K Shanmugam
Singapore
“Bank accounts are frozen when there is reason to suspect that the bank accounts are involved in illicit activities, including money laundering activities.”
“The Singapore Police Force does not track the requested data. Distinguishing artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content typically requires more detailed forensic examination which may not be necessary in every investigation and may also not be conclusive as to whether AI-generative tools were used.”
“The Building and Construction Authority’s Code on Accessibility provides baseline requirements for accessible and inclusive buildings. It stipulates a minimum width of 1.5 metres or 1.8 metres for primary accessible routes, depending on the building type.”
“The Road Traffic (Motor Vehicles, Driving Licence) Rules under the Road Traffic Act set out the scope of the medical assessment required for motorists aged 65 and above who wish to retain their driving licences.”
“When a Police report has been made, the Police will investigate to determine if a criminal offence has been committed. If there is reasonable suspicion that a case is scam-related, the Police can direct online service providers to restrict Singapore users' access to the relevant online activity under the Online Criminal Harms Act.”
“Through intelligence sharing and coordinated enforcement actions, the cross-border operation disrupted a transnational drug trafficking syndicate and downstream drug trafficking activities, with the UK arresting seven persons so far and further investigations underway.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,552 lines we hold for K Shanmugam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 32 of 92.
“The best defence against scams is a discerning public and our third area of focus is to take an upstream approach by creating strong public awareness on scams. Our anti-scam public education campaign, called "Spot the Signs. Stop the Crimes." is in its second year. The campaign focuses on using real-life examples to build awareness and vigilance amongst the public on the tell-tale signs of scams. As part of this campaign, we have shared materials advising the public against sharing personal details such as log-in credentials and one-time-passwords (OTP) with unverified parties. To bolster public awareness, SPF and NCPC partnered with the Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) on various initiatives to educate bank customers. For example, the banks have introduced an online quiz on scam prevention. They have also sent out advisories to customers to remind them not to share their OTPs with others. Combatting scams is a whole of society effort, and members of the community play an important role in the fight. We urge the public to be alert, and to raise our collective awareness of scams by sharing scam prevention tips with your friends and family. Examples of scam prevention tips include not responding to requests for personal information from unverified sources and to practise healthy skepticism – pause, check and confirm before providing personal information to anyone. We will continue to strengthen our public education and awareness efforts, working closely with other Government agencies and private stakeholders to better protect the public against scams.”
“For example, through Project FRONTIER, SPF has established processes with financial institutions to swiftly freeze bank accounts suspected of scams, in order to mitigate victims’ losses. From January to November 2021, SPF froze more than 5,400 accounts, and recovered more than S$65 million of scam proceeds. We are working with the banks to further strengthen measures to prevent scams, such as enhancing their fraud controls to facilitate timely detection and blocking of suspicious transactions. We are also working with e-commerce platforms to further improve user identification and authentication, and enhance transaction safety. The National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) also collaborated with GovTech and SPF to develop ScamShield, a mobile application which identifies and filters out scam messages. It also blocks calls from phone numbers that were used in other scam cases or which were reported by ScamShield users. ScamShield was launched in November 2020 for iOS platform users and will be available on the Android platform this year. In addition, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) had worked with the telecom operators to block known numbers used to perpetuate scams, including those that start with "+656" or spoof the numbers of well-known Government agencies. IMDA and SPF have also stepped up efforts to educate the public not to pick up calls with a "+" or "+65" prefix if they are not expecting any calls from overseas. Given the investigative challenges associated with transnational scammers, prevention is the best solution. It is imperative that the public is aware of the tell-tale signs of scams.”
“The vast majority of Internet-related scams are perpetrated by scammers based outside Singapore. Such cases are difficult to investigate and prosecute. Much of our efforts to solve these cases will depend on the level of cooperation of overseas law enforcement agencies, as well as their ability to track down these scammers based in their jurisdictions. These scammers are typically part of organised criminal groups and run sophisticated transnational operations which are not easy to detect or dismantle. Where monies have been transferred outside Singapore, recovery is also more difficult. The Government adopts a multi-pronged approach to combat scams. First, we have strengthened enforcement. Given the transnational nature of Internet-related scams we have stepped up collaboration with foreign law enforcement agencies, to dismantle scam syndicates. For example, in December 2021, SPF worked with the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP) to dismantle two scam syndicates believed to have perpetrated job scams and fixed deposit investment scams targeting Singaporeans, involving more than 100 victims and losses amounting to more than S$1.5 million. Fifteen people were arrested - eight in Malaysia, and seven in Singapore. SPF has also set up dedicated units to disrupt scammers' operations. For example, in March 2021, SPF set up the Anti-Scam Division (ASD) to coordinate the SPF’s overall anti-scam investigation and enforcement efforts. Second, through the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams, SPF coordinates efforts with other public agencies, as well as private sector partners such as banks, e-commerce platforms and telecommunications companies. This cooperation has been effective at disrupting scammers’ operations, especially those perpetuated over the Internet.”
“To raise awareness of cases of Outrage of Modesty (OM) on public transport, SPF works closely with public transport operators and partners such as the National Crime Prevention Council, to reach out to public transport commuters. These efforts educate members of the public on what they can do when they encounter such crimes, remind them to stay vigilant when on public transport and encourage them to report the matter to the Police if they encounter anything suspicious. For example, posters on OM are prominently displayed on MRT lines, bus interchanges and bus shelters. Public education videos on OM are also screened at MRT stations. Since September 2021, advisories on OM have been distributed to more than 700,000 commuters through various platforms, including online ones such as the LTA MyTransport, SMRTConnect and SBS Transit mobile applications. The Public Transport Security Command also launched the Riders-on-Watch (ROW) scheme in July 2019, which has been incorporated under the Community Watch Scheme (CWS) launched recently on 11 December 2021. ROW taps on commuters to act as additional "eyes and ears" on public transport for the Police, with ROW volunteers keeping watch for suspicious persons or activities and providing valuable information to the Police when needed. These volunteers also receive regular advisories on crimes affecting the public transport system. The Police adopts a tough enforcement approach towards OM cases on public transport and will continue to work closely with the community and key stakeholders to improve the safety and security of all commuters. We urge all victims of OM on public transport to make a Police report as soon as possible, as reporting the crime early is crucial to help the Police identify and arrest the perpetrator.”
“They could lose their entire investment, which are high value transactions, as the arrangement would be deemed null and void. And all parties involved would also face criminal charges and penalties under the law. Since 2017, other than this case, the authorities had also investigated another case in 2020 regarding a potential breach. However, there was insufficient evidence and no further action was taken. The Member asked if such incidents have materially impacted the broader landed residential property market or private housing prices in general. Our assessment is that this is unlikely to be the case.”
“The Government takes a strict approach towards ownership of landed residential property in Singapore by foreigners, including Permanent Residents, to ensure that they remain the primary preserve of Singapore Citizens. Foreign ownership of landed residential properties in Singapore is restricted under the Residential Property Act (RPA) and foreigners who wish to purchase such properties must seek the approval of the Minister for Law. The Act prohibits the creation of any trust for sale in respect of a residential property, in favour of any foreign person. The Act also prohibits any citizen from purchasing a residential property as a nominee of any foreign person, with the intention to hold it in trust for that foreign person. Any trust created and/or any contract between the citizen and foreign person in respect of such residential property shall be null and void, and any individual that commits such an offence faces a fine of up to $100,000, imprisonment of up to three years, or both. In 2017, it was discovered that a Singaporean, Ms Song Fanrong had bought three landed properties for three foreign individuals. The authorities investigated the matter and prosecuted Song, who pleaded guilty to one charge under the RPA of purchasing restricted residential property with the intention of holding it in trust for a foreigner, with two similar charges to be taken into consideration for sentencing. She will receive her sentencing later this month. Members will appreciate that such cases are not easy to detect, as the parties involved would have taken extensive steps to conceal evidence of such arrangements. Foreigners who turn to such illegal arrangements to acquire a landed property are taking a big risk.”
“For example, in MoneySense’s recent campaign from April to June 2021, in addition to highlighting the risks of investing in cryptocurrencies, the campaign featured key messages about the risks of dealing with unregulated entities and reminded the public to always "Ask, Check and Confirm". When transacting with cryptocurrencies, we urge the public to only deal with entities that are regulated by the MAS. Members of the public should also practise healthy skepticism to ask, check and confirm before making any transactions on cryptocurrency-related platforms, whether they be investment-related, or for online games. If the offer from an investment platform or online game appears too good to be true, it could be a scam.”
“With increasing interest in cryptocurrency, cryptocurrency-related scams have become more common. These scams come in many forms. In addition to online games that the Member mentioned, cryptocurrency-related scams include fake trading platforms and fake investment schemes. Given that the vast majority of such cryptocurrency scams are perpetrated by scammers based outside Singapore, there is a limit to how much law enforcement agencies in Singapore can do once the scam has taken place. Our ability to solve these cases will depend on the level of cooperation from overseas law enforcement agencies, as well as their ability to track down these scammers. Where money has been transferred overseas, recovery is also more difficult. Nonetheless, to address these scams, we have stepped up investigation efforts. The Police established a cryptocurrency taskforce in 2018 to monitor the cryptocurrency landscape, develop and improve operational procedures in the investigation and seizing of cryptocurrencies, and establish working relationships with overseas law enforcement agencies, industry professionals, and academic experts. The taskforce works closely with MAS which regulates entities that deal in or facilitate the exchange of cryptocurrencies. Given the difficulties in investigating and prosecuting such overseas-based cryptocurrency scams, the best defence is a discerning public. To that end, we have stepped up public education efforts to educate the public on cryptocurrency-related scams. Police have shared advisories and worked with Government agencies to increase public awareness.”
“Since the Remote Gambling Act, or RGA, came into force in 2015, the number of people arrested for illegal online gambling offences has increased. This can be driven by many factors, including increasing internet penetration and enforcement operations. It is not possible to conclude that the increase is solely due to the pandemic. In the two years preceding the start of the pandemic, the number of persons arrested for illegal online gambling offences under the RGA was 145 in 2018 and 210 in 2019. This dropped very slightly to 205 in 2020 and increased to 280 in 2021.”
“The public is familiar with these existing channels for reporting crimes. In addition, some of the agencies administering grants have also established channels to obtain information from the public on abuse or malpractices.”
“From March 2020 to December 2021, the Police received 57 reports involving the abuse or fraudulent application of COVID-19 government grants and payouts. Of these, investigations into 17 have concluded. For the remaining cases, investigations are still ongoing, or are pending AGC’s advice or completion of court proceedings. The reports received by the Police involved government funds amounting to approximately $1.7 million. Not all $1.7 million had been disbursed. The amount disbursed was lower as the agencies had managed to detect the fraud early. Of the 17 reports for which investigations have concluded, these involved government funds amounting to approximately $68,000. Of this, about $31,000 had been disbursed and $7,000 had been recovered. We are unable to share how much had been disbursed for the remaining cases as the investigations are still ongoing. To date, 42 persons have been arrested for their alleged roles in COVID-19 grant fraud. Eight of them have been convicted of cheating or forgery offences. The Member asked if MHA would set up a separate agency to investigate these cases. This is not necessary. Within the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD), there is a team called the Public Institutional Fraud Division that investigates fraud in the public sector, including the abuse or fraudulent application of Government grants such as the COVID-19 grants. The Member also asked whether MHA would provide a dedicated whistle-blower channel to uncover more of such cases. This is not necessary, as there are already channels. Anyone with information regarding the abuse or fraudulent application of COVID-19 grants can submit information online via the Police’s I-Witness e-service or make a police report.”
“Such orders are not specifically tracked. A manual review of data in the Courts’ e-Litigation system on a best-efforts basis showed no records of any orders for committal to civil prison under the Debtors Act under section 6(1), 6(3) or 15(1) from 2013 to date. Data on applications made under the Debtors Act prior to 2013 is not readily available.”
“Over the past three years, an average of 1,480 citizens per year renounced their Singapore Citizenship (SC). Of these, 21% were naturalised SCs. The annual renunciation rate of citizens has remained low at under 0.1% of the citizen population. We had not seen an increase in renunciation rate during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
“Investigation Officers (IOs) assigned to handle sexual crime cases are trained on victim management skills to minimise re-traumatising victims during interviews. In addition, all Police officers undergo regular training on how to manage victims with sensitivity. Whenever a complaint is made against the Singapore Police Force (SPF), it will be investigated. So far, the majority of complaints have been found to be not substantiated. Where the complaints have been substantiated, SPF has taken action against the errant officer(s). SPF will also learn from these incidents and take steps to improve on processes and systems to minimise similar incidents from recurring. MHA does not keep track of the data on the number of complaints against Police officers on their interaction with victims of sexual misconduct in other countries.”
“In addition, MAS expects all insurers and insurance intermediaries to have in place a robust fraud risk management framework commensurate with the size and complexity of their operations. MAS carries out regular reviews and on-site inspections of insurers to identify control gaps, including areas which may increase susceptibility to fraud. Where such control gaps exist, insurers are required to promptly address these findings and put in place remedial actions. Individuals who file, or collude with fraudsters to file, fraudulent insurance claims can be charged with one of the cheating-related offences under sections 417 to 420 of the Penal Code, which carry maximum imprisonment terms of between three and 10 years. Industry professionals may also be subject to additional regulatory penalties. For example, MAS has issued Prohibition Orders against former insurance agents who were involved in fraudulent activities and dishonest conduct under the Financial Advisers Act and the Insurance Act.”
“Insurance fraud, typically, involves the submission of fraudulent and inflated claims or the submission of duplicate claims to multiple insurers. Over the past three years, the number of reports of insurance fraud has increased, from 20 in 2018, to 71 in 2020. The increase is largely attributed to an increase in reports of fraudulent health insurance claims – these increased from five reports in 2018 to 32 reports in 2020. This sharp increase is due to a single case where 22 reports were lodged against an Indonesian national who submitted multiple fraudulent medical insurance claims. He was arrested in February 2020 in Singapore and, in September 2020, was sentenced to three years and two months’ imprisonment. The Police works with partner agencies and industry stakeholders, such as the General Insurance Association of Singapore (GIA), to investigate and combat insurance fraud. The Specialised Fraud Insurance Branch within the Commercial Affairs Department is part of the Insurance Fraud Committee chaired by GIA, which shares information, crime trends and best practices relating to the detection and prevention of insurance fraud. For example, when SPF receives reports of new variants of insurance fraud, it will alert GIA and insurers to review safeguards and conduct more stringent checks to verify the authenticity of claims. In addition, SPF also provides information on possible characteristics of fraudulent insurance claims to refine GIA’s Fraud Management System which was implemented in 2017. This system enhances the detection and analysis of potential fraudulent and duplicate claims through data analytics.”
“Police cameras (PolCams) are deployed in public places such as public residential estates, neighbourhood centres, hawker centres, commercial and entertainment districts, to deter and solve crimes. PolCams have helped the Police to solve more than 5,000 crimes since 2012 and surveys show that people feel safer with PolCams in their neighbourhood. In the deployment of PolCams, the Police seek to address the broader interests of public safety and security, while respecting the privacy of private spaces. PolCams are therefore deployed at locations which only cover public spaces. There are strict data protection safeguards and controls on the access and use of information obtained through PolCams. The data is securely stored and protected, and only authorised persons are given access. Any person found accessing the footage for unauthorised purposes will be severely dealt with.”
“The case mentioned by the Member involved an inmate who was assaulted by two other inmates at the Changi Prison Complex. The victim was waiting in the medical centre for his medical review. He was suddenly assaulted by two other inmates who were in the same room. A prison officer who was in the monitoring room saw the assault and responded with two other officers within 20 seconds, and stopped the assault. The two inmates who had assaulted the victim have been charged in Court. One has been sentenced, and the other is pending sentencing. The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) has measures in place to try to prevent assault incidents from occurring, and to respond swiftly when they do. First, Prison officers actively look out for signs of conflict between inmates. Inmates are also informed that they can approach staff if they encounter any issues or fear for their safety. Second, inmates who are assessed to be of higher risk of violence undergo programmes to address their violent behaviours. Third, SPS leverages technology to detect incidents and intervene swiftly. SPS is expanding its use of surveillance cameras to monitor all areas which inmates have access to. SPS is also using video analytics to detect abnormal or aggressive behaviours. When this capability is fully in place, officers can be alerted and respond to suspected fights, medical emergencies or suicidal behaviour, even quicker. SPS takes incidents of assault very seriously, and will continue to review and enhance its operational capabilities to deter inmates from committing assault, and to be able to swiftly detect and respond.”
“The integration between Singapore’s PayNow and Thailand’s PromptPay started in April 2021. Within Singapore, as of September 2021, there have been no reported cases of scams perpetrated through this integration. However, MHA is aware of at least one case taking place outside Singapore, where an e-commerce scam used the PayNow-PromptPay integration to have the money transferred to the scammer. The same safeguards imposed for domestic PayNow transfers apply to cross-border transfers made via the PayNow-PromptPay linkage. These include the use of online banking credentials to access PayNow-PromptPay services, and customisable limits on daily transfer amounts. In addition, there is a system-imposed daily cap of S$1,000. Users are also able to check the identity of the recipient before making the transfer, after keying in the mobile phone number of the recipient. As scammers based overseas may try to exploit advancements in cross-border integration of banking services to get their victims to directly transfer monies overseas, we urge users to practise healthy skepticism in verifying the authenticity of the transactions, make full use of the safeguards available, as well as to pause, check and confirm before effecting the transfer.”
“The Ministry had previously considered this matter and taken the view that there were some issues in amending the Limitation Act. However, the matter is being reviewed again. Given the need to prioritise resources, this review might take time.”
“For national security reasons, the Government does not disclose operational details or publicise statistics of suspected or actual foreign interference in Singapore. We also do not publicise some cases due to bilateral considerations. MHA has disclosed some of the foreign interference incidents to which we had been subject, as well as international case studies, in Parliament when we were moving the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill. The Workers’ Party agreed that the threat of foreign interference was ubiquitous and the Government must have powers to intervene where appropriate. For cases which we had been subject to, some we had dealt with under the Internal Security Act and existing laws, whereas, for others, we did not have the levers, such as those proposed in the Bill to deal with them. For future cases, necessary notice will be given should we take steps under the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act.”
“Between 11 July and 20 October 2021, the Police conducted enforcement checks against 495 licensed and unlicensed massage establishments, as well as 293 licensed and unlicensed public entertainment outlets. In total, 196 persons were arrested for offences under laws, such as the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, the Women’s Charter, the Public Entertainments Act, and the Liquor Control (Supply and Consumption) Act. Of those arrested, 14 were repeat offenders.”
“Where illegal wildlife trade seizures involve entities outside of Singapore, our enforcement agencies work closely with the source and destination countries and share information with international organisations, such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and INTERPOL, to assist in investigation and enforcement efforts. Where other countries have uncovered links to organised crime in their jurisdictions, NParks has extended assistance to them in their investigations. The illegal wildlife trade offences mentioned by Mr Louis Ng are listed as Serious Offences under the Second Schedule to the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act. This allows Singapore to provide mutual legal assistance for the aforementioned offences, whether or not they involve organised criminal groups, and, consequently, to cooperate with other countries in combatting wildlife trafficking.”
“For an offence to be considered a serious offence listed in the Schedule of the Organised Crime Act (OCA), the offence must pose a serious threat to public safety and security in Singapore. The offence must also be one that is associated with organised crime in Singapore. Examples of crimes in the Schedule to the OCA include murder, drug-trafficking and unlicensed moneylending. The offences under sections 4 and 5 of the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act (ESA) and sections 8 and 9 of the Wildlife Act relate to the international and domestic trade of wildlife without the requisite permits, and the offence under section 19 of the ESA is for the abetment of offences under the ESA. We take these offences seriously. However, the question is whether they will qualify under the OCA – do they pose a serious threat to public safety and security in Singapore and are they related to organised crime? Over the years, NParks has investigated and made a number of prosecutions for illegal wildlife trade. These cases have so far not been found to be associated with organised crime in Singapore. That said, MHA and MND will monitor the developments. We do not rule out including these offences under OCA if the specific criteria set out are met. We will emphasise: even if they are not within the ambit of the OCA, nevertheless, they are considered serious offences. MND and NParks will continue to maintain Singapore’s vigilance against illegal wildlife trade.”
“In addition, IMDA has required the telecom operators to block international calls that spoof numbers, for example, 999, 995 and other numbers of our Government agencies. IMDA has also implemented the "+" prefix for all international calls since April 2020 to help consumers who are not expecting any overseas calls to be more vigilant and exercise greater care when answering such calls. Third, we are strengthening public education and awareness. The best defence against scams is a discerning public. For example, we have been working with partners, such as the NCPC, to disseminate advisories to the public through various media and online platforms. We urge members of public to stay vigilant and also to watch out for their families and friends to prevent them from falling prey to scams.”
“Depending on the facts of the case, persons who take part in the perpetration of scams can be charged with one of the cheating-related offences under sections 417 to 420A of the Penal Code, which carry imprisonment terms of up to between three and 10 years. MHA’s assessment is that these penalties are adequate for now. The main challenge in combating scams perpetrated via telecommunication media is that most of the scammers are based overseas. We have adopted a multi-pronged approach to tackle them. This is led by the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams (IMCS). First, we have strengthened enforcement. We have been actively collaborating with foreign law enforcement agencies to share information that may lead to the arrest of scammers based abroad. For example, between June and September 2021, the Singapore Police Force worked with the Royal Malaysian Police, Hong Kong Police Force and Taiwan Police, to bust 10 transnational syndicates involved in job scams, Internet love scams and impersonation scams. Second, we are partnering stakeholders outside of the Home Team to combat scams upstream. One such initiative is ScamShield, an iOS mobile app developed by the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and GovTech, launched in November 2020. Apart from blocking SMS messages and calls from known scam numbers, ScamShield also has a function for users to report suspected scam calls and messages to the Police. As of 30 September 2021, there have been more than 210,000 user downloads, 1.8 million scam SMSes blocked, and 11,900 suspected scam phone numbers blocked. The ScamShield team is presently working on an Android version of the app which is expected to be released by end of this year.”
“The Police track reports where criminal offences are made out. From 2018 to 2020, there were, on average, about 400 Police reports a year pertaining to the conduct of debt collection agencies or their employees. Ninety-seven percent of these cases were classified as Intentional Harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act and the rest were classified as offences, such as Mischief or Voluntarily Causing Hurt under the Penal Code. Police will initiate investigations when there is a prima facie case which is arrestable. Where it is not arrestable, the complainant will be advised to pursue civil remedies, or file a Magistrate’s Complaint. From 2018 to 2020, Police investigated 192 cases. Prosecution or other action will be taken with the advice of AGC, when it is assessed that a case can be made out, beyond reasonable doubt. Thirteen of the above cases resulted in warnings and six cases in convictions. MHA plans to introduce new legislation to regulate debt collection companies and their employees. We will be conducting public consultations soon.”
“Employers who hired ex-offenders through YRSG, the Industrial and Services Co-operative Society (ISCOS), or halfway houses engaged by the Singapore Prison Service, will automatically receive the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) if they meet the eligibility criteria. Employers hiring ex-offenders receive the higher tier of support of up to $36,000 per hire. Between September 2020 and May 2021, the JGI has supported around 1,000 ex-offender hires by 380 employers. The JGI has been extended by another six months and will cover eligible hires until March 2022.”
“The number of ex-offenders who secured employment through Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG) is shown in the table below. Many others secure employment on their own. As of September 2021, more than 6,000 employers have registered with YRSG to offer jobs to ex-offenders. YRSG helps employers understand the support ex-offenders need at the workplace. For example, YRSG’s career coaches work with both ex-offenders and their employers to set behavioural goals, resolve work-related issues and develop ways to create and sustain an inclusive work environment. YRSG and the Institute for Human Resources Professionals will be running a Project Beyond Hiring initiative to develop the coaching competencies of employers and workplace supervisors. YRSG also works with other public agencies to encourage employers to hire ex-offenders. For example, YRSG has collaborated with Workforce Singapore since 2019 to offer the Career Trial programme to employers and ex-offenders. This allows both ex-offender jobseekers and employers to try out work opportunities for up to three months and assess if there is a job fit. While on the trial, the jobseekers will receive a training allowance, and those employed for at least three months after the trial will receive a retention incentive. As of September 2021, the Career Trial has supported around 70 employers and benefited more than 280 ex-offenders. Amidst the uncertain economic conditions posed by COVID-19, additional measures have been introduced to encourage employers to continue hiring local workers, including ex-offenders.”
“For example, we have been working with partners such as the National Crime Prevention Council to disseminate advisories through various media and online platforms. Our anti-scam public education campaign, called "Spot the Signs. Stop the Crimes." is in its second year. These outreach and engagement efforts cover a variety of scam types, including loan scams and job scams, which seek particularly to exploit those who are struggling financially. Other scam public outreach campaigns include the "Beware! Investment Scams Campaign" led by the Monetary Authority of Singapore in April 2021, and the "SG Cyber Safe Seniors Programme" launched in June 2021 by the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA), Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA), and SPF. Combatting scams requires a whole of society effort. MHA will continue to collaborate with Government agencies and industry partners to this end.”
“The number of scams has been on the rise. In the first half of this year, there were 8,403 scam cases reported, up 16% from the same period last year. Loan scams, e-commerce scams, investment scams and job scams made up about half of all the scam cases reported. We have adopted a multi-pronged approach to tackle scams. This is led by the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams (IMCS). First, we are strengthening enforcement. We have set up specialised units in the Singapore Police Force (SPF) to disrupt scammers’ operations, such as the E-Commerce Fraud Enforcement and Coordination Team to tackle e-commerce scams, and the Anti-Scam Centre to serve as the nerve centre for investigations into scam-related crimes. The SPF has also stepped up collaboration and conducted joint operations with foreign law enforcement agencies. For example, in August 2021, the SPF worked with the Royal Malaysia Police to cripple a transnational job scam syndicate based in Malaysia that was believed to be responsible for more than 188 cases of job scams reported in Singapore. Second, we are partnering stakeholders outside of the Home Team. In addition to drawing on the expertise and resources in other Government agencies, we also work closely with private sector stakeholders such as banks, digital platforms and telecommunications companies. For example, SPF works with financial institutions to swiftly freeze bank accounts suspected to be involved in scammers’ operations and to weed out money mules. SPF has also worked with telecommunications companies to block spoof calls used by overseas scammers. Third, we are strengthening public education and awareness, as the best defence against scams is a discerning public.”
“SCDF does not conduct quantitative assessments of the damage sustained arising from fires, thus we are unable to provide the Member with an estimated cost. Between January and September 2021, there were 778 fires at residential premises, of which 89% (or 693 cases) involved public residential premises and 11% (or 85 cases) involved private residential premises. We are unable to draw any conclusions whether a particular household or flat type is more vulnerable to fire. Fire incidents may happen due to various reasons, such as unattended cooking or indiscriminate disposal of lighted materials such as cigarette butts, and these are independent of the type of household or flat. After a fire incident at public residential premises, SCDF will conduct door-to-door engagements with residents of the affected blocks to share fire safety tips and assuage concerns. SCDF has also been raising public awareness about fire hazards and sharing fire safety tips with the public through targeted outreach and community events. This includes working with grassroots committees to organise community-level engagement events, which provide hands-on training on the use of fire extinguishers as well as to disseminate fire safety educational materials. Although the ongoing pandemic situation has disrupted many of the community events, SCDF is working towards resuming these safely. One such event is the Community Resilience Day. A pilot was recently held on 30 October 2021 at the Queenstown constituency, in the form of a hybrid event, with a small number of participants present physically and others joining in virtually. We strongly encourage members of the public to sign up for these events when they resume on a wider scale.”
“In every investigation, all relevant evidence, including forensic evidence, and CCTV footages are likely to be followed through. AGC will review the evidence, documents and interview relevant witnesses. A key witness’ statement would have been examined by the AGC and examined against other evidence. Accused persons, victims and witnesses are generally also required to testify during a Court trial. All such evidence will be considered holistically by the Court. So, documents or evidence that is not real is likely to be picked up if it is material. For the specific affected cases under the Coroner’s inquiries, AGC has reviewed them and is satisfied that the forged statements had no material impact on the outcome of the cases. In all these cases, there was other direct and relevant evidence (for example, CCTV footage, witness statements and forensic reports) that supported the eventual outcomes. The forged statements were not central to the matters. In fact, the Coroner has already completed his hearings for seven of the eight reopened Coroner’s inquiries and re-confirmed the findings that the deaths in all those cases were caused by unfortunate traffic misadventures. The remaining case has been adjourned pending further investigations into issues that did not arise from the forged statements. Our public officers have to carry out their functions professionally, and with integrity. We cannot completely prevent individual acts of misconduct; it may still happen from time to time. But what is important is that we act firmly and swiftly against any such misconduct whenever we discover them, including charging the offending officers in Court.”
“I will answer this Parliamentary Question (PQ) with another PQ filed for a later sitting by Mr Lim Biow Chuan1 on a similar issue. Mr Murali Pillai asked how we ensure that there is no over-reliance on a single officer during investigations and Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about the safeguards in place to prevent forgery of statements by investigation officers. Statements recorded by an Investigation Officer (IO) are required to be reviewed by his/her supervisor as part of the overall assessment of the investigations. IOs are required to keep records of investigative steps such as the recording of statements in their field book. Supervisors will perform regular checks of the field book to ensure that investigations are properly carried out. The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) also acts as an additional layer of checks to ensure that all relevant evidence has been obtained and that any evidence relied upon is, on the face of it, credible and reliable. We are also implementing technological solutions to reduce errors and further safeguard the process. For example, some statements can already be signed electronically in real-time by the interviewee. When the investigation process is fully digitalised, statements will be recorded electronically by default and the statements will be locked at relevant junctures to prevent tampering of statements. These are generally effective, but as Members will understand, sometimes an errant officer may try and bypass these safeguards. However, Members who are lawyers will understand that the nature of the Court process and the examination of evidence means that such errant behaviour is unlikely to affect a matter in a substantive way.”
“From the introduction of the Enhanced Direct Supervision Order (EDSO) in September 2019 to 31 August 2021, 218 first-time drug abusers, comprising 9.7% of all first-time abusers arrested in that time period, were placed on the EDSO instead of being channelled to a Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) or sentenced to imprisonment. Of these, 120 supervisees (55%) have completed their EDSO, and 91 (41.7%) are still on their EDSO. The remaining seven supervisees (3.3%) had consumed drugs during their EDSO period and were admitted to a DRC or charged for drug consumption under section 8(b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. As the EDSO was only implemented in 2019 with the completion of the first batch of supervision orders in March 2021, we do not have data on the number of supervisees who have reoffended within the five-year period from the completion of their EDSO. Based on information provided by the supervisees, 96 (80%) of the 120 supervisees who have completed their EDSO were engaged in full-time or part-time employment during the period of supervision. Of the 91 supervisees currently on their EDSO, 61 (67%) are employed full-time. CNB does not track the employment status of supervisees upon the completion of their supervision order. Since 2019, 52 drug abusers have met the conditions for the Surrender Regime.1 Of these, nine drug abusers were subsequently placed on the EDSO. CNB does not track the specific reasons for surrender, whether it was due to the EDSO or other factors.”
“Police investigation ascertained that there were fund transfers between oBike Asia Pte Ltd (oBike Singapore) and its parent company oBike Hong Kong Ltd (oBike Hong Kong). oBikeSingapore was settling its debts owed to oBike Hong Kong as it was oBike Hong Kong who had paid for the bicycles imported by oBike Singapore. The repayment of debts took place over a one-year period before oBike Singapore ceased operations. Investigations did not suggest that oBike Singapore was a shell company set up to transfer the deposit money from oBike users in Singapore to oBike Hong Kong without conducting a genuine business. There was an extensive bicycle-sharing business operated by oBike Singapore in Singapore. On 26 November 2020, the liquidator FTI Consulting Pte Ltd (FTI) wound up oBike Singapore. FTI did not file a Police report with the CAD or make any findings of criminal offence. Police consulted the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) on the evidence. As no offences were made out, the decision was taken to close the investigation and take no further action against oBike Singapore.”
“The number of deaths by suicide between 2016 and 2020 of females who had given birth in the year prior to death is in Table 1. We do not have data on the number of deaths by suicide of females who were pregnant at the point of death.”
“From January 2019 to December 2020, there were 7,711, 102 and 250 road traffic accidents involving motorcyclists, power-assisted bicycles and personal mobility devices, respectively. We do not have information on how many of these riders were delivery workers.”
“The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) and Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG) have programmes to help older offenders understand and meet their financial needs after release. During incarceration, SPS will disseminate information on various schemes that may be relevant to older offenders, such as the Silver Support Scheme, and CareShield Life. Most inmates, including older offenders, will undergo the Release Preparation Programme (RPP) before their release. Financial literacy constitutes one component of the RPP. Through the programme, offenders learn about budgeting and financial planning, with content tailored to Singapore’s context. This includes topics on CPF, employment and training assistance, as well as sources of financial support in the community. About six months before release, SPS’ Personal Supervisors will engage inmates to discuss their post-release plans. During these engagements, financial planning and retirement security issues may be discussed. If the older offender requires financial support, referrals will be made to SPS’ Family Resource Centres for assistance and follow-up. After release, SPS and YRSG work with various partners to deliver finance-related programmes for supervisees in the community. For example, SPS has a partnership with Barclays to implement the Financial Literacy Programme. Under this programme, offenders are equipped with basic budgeting and financial management skills. YRSG also partnered the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) in 2021 to roll out customised "Seniors Go Digital" training for older offenders. They learn basic digital literacy skills like using smartphone apps to access digital services offered on Government portals, as well as financial and payment services.”
“An individual’s NRIC number is a unique and permanent identifier used in many transactions and documents throughout the individual’s life. Therefore, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) does not allow an individual to change his or her NRIC number, even if the number had been stolen during a data breach incident. There are measures in place to prevent and mitigate the risk of subsequent identity theft, especially for financial transactions and sensitive transactions with public agencies. These include the use of additional information for identity verification, such as one-time passwords, personal identification numbers and biometrics. Residents who have lost their physical NRIC have to apply to ICA for a replacement NRIC. ICA takes into consideration the reason for the loss of the NRIC in considering waivers of the replacement fee.”
“The Class 4A licence allows a person to drive public buses. Before a person can obtain a Class 4A licence, the person needs to have a Class 3 driving licence which allows the person to drive cars and small vans with either manual or automatic transmission. This has been the requirement because public bus fleets had consisted of a mix of buses with automatic and manual transmission. As the Member has noted in the question, our public bus fleets have fully shifted to automatic transmission. The Traffic Police, or TP, will be changing the regulations such that both Class 3 and 3A licence holders may undergo training to obtain a Class 4A driving licence. We will provide an update when ready. In the meantime, holders of Class 3A licence may appeal to TP through the Public Transport Operators, to allow them to undergo training to obtain a Class 4A driving licence. Between April 2019 and July 2021, TP approved 57 out of 60 such appeals; the remaining three appeals were rejected as the applicants had outstanding driving offences.”
“Police conducted a series of operations in June and July 2021 to combat illegal football gambling. Seventy-two individuals aged between 18 and 63 years old were arrested for their suspected involvement in unlawful gambling activities. Investigations are ongoing. Currently, under the Remote Gambling Act, an operator of illegal remote gambling services is liable for a fine of not less than $20,000 and not more than $500,000, or to imprisonment not exceeding seven years, or to both. An agent who facilitates others to gamble illegally is liable for a fine of not less than $20,000 and not more than $200,000, or imprisonment not exceeding five years, or to both. In April 2020, MHA announced a review of our gambling laws to ensure that our laws and regulatory approach towards gambling keep pace with the evolving gambling landscape. As part of the upcoming proposed amendments to gambling legislation, MHA is reviewing the penalties for illegal gambling, with a view to increasing them to strengthen deterrence. The outcome of our review will be announced at the end of this year, when we table amendments to the gambling legislation to Parliament for consideration.”
“(proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr K Shanmugam]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“I think Mr Perera's fourth and final point is whether the MRHA amendments are already in force. No, they are not yet in force. I think we answered a Parliamentary Question in September. The amendments were passed in 2019 but, normally, with many such legislation, which affect a large group of people on the ground – here, it is all the religious organisations – they have to make disclosures, they have compliance requirements. You cannot just bring the Act into force without making sure – religious organisations are differently resourced. Some are well-resourced, some are less well-resourced. Some are essentially a very small operation – to give time to all of them to resource themselves, to be able to comply with the requirements of the legislation. In fact, you have got to take time to educate them, talk to them about the requirements. We also have to make sure that our own systems are set up to be able to receive the information that comes through. Another subject which I have spoken about quite frequently in this House is that we are short of officers and we now have to find officers who can be trained to deal with these specific returns that the religious groups will be giving. So, there are a number of different factors here. We will do this as quickly as we can. I have said the training of the Investigation Officers on the thresholds for the amended offences is ongoing and that will take a little bit of time. But, on the ground, as in the religious organisations, also need a little bit of time. And our systems need a little bit of time. We will bring it into force as soon as all these things are in sync. Madam, once again, I thank Members for their support of the Bill. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to.”
“The Sedition Act section 3(2)(d) has some reference to producing feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes, but you must look at it in the light also of section 3(3), which says the intention of the person charged at the time he did some of these things, seditious words are irrelevant. Your intention is irrelevant. If you did what you did and it has these tendencies, then you are liable under the law. Your intention, your knowledge is completely irrelevant. So, it is a very different animal, very different kind of offence and one could almost say very sui generis. We are not going down that route. If you look at sections 298 and 298A, which, by the way, is not an issue today, "whoever by words, spoken or written, or by signs or visible representation, promote or attempts to promote, on the grounds of religion or race, ill-will and commits any act which he knows is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious groups". That is section 298A. So, the element of intention is incorporated in section 298A(b). Section 298 refers to deliberate intention. It is relevant today insofar as offences are being made arrestable. So, one can ask: does it have to be made arrestable? What is the prejudice? Those are fair questions. I do not think the question can be asked by reference to the Sedition Act which, as I have said, deals with quite different subjects and the exceptions do not make sense in the context of these provisions. But I think it is legitimate to ask. Do you need to make it arrestable? I think a counter question is: what is the prejudice if it is made arrestable? It allows the Police to move faster, it allows the Police to intervene and these are serious matters. And that is a matter of judgement.”
“So, the mental elements are set out in the proposed amendments, which are at a higher level than what the Sedition Act requires. The third point Mr Perera makes is why is it being made arrestable. Again, I think you need to compare sections 298 to 298A, which are already in our Statute books, with section 3(1). I just took the House through section 3(1). As I mentioned, a large number of us would probably have run afoul of section 3(1) at one point of time. The reason for lower thresholds in section 3(1) is due to its own history of maintaining colonial rule. You have got to look at section 3(1) and you have got to see what is important is that section 3(1)(a), "A seditious tendency is a tendency to bring into hatred or contempt or excite disaffection against the Government". And then, of course, you have got (b), (c), (d), (e), some of which have been moved over in the past and one aspect is being moved over now. And then, section 3(2) says it shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that you are trying to show that the Government has been misled or mistaken; or you are pointing out errors or defects in the Government as by law established; or you are trying to persuade citizens of Singapore, the residents in Singapore to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Singapore; or to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes. So, you see this is really nothing to do with the offences that are now found in other legislation, including the slight amendments to section 267C which is on counselling disobedience to the law or the view to breaking of the law.”
“So, you can see it is a very different type of offence, counselling disobedience to the law or to lawful order of a public servant, which is likely to lead to a breach of the peace. So, it is that sort of offence. It has got nothing to do with exciting disaffection against the Government or making people unhappy. It is a very direct focused offence and we are making some changes there, including to the mental elements. Specifically, we are covering statements made, words uttered and reproduction sale, offer for sale and importation of documents. That is the reason why the six months' requirement under the Sedition Act is not being ported over because, basically, most of the key elements of the Sedition Act, which kept the colonial rule in place, are being done away with. Bits and pieces which are relevant for modern Singapore have already been moved out into other legislation. Now, one last bit is being moved out. The second point that Mr Perera makes on the counselling of civil disobedience and the mental element. Again, if you look at section 267C, conveying information about civil disobedience is, in and of itself, not an offence under section 267C because if you look at section 267C, it has got (1)(a), (b), (c), (d), then it says, in the proposed amendments, the person does any of these things, intending for violence, disobedience to the law or such lawful order or breach of the peace to occur. So, the person must have intended for the violence or the disobedience or the breach of the peace to occur, or knowing, or having reason to believe, that such consequences would occur. And, likewise, under 267(2)(d), there is also a requirement for knowing or having reason to believe an intention.”
“So, it is a very extreme legislation and we are doing away with it and you can understand why a time limit of six months has been put. As I said earlier, I think on the strict wordings of section 3, Mr Leon Perera would have committed offences several times. I am likely to have committed offences several times as well, both in my previous incarnation and now, because it talks about raising discontent, disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore and exciting disaffection against the Government. These all really have not been relevant for a very long time. Over a period of time, different provisions come up, as I explained in my Second Reading opening speech. For example, the Administration of Justice Act on contempt of Court, on interfering with proceedings in Court, on bringing that disrepute to the Judiciary. So, there is legislation that deals with that. Section 267C takes some parts of section 4. That is really on violence, getting people to violently do something and contrary to the law. There is no complete taking of the Sedition Act and putting it in. What you now have with the other pieces of legislation are completely different animals. The essence or the heart of the Sedition Act is actually being done away with. So, the rationale for the six months has got to be seen in the context of what the Sedition Act provides. In the other legislation, in normal criminal cases, you take the normal criminal approach, which is that there is no time limit on prosecuting offences. So, for example, if you look at section 267C, which is the amendment that is coming along, section 267C of the Penal Code is an existing provision with no time limits. It originally dealt with usage, making, printing, reproducing, distributing, communicating any incitement to violence.”
“Thank you, Madam. I wanted to say I thank Members for the overwhelming support for this Bill to repeal the Sedition Act. The fact that only Mr Perera wanted to speak, I think, does suggest overwhelming support. And he supports it as well, so, I thank him for that. I will address the clarifications that Mr Perera has raised. I think the first question that he asked is the time limit for prosecution. Under the Sedition Act, actions have to be brought within six months and there is no time limit under the amended provisions. To understand this, I think we need to look at the Sedition Act a little carefully. We are talking about very different offences. Let me make that clear. The six-month time limit is in section 5 of the Sedition Act. Section 5, then, must relate back to section 4, for example, 4(1)(a), where any person who does or attempts to do or makes any preparation to do anything which would have a seditious tendency. So, what is important is seditious tendency. That, in turn, brings you back to section 3(1), which defines what seditious tendency is. A seditious tendency is a tendency to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the Government. If you look at (d), "to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore"; (e), "to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore". So, if you went out there and you said something that makes people upset with the Government of Singapore, under section 3(1)(a), that is an offence. If you raise the discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens, it does not matter whether it is against the Government or not, that is also an offence.”
“Section 298A of the Penal Code, which criminalises the promotion of disharmony between different racial or religious feelings. Section 505 of the Penal Code, which criminalises, among other behaviour, the making, publication or circulation of material with the intent to incite any group of persons to commit an offence against another group of persons. Section 267C is already an arrestable offence. No amendment is needed in this regard. In conclusion, with that, I beg to move. Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”