the work of the DPPs is such that a decision whether or not to prosecute is taken very seriously. There are different levels or tiers of evaluation, particularly for the more serious offences. We are quite unlike England, which Mr Mohan mentioned, for example, where there is division of work between a solicitor, barrister and the Crown Prosecution Service. Crucially, the Crown Prosecution Service handles all issues relating to prosecutorial discretion and policy. So, that still resides in the equivalent of our Criminal Justice Division. It is only when the Crown Prosecution Service decides to proceed with the prosecution that it instructs a barrister to conduct the court proceedings. In such instances, the Crown Prosecution Service solicitor attends the court to give instructions to the barrister whenever necessary. The barrister merely conducts a case in court. He does not make any prosecutorial decisions. And even then, I understand that, increasingly, this practice of instructing barristers is done only in serious cases. For summary trials, the Crown Prosecution Service conducts its own prosecution. So, herein lies the difference because, as Mr Mohan would be very well aware of, in Singapore, ours is a fused profession. In England, you are tapping the skills and expertise of a special group of people to present your case in court. But I think, more fundamentally, the issue that would arise is also the fair-mindedness of such private sector lawyers who are engaged to prosecute such cases in court. Mr Mohan mentioned ex-DPPs, but there again, an ex-DPP would also be someone who is in the marketplace. For example, he may be a lawyer.”