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 39 of 92.
“And sponsors who are unable to substantiate when we asked questions, "What relationship do you really have with this person who is proposed to become sponsored?" But as Members of Parliament will know, the residents will come to the Members of Parliament and say, "I am a Singapore Citizen, I have done National Service, why are you not allowing my girlfriend to come in?" We all have received such appeals. ICA has received them! But when we looked at these applications for girlfriends and they are all primarily girlfriends, to come in, we decided this would not do, we have to stop this. So, in March 2021, this "girlfriend/boyfriend" category was removed. You can no longer appeal for a boyfriend or girlfriend to come in. ICA moved quite fast. In February, the Unilateral Opening with Vietnam was suspended. The next month, in March, the "boyfriend/girlfriend" category was scrapped because we took the view that this was being abused. We created this "boyfriend/girlfriend" category during a pandemic last year in October because we wanted to be compassionate. If you wanted to rank the organisations in terms of compassion, I do not think most people will put ICA at number one on the list. And MHA will not usually be accused of being the most compassionate either. But we did want to try and be compassionate and helpful because of the number of appeals and people want their loved ones to come in and we want to try and help. But if the system is abused, then we have to stop it. If it is mutated, we have to stop it. But, unfortunately, what that means is that many legitimate applications are now being refused.”
“Meanwhile, there was a parallel development around September/October 2020. We announced Unilateral Opening to specific countries and regions which were of lower COVID-19 risk, including Vietnam, Brunei, New Zealand, Australia except Victoria state. Our assessment was the risk of importation of the virus was assessed to be low. Vietnam, specifically, had a comprehensive public health surveillance system, had displayed successful control over COVID-19 at that time. In the last four weeks of September 2020, it had zero local COVID-19 cases. So, under the Unilateral Opening, travellers could seek entry into Singapore by applying for an Air Travel Pass and this means short-term travellers from these countries were allowed to come in. In February 2021, due to the worsening COVID-19 situation in Vietnam, we suspended the Unilateral Opening between Singapore and Vietnam, which meant that short-term travellers from Vietnam could not come in from February 2021 under the Unilateral Opening. ICA then began to receive many applications for Vietnamese to come into Singapore under the "boyfriend/girlfriend" category; people are quite inventive. So, to emphasise, once we suspended the Unilateral Opening with Vietnam in February 2021, there were many applications under the "boyfriend/girlfriend" category. We looked at it, scratched our heads, the applications raised concerns. I will just give examples. There will be one Vietnamese applicant and multiple sponsors claiming to be the lady's boyfriend. There will be Singaporean sponsors, many who applied for multiple girlfriends. It is possible. But sponsors who are already married to someone else applying. Many men claiming to be a single lady's boyfriend, I mentioned it earlier.”
“Since the onset of COVID-19, the rules are that hostessing is not allowed in any setting. The women who were caught were likely in breach of their visit or work pass conditions and they were operating illegally. The first woman linked to the KTV cluster, much attention has centred on her, had come into Singapore in February 2021, through the "boyfriend/girlfriend" category, under what we call the Familial Ties Lane and I will refer to it as FTL, sponsored by a Singapore Citizen who applied for her on the basis that he was her boyfriend. Let me explain this boyfriend/girlfriend category. At the start of COVID-19 last year, we banned short-term visitors from coming into Singapore. So, as of September last year, the ban on short-term visitors continued. Basically, only Singaporean residents can come back, some of their relatives and some business travellers. In October last year, we introduced flexibility to allow boyfriends and girlfriends to come into Singapore. And why? We had almost a complete ban on short-term visitors, so boyfriends/girlfriends could not come in. There were many appeals. For background reference, between 2000 and 2019, there were about 120,000 Singapore Citizens who married non-residents. About one in four citizen marriages were between Singaporeans and non-resident partners. So, it is quite common for Singaporeans to have relationships with non-Singaporeans. This boyfriend/girlfriend category was specifically introduced in the context of the ban on short-term visitors, to allow Singaporeans who were in relationships with foreign partners to be reunited because they had been separated for a long time due to border restrictions. This was after numerous appeals on this were received.”
“This, I think, should put to rest any questions about enforcement actions by the Police; one operation every day. That has resulted in the detection of 58 Public Entertainment Act, Liquor Control Act infringements, 595 SMM breaches, 142 arrests for offences under various laws including the Public Entertainment Act, Liquor Control Act, Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, Immigration Act; not all in pivoted places but also completely illegal operations. To share a few examples, in October 2020, Police raided units along Ubi Road and Kallang Pudding Road, 57 persons were investigated for breach of SMMs. In November at Genting Lane, 24 persons were investigated for breach of SMMs, 10 women were arrested for work pass-related offences. In February 2021 at Admiral Hill Road and, again, at Genting Lane, 88 persons investigated for breach of SMMs, one man arrested for working without a valid work permit. In April, at Kitchener Road and Verdun Road, 45 persons investigated for breach of SMMs, seven men and one woman arrested. In all the cases, items such as karaoke equipment, liquor, were seized; operators are being investigated. Enforcement operations were also conducted over 20 weekends at every single festive occasion since October 2020. About 400 F&B outlets including pivoted outlets were inspected in each operation. To date, agencies have imposed around 100 closure orders on F&B outlets including on about 40 pivoted outlets. As I said to the House just now, there were about 437 pivoted outlets, so roughly 10% have been acting illegally and about 60 other F&B outlets also were in breach. So, SFA has revoked the food licence of seven pivoted outlets as of 23 July. Let me now move to this business of hostesses.”
“The virus seems to have come from the region to our port, JFP. With this background, there is a live issue which I will share with Members. The SNBA has sent an open letter, appealed for the industry to work more closely with the Government to report illegal activities, among other things, and they have also pointed out pivoting has helped many legitimate businesses to survive. So, should we allow them to reopen and continue as F&B operations? This brings me to the earlier question I posed. Some of them, when you look at the premises, you do question if they can really be F&B, but it requires us to say, flat out, to the operators, "Regardless of what you say, I am not going to believe you and I am not going to allow you to operate as an F&B". Agencies are working on the conditions that can be imposed like CCTVs, various other conditions, over and above what is applied to F&B outlets. They will also have to consult with the AGC, "Can we say no to an operator if we think it might be dodgy, even if the operators undertake to comply with the conditions?" It is not so straightforward. Once these issues are assessed, the MTF has to decide on whether the opening or reopening can be allowed. I will now deal with the questions which have been raised on enforcement. During the period October 2020 to 10 July 2021, the Police conducted 202 operations against pivoted outlets as well as other outlets which were operating illegally. So, this is what I said earlier. Assume we had said no to all pivoting of F&B operations, there would still be places which offer sex and meet-up opportunities; that was always going to happen. So, we had one Police operation every single day on average since October 2020.”
“We then had the Delta variant, completely different transmissibility. That variant came into the KTVs and created a cluster. There is some public confusion. The Minister for Health, my colleague, has spoken about it a number of times to clarify it. The confusion is that the KTV cluster was somehow the reason for the recent Phase Two (Heightened Alert) tightened restrictions imposed on 22 July, but that is not so. He has clarified it. It is not so. If we had only the KTV cluster, then we would not have had to move to Phase Two (Heightened Alert) or the tightened restrictions. In fact, the MTF, as the Minister pointed out, considered the KTV cluster and decided we can manage it without having to impose any additional restrictions. As he has said in his speech, the KTV cluster has been brought under control fairly quickly: tracing, testing, ringfencing the cases. So, we have about five new cases linked to the KTV cluster each day for the past few days. He gave you the figures. I have the figures as of 24 July: 232 cases, 49 in the hospital, none have been in or are in the ICU. So, let me summarise by making three points. About 430 businesses pivoted to F&B for several months. Cases of infections overall in Singapore were low. The new Delta variant caused a KTV cluster that has been brought under control. And finally, if we were facing only the KTV cluster, there would have been no need for any tightened measures. The tightening of the measures was due to the cluster at the Jurong Fishery Port (JFP). It has spread from the ports to the markets and the hawkers and into the wider community. My colleagues have explained how this happened. Some are under the misimpression that the virus went from the KTVs to the fishery port. The evidence that we have does not suggest that.”
“More than 400 such businesses converted and about 100 exited the nightlife industry. At the same time, we were considering this, that yes, MTF and the Government do know that there are some KTV operations, pubs and bars with dodgy reputations. Should we have said to them, "No, you cannot convert to F&B"? For some, if you look at their premises, darkened rooms, not the most optimal for dining and people might well say, "Why would I want to go here for dining?" It appears common sensical to say this is dodgy and doubtful. But in law, it is not so straightforward. If a person comes to you and says, "Yes, I want to convert and I will keep to the rules. My business was perfectly legal in the past and now, I will continue to be legal." Then, the agencies will have to look him in the eye and say, "You cannot get a licence to become a food place because we do not think you are going to keep to the law in future. We think you are going to break the law, even though you have committed no offence and even though you confirm that you will follow the rules." I will come back to this later. So, in addition to seeing if we can say no to those with dodgy reputations, part of the answer has got to be enforcement. I will also say, realistically, the people who are going to cheat, going to do illegal things, will do them anyway. They will use lounges, flats, warehouses, various places. It has gone on and I am sure it goes on, regardless of whether we allow the change to F&B. And there have been several illegal operations in different places outside of KTV outlets or ex-KTV outlets which have been busted. As of November 2020, it was a risk-assessed approach and in general, it was working if you look at it as of March this year with a relatively low number of cases.”
“Once converted to F&B, they were subject to the same safe management measures (SMMs) imposed on F&B outlets, meaning no inter-mingling amongst patrons and staff, no live music, no performances and various other conditions. So, in summary, from March 2020: one, KTVs were not to operate; and two, some KTVs were allowed to become F&B outlets; as well as some pubs and bars, as they were also allowed to pivot to F&B outlets. So, as of March of this year, after several months of operations of these massage establishments, former pubs, bars and KTV businesses pivoting to being F&B outlets and so on, the situation was stable and the number of infections was generally low. So, that is the context and the background to why pubs, bars and KTV outlets were allowed to pivot and provide F&B. Secondly, it has been suggested that we should have assumed or known that KTV operators will cheat and allow themselves to become semi-brothels even though they were only allowed to provide F&B. There have been suggestions ranging from: we were in effect in cahoots with KTVs, which is a suggestion in a recent and quite unbalanced Nikkei article; or alternatively, we were very naive to not realise what happens at KTVs. The truth – we were neither in cahoots with the KTV operators nor are we as naive as some suggested. Let me explain. I think most people will accept it will be wrong to treat all the 430-odd businesses – KTV operators, pubs and bars – who want to change to provide F&B automatically as crooks. Several are genuine operators. They want to pivot over to provide F&B, that is the only way they can survive. If you ask SNBA and SEA, there are KTVs which cater to families, there are many which do legitimate business and they were crying out for help.”
“Some of us met directly with the KTV businesses in August 2020 and listened to them. There were several townhall sessions. They asked to have singing and dancing to resume and they proposed a pilot with a maximum of five persons in a room. Masks would be worn when not singing and disposable microphone covers would be used and they referred to other countries, including South Korea, where this had been allowed. Others proposed changing their business models to F&B outlets. They needed help to get new permits, change their use for F&B and so on; and for many, the situation was desperate. We considered their suggestions and weighed the risks. At one time, we considered possibly allowing a pilot project for KTVs with very strict conditions but eventually we did not proceed. So, the first point to note is that from March 2020 until now, KTV operations remain forbidden. It is illegal to have any kind of KTV operations. We did not allow those. Then, to the group that had asked to move over to provide F&B on a temporary basis, we said okay to that; again, with several conditions. Why? Because basically, anyone can offer and open an F&B outlet. The Government cannot specifically say no to KTV outlets which want to become F&B outlets, provided they have the space to be an F&B outlet, the premises allow F&B outlets and they can get the approval from Singapore Food Agency (SFA), the land-use permissions and so on. And conditions were imposed. The pivoted businesses would need a food preparation area to prepare and serve food, adequate indoor dining area for customers to be seated, to have their meals and with safe distancing in place.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to address some of the questions that have been raised in relation to the enforcement against KTV outlets, specifically. In this House and outside, there have been a number of questions related to KTVs: why were KTVs and nightclubs allowed to operate as F&B outlets; the enforcement regime in respect to these outlets; why were hostesses allowed in those places; and the immigration status of these providing hostessing service at these places. For example, I can refer to a Facebook post by Mr Alan John, former editor of The Straits Times, raising some of these questions in a very succinct way and making a number of fair points based on his understanding of the facts. I will address these questions. First, why were KTVs allowed to change into F&B operations? During the circuit breaker last year, nightlife outlets were shut from 27 March 2020, together with many other businesses. From Phase Two in June 2020, many businesses were allowed to reopen, including dine-in at F&B outlets. Massage establishments were also allowed to open with conditions but KTVs were not allowed to reopen. We took a stricter approach with KTVs because singing was considered a high-risk activity in an indoor setting and has a higher risk of transmission. In August 2020, the Singapore Nightlife Business Association (SNBA), the Singapore Entertainment Affiliation (SEA), other associations as well as individual businesses appealed for KTVs to re-open. They had been closed by then for several months. Jobs, the livelihoods of those in the KTV industries, the workers and their jobs were at risk and badly affected even with financial support from the Government. Our assessment is that they probably employ about 10,000 local workers as of end 2019.”
“Sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code cover acts that deliberately wound the racial and religious feelings of any person, that promote enmity between different racial and religious groups, or that are prejudicial to the maintenance of racial and religious harmony. The number of cases that Police investigated from 2011 to 2020 under sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code, and of these, the breakdown of whether the cases resulted in warning, charging or conviction, are appended at Table 1. The figures for cases "warned" or "charged" does not include cases where investigations are still ongoing at the time when this reply is issued, or where no further action was taken.”
“This includes training SOs to be adept in handling security technology and new operating models. The Security ITM is an ongoing journey. As the security landscape evolves, MHA will work with tripartite partners to evolve the ITM initiatives.”
“The Skills Framework for Security was refreshed in 2019 to update the requisite skills and competencies for SOs. There are programmes in place to assist the industry with job redesign to incorporate technology and raise productivity. More than 80 security agencies and buyers have redesigned their work processes and job roles, which have benefited about 780 employees under Workforce Singapore’s Security Productivity Initiative. To support a new security consultancy career pathway, MHA worked with Temasek Polytechnic to launch a Specialist Diploma in Security Consultancy in 2019, and with industry partners to develop a Security Consultants Accreditation Programme. There have been two runs of the Specialist Diploma and 71 participants have completed the Diploma Programme to date. Fourth, promote use of outcome-based contracts (OBC) in procurement of security services, with Government taking the lead. The Government has taken the lead to adopt OBCs for security contracts from May 2020. All Government Procuring Entities are expected to operate on OBCs for security contracts by 2023. MHA will continue to work closely with industry partners in the engagement and training of buyers, to push for OBC adoption in both the public and private sectors. We will continue ongoing work with tripartite partners on wage negotiations for SOs beyond 2022 under the PWM. To foster a safer environment for SOs to carry out their duties, MHA will also be amending the Private Security Industry Act later this year, to enhance protection for SOs executing their duties. The amendments will address the common types of verbal and physical abuse which SOs face. In addition, MHA will work with relevant Government agencies on further initiatives to redesign jobs and upskill SOs.”
“Since the launch of the Security Industry Transformation Map (ITM) in 2018, all major initiatives have been implemented. Significant progress has been made across the four pillars of the ITM. First, push for technology and innovation to transform operating models. Sector productivity has improved with more small and medium sized enterprise (SME) security agencies adopting technology to increase manpower efficiency. In 2019, 98% (up from 77% in 2018) and 82% (up from 46% in 2018) of surveyed SME security agencies adopted at least one Stage 1 digital solution and at least one Stage 2 solution respectively, as recommended in the Security Industry Digital Plan.1 Second, align regulatory criteria with ITM objectives to raise standards. The new Security Agencies Competency Evaluation (SACE) was developed by a tripartite taskforce comprising security industry associations, the Union of Security Employees and Government agencies, and will replace the current Security Agencies Grading Exercise (SAGE) from 1 January 2022. SACE will motivate security agencies to accelerate technology adoption in the areas of training, operations, and command, control and communications. The SACE competencies will be reviewed periodically to keep up with technological developments and complement efforts under the Security ITM, to raise overall industry standards. Third, invest in skills to support career advancement and wage increases. Since the implementation of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in 2016, the PWM has benefited about 40,000 security officers (SOs). Real median monthly gross wages for SOs grew cumulatively by 36% from 2014 to 2019, outstripping the 21% growth for workers in general.”
“The Public Warning System (PWS) is a network of outdoor sirens located on roof-tops throughout Singapore. The sirens provide warning of threats such as civil disasters, terror attacks and other home-front emergencies. In 2017, the SGSecure mobile application was enhanced to also sound the relevant alert when the PWS is activated. At the sounding of the “Important Message” signal through the PWS and the SGSecure app, members of the public can access the message through various means, such as via the SGSecure app, by tuning in to Mediacorp’s free-to-air TV and radio channels, through SCDF’s Facebook and Twitter accounts, as well as via location-based text message alerts through the SMS-based Public Alert System (SPAS). Members of the public need not depend only on FM radio broadcasts. The SCDF continues to enhance how it relays its emergency messages to the public. For example, during emergencies, SCDF will be extending its emergency broadcast capability to Mediacorp’s meWATCH platform for TV programmes and Mediacorp’s meLISTEN platform for FM radio broadcasts. The emergency broadcast will also be available on Mediacorp’s TV channels carried on StarHub and Singtel’s platforms. In the next generation PWS which will be progressively rolled out from 2024, the system will be able to broadcast voice messages and interface with in-building Public Address (PA) systems. This will ensure an even more extensive coverage of emergency broadcasts, whether indoors or outdoors, and enable members of the public to take the necessary actions to keep themselves safe.”
“We take a very serious view of anyone who enters into a clandestine relationship with a foreign government or engages in espionage or subversive activities at the behest of a foreign actor. We will deal very firmly with such individuals.”
“Through our security agencies’ engagement and outreach to constituencies within the Public Service and beyond, the Government will continue to raise awareness of the real risks and modus operandi of foreign actors, whether it takes the form of an online or offline influence operation aimed at shaping public opinion or policy-making, or foreign intelligence recruitment operation. Organisations and individuals who are more vulnerable to foreign interference, whether by virtue of the activities or issues they are involved in, will need to be even more aware of these risks. Foreign interference operations are increasingly sophisticated and well-disguised. The affordances of the internet have increased the potential of online hostile information campaigns, but covert attempts to exercise control or influence over organisations and individuals are just as insidious. As the threats evolve, we need to continue to build up our capabilities to detect and disrupt such activities. These include introducing new legislative levers to prevent and counter foreign interference in Singapore’s domestic politics. As mentioned in previous parliamentary responses and speeches, MHA is studying other countries’ approaches. We will move on these proposals when ready. For national security reasons, the Government does not publicise the actions taken in dealing with foreign states involved in influence operations and recruitment attempts in Singapore. Such actions must necessarily take place out of the public eye. The Singapore Government has made it very clear that we will not condone our nationals lending themselves to be subverted or used by foreign actors for activities prejudicial to our security and national interests.”
“The threat of foreign influence, subversion and espionage has always been present, since time immemorial, and not just in Singapore. Foreign state actors make use of a variety of tactics to shape the behaviour, actions and policies of a target country to suit their own agenda, and recruit sources and carry out operations that would give them intelligence about the country. They may go further as in a case in Singapore in the 1970s where a foreign power enlisted a leader of a political party to interfere in Singapore’s domestic politics. We have policies and measures in place to minimise the risks of such foreign interference. We conduct security clearance for public sector positions that have access to classified Government information. We also have legislative levers, such as the Internal Security Act, Political Donations Act, Broadcasting Act and Societies Act to guard against and respond to foreign interference. Our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have processes and protocols to maintain oversight over academic collaborations and partnerships, both local and overseas, and take measures to instil awareness among their staff on the risks of foreign interference. The ultimate line of defence against foreign interference, however, must be a populace that is united in our belief that Singapore’s domestic affairs are for us alone to decide and who is discerning enough to identify attempts at manipulation.”
“In 2020, 90% of cases that went through mediation either reached a full or partial settlement; and (c) the use of the judge-led approach, where Judges take a more proactive role in proceedings by taking the lead and controlling the pace of the proceedings. This is a less adversarial mode of proceedings, which avoids unnecessary disputes, acrimony and protracted hearings. Nevertheless, we agree that more can be done because there continue to be cases where it is too costly and protracted, unnecessarily so. We will continue to see how these issues can be dealt with. The Member has also asked about Deputyship and Estate Administration. We have worked with agencies and the Courts to simplify processes in these matters, amongst others, to help Singaporeans to navigate processes. Simplified filing tracks have been introduced in the Family Justice Courts for the more straightforward deputyship applications. The Courts are also developing an online application for straightforward probate matters. We work closely with partners to increase awareness of common legal issues, through free public talks, webinars and legal clinics. We are also partnering the Law Society Pro Bono Services (LSPBS) to develop a one-stop portal that will provide layman-friendly information on common legal issues. We will continue to review other areas and processes that can be streamlined, and work on measures to increase awareness and enhance access to justice for Singaporeans.”
“The Government-funded civil and criminal legal aid covers the bottom 25% of resident households. This focuses our resources on helping residents most in need. The Member’s real question is whether legal aid can be expanded to go beyond 25% in respect of the categories she has highlighted. We have given answers to similar questions, previously. It is possible to expand the coverage but that has to be paid for, either by cutting back on some other service or by increasing taxes. Ultimately, there have to be judgement calls on the right level of support for private legal services, to be paid for by the general taxpayer. We have settled on 25% of resident households, and the figure has been and will be regularly reviewed. The Member also specifically referred to divorce cases. We have introduced a number of measures to streamline divorce proceedings. These include: (a) the simplified case management track. Parties who agree on the divorce and ancillary matters prior to the filing of the action can obtain a divorce on this track without going through lengthy court proceedings. They can navigate this on their own without the need to incur legal fees. This saves parties both costs and time. The majority of divorce cases are filed on the simplified track. In 2020, 60% of cases were filed on the simplified track; (b) the use of alternative dispute resolution. For cases that do not proceed on the simplified track, many have been resolved through mediation. Mediation helps parties address the key issues without the need for lengthy or acrimonious hearings.”
“MHA is aware that there are e-commerce platforms that offer weapons such as karambits for sale. Karambits are currently not regulated under the Arms and Explosives Act (AEA) and a licence is not required for selling or possessing them. However, in January 2021, we introduced the Guns, Explosives and Weapons Control Act (GEWCA), which will replace the AEA when it comes into force later this year. GEWCA will expand the list of regulated weapons to include dangerous weapons such as karambits. All persons, including e-commerce platforms, who possess, handle or supply these items, will need a licence from Police. Sellers of these dangerous weapons will need to be security-screened by Police; and those who hold a licence to possess them will need to adhere to stringent safety conditions, such as storing the items safely under lock and key, and not handing the items to unauthorised persons. In addition, under the Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act (CESOWA), it is an offence to carry a karambit in public without a lawful purpose. MHA will continue to regularly review our legislation to keep Singapore safe.”
“SCDF and LTA are investigating the fatal incident involving a Personal Mobility Device (PMD) that caught fire, which occurred at 537 Woodlands Drive 16 on 3 June 2021. As investigations are ongoing, it is not appropriate for us to comment further. On the Member’s questions about non-compliant e-bikes, we strongly advise the public to only use UL-2272 certified PMDs and EN-15194 compliant Power Assisted Bicycles (PABs). Non-compliant devices are dangerous because they do not meet various safety requirements. Owners of such devices should dispose of them safely, via e-waste recyclers. The inter-agency Active Mobility Fire Safety Taskforce co-chaired by SCDF and LTA develops and implements strategies to improve the safe usage of PMDs and PABs. For example, it worked with key stakeholders such as NTUC and the food delivery companies to share device safety tips with users and to encourage them to dispose of non-compliant devices. LTA has also banned the import of non-compliant PMDs and PABs into Singapore, except for certain legitimate uses such as research or re-export.”
“Police investigations into the case have concluded. A 47-year-old man was found to have thrown a small Pride flag in the direction of staff of the SMOL restaurant at Lau Pa Sat and shouted at them for their display of the flag. Police did not recommend prosecution in consideration that no injuries were caused, the man had a medical history of mental disorder which may explain in part his actions in the case and the incident was not protracted. With the concurrence of the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), Police have issued a 24-month conditional warning to the man for an offence of intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress under section 3(2) of the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). The Government’s position is clear: harassment and abuse of any person for any reason is not condoned. The law protects LGBTQ individuals the same as everyone else. For instance, POHA contains a range of both civil and criminal measures to protect all victims against offences involving harassment and abuse. Acts involving hurt or incitement of violence are criminalised under legislation such as the Penal Code. Amendments were also made to the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MRHA) in 2019 to make it an offence to urge violence on the grounds of religion or religious belief, against any person or group.”
“The Police cooperate closely with social media platforms to tackle scams. In 2021, the Police issued about 6000 takedown requests to social media companies for accounts believed to have been used in the perpetration of scams on social media platforms. When scams are reported, the Police shares the relevant information with the relevant social media platform for their assistance to take down accounts believed to be used to commit scams. After reviewing Police’s requests, the social media platforms will typically take down accounts between one and seven days of the report being lodged, depending on the facts and circumstances of the request. Under the Broadcasting Act, the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) has powers to direct Internet Content Providers to take down prohibited material, such as those which are objectionable on the grounds of public order or prohibited by applicable Singapore laws, such as scams, as soon as possible. IMDA can also direct Internet Service Providers to block access to websites that contain such prohibited material, including scam websites. MHA and MCI are studying how to enhance our regulations to deal with online harms, including scams. We will share our findings and recommendations in due course.”
“This helps alert consumers who are not expecting any overseas calls to exercise care when answering such calls or to ignore them. This is particularly useful when we get calls from unidentified telephone numbers which start as '+65'. Chances are that this is an overseas call spoofing as a local number. Fourth, public education. The Police and the NCPC have disseminated advisories through various media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. In August 2020, an anti-scam public education campaign, "Spot the Signs. Stop the Crimes.", was launched. This campaign focused on sharing real-life scam examples to educate the public on how to spot the tell-tale signs. The Police also work with grassroots organisations to spread awareness on scams to residents via community events and Community Safety & Security Programmes. More recently, between May and June 2021, the seven major retail banks in Singapore partnered the NCPC to introduce an online scam quiz on their various customer touch-points across their Internet and mobile banking platforms. Ultimately, the best defence against scams is a discerning public. We urge members of public to stay vigilant and report possible scams promptly to the Police.”
“Second, the Police have set up specialised units to enhance their anti-scam capabilities. In June 2019, the Police set up the Anti-Scam Centre (ASC), which acts as the nerve centre for investigations into scam-related crimes. The ASC's focus is to mitigate victims' losses, through swift interdiction of the proceeds of the crime. Since its inception, the ASC has frozen more than 16,000 bank accounts and recovered more than $120 million. Third, we work closely with public and private sector stakeholders. The Police regularly engage banks, remittance agencies and convenience stores to train their frontline staff to spot possible scam victims. In 2021, so far, the Police have commended 108 members of the community for preventing 91 instances of scams involving about $5 million. The Police also work with other public sector agencies through the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams, to coordinate a whole-of-Government effort. One such initiative is ScamShield, an iOS mobile application developed by the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and GovTech. 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. ScamShield has been downloaded more than 185,000 times since its launch in November 2020. About 800,000 SMSes have been reported and more than 8,000 unique phone numbers believed to be used in scams have been blocked. The ScamShield team is presently working on developing an Android version of the application. In addition, IMDA has implemented the '+' prefix for all international calls since April 2020 to help consumers recognise calls that originate from overseas.”
“The vast majority of online and phone scams were perpetrated by scammers based outside Singapore. In the past three years, out of about 31,500 scam cases reported, involving $591 million of losses, 90% were believed to have been committed by overseas scammers. Such cases are difficult to prosecute. These scammers are typically syndicated and run sophisticated transnational operations that are not easy to detect or dismantle. The only case where overseas-based suspects were successfully extradited to Singapore for prosecution was in May 2019. Two Nigerian men were arrested and sent to Singapore for prosecution, for cheating Singapore-based victims in Internet Love Scams perpetrated from Malaysia. The two accused persons have been charged in Court and Court proceedings are on-going. We do not track prosecutions in other jurisdictions of individuals who are believed to have committed scams against Singaporeans. The Police adopt a multi-pronged approach to protect Singaporeans from scams. The Police have stepped up collaboration with foreign law enforcement agencies, to share information that may lead to the arrest of scammers based abroad. Such cooperation has helped to disrupt scammers' operations in Singapore. To facilitate the cooperation, the Police set up the Transnational Commercial Crime Task Force (TCTF) in October 2017. Most recently, TCTF participated in a multilateral global operation against syndicates behind China Officials Impersonation Scams, coordinated by Interpol. Code-named Operation "First Light", the operation lasted a year and concluded in November 2020. In all, SPF arrested 56 locally-based money mules and runners working for international scam syndicates, and seized over $2.16 million.”
“The Reserve Price for sites sold under the Government Land Sales (GLS) and Industrial GLS programmes is pegged to 85% of the estimated market value of each site, as assessed by the Chief Valuer’s Office (CVO), taking into account proposed land use and site-specific conditions, relevant land sale transactions as well as rental and sale transactions of completed buildings. The Reserve Price serves as an internal guide to assess if tender bids are reflective of the fair market value of the land being put up for sale. Bids below the Reserve Price are not automatically ruled out; whether a site is awarded depends on the prevailing market conditions, number of independent bids received and the specific circumstances of each site. Of the 133 sites launched for tender between 2016 and 2021, 17 were not awarded as the highest bids were deemed not reflective of the fair market value of the land. Of the sites that were awarded, the majority were within 15% of CVO’s estimated market value.”
“Between 2017 and 2020, there were 9,200 reports of sexual assault, including rape, sexual assault by penetration, outrage of modesty, and sexual offences involving children and vulnerable victims. Of these, 869 were allegedly committed by family members or relatives. Between 2017 and 2020, 1,858 offenders were charged for sexual assault offences, of whom 44 were charged for rape of a person below 14 years of age. We do not provide the racial composition of victims of any crime.”
“In fact, the General Recommendation emphasises that legislation against racial discrimination is "indispensable" to combating hate speech effectively and that States Parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination must effectively sanction racist hate speech as offences. In the words of the Committee, "racist hate speech potentially silences the free speech of its victims". These views of the CERD Committee are consistent with our approach. It is not clear if the Member is suggesting that whenever anyone claims to be protesting at injustice, expressing social discontent, or speaking in opposition, then such a person should be exempted from the above cited Penal Code provisions and that such a person should be allowed to engage in hate or offensive speech? We invite the Member to clarify.”
“The reasons for our approach were set out in a Ministerial Statement on Restricting Hate Speech to Maintain Racial and Religious Harmony in Singapore made by the Minister for Home Affairs, on 1 April 2019. [Please refer to “Restricting Hate Speech to Maintain Racial and Religious Harmony in Singapore”, Official Report, 1 April 2019, Volume 94, Issue No 102, Ministerial Statement section.] We apply this approach equally to all, regardless of majority or minority. This approach affords greater protection for minorities, by making it safe for them to speak about their experiences, and their views. Otherwise, in a situation where racially offensive speech by all is tolerated or allowed, and both majority and minority communities engage in such speech, it can be expected that more of such speech will be directed towards minority communities. And it will be the minority communities who will then bear the brunt of such offensive speech. That will ironically reduce the safe space for discussion of such issues, and increase minority community concerns for safety and security. These are not hypotheticals. This is what has happened in several other countries. We need to be careful about changing what has worked reasonably well in Singapore (though it is not perfect), and replacing it with policies which have not worked so well, in other places. Our laws are the subject of scrutiny in Parliament, and enforcement of the laws is done through the Courts. I would add that the CERD Committee has similarly taken the view that the protection of persons from racist hate speech is not incompatible and is not "simply one of opposition" with the freedom of expression.”
“Our existing laws against racist hate and offensive speech are consistent with paragraph 20 of the General Recommendation No. 35 of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Under the Penal Code, it is an offence to commit acts that deliberately wound the racial feelings of any person, promote enmity between different racial groups, or conduct acts that are prejudicial to the maintenance of racial harmony. These laws apply equally to everyone, regardless of race. A couple of relatively recent examples when these laws were used are as follows. In January 2019, we charged a Chinese man under the Penal Code for deliberate intent to wound the racial feelings of the Malay population. The man had scrawled racist messages about Malays on walls in void decks and sheltered walkways in Geylang and Aljunied. In June 2020, we charged a Malay man who used a Twitter account with a Chinese name “@sharonliew86” to make racist remarks against people of different races. Amongst others, he (prima facie pretending to be a Chinese lady) made racist comments against Indians. As Members know, there are other recent examples, and also situations where warnings have been given, instead of prosecutions in Court. The law does not prohibit speech on race which does not cross into hate speech, or racially derogatory speech. Neither does it prohibit commentary and sharing of opinions or experiences on race. Members will know that on racial issues, a significant amount of discussion, commentary, sharing of experiences, and more, takes place, regularly. But we take a strict approach to offensive speech and hate speech.”
“The Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA) is aware of companies that claim to be able to help applicants improve their success in obtaining long-term immigration facilities in Singapore, including Permanent Residence. ICA does not support or endorse the services offered by these companies. All PR applications are evaluated objectively and rigorously by ICA, based on the applicant’s ability to contribute to Singapore and commitment to sinking roots here. Applicants who choose to engage the services of these companies are advised to exercise caution. Companies that publish false or misleading advertisements about their services will be referred to the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (ASAS), who will investigate and take action on advertisements that breach the Singapore Code of Advertising Practice (SCAP).”
“Lorries ferrying workers in the rear deck, as well as those with a maximum laden weight greater than 3,500 kilogrammes, have a vehicle speed limit of 60 km/h; otherwise the speed limit is 70 km/h. When Traffic Police (TP) officers spot any vehicle, including lorries, travelling in excess of either its vehicle or the road speed limit, they will direct the driver to stop at the side of the road, explain that they have committed a speeding offence and take enforcement action against the driver. From 2016 to 2020, TP detected a total of 19,758 speeding violations involving Singapore-registered lorries. This includes lorries which were caught travelling at a speed higher than either its vehicle or the road speed limit. Of these speeding violations involving Singapore-registered lorries, 82% were detected by TP patrol officers and 18% were caught by fixed speed enforcement cameras. TP is not able to take enforcement action against drivers for speeding solely based on the submission of dashcam footages from other vehicles, as it is not possible to verify the actual speed of the alleged speeding vehicle through such footage. It is necessary to determine the actual speed of the vehicle in order to mete out composition fines and demerit points.”
“After the FPCS programme, if required, they would either be referred to IMH’s regional care teams for specialist follow-up in the community, or to regional general hospitals or general practitioners of their choice. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, FPCS and IMH’s regional care teams have shifted to using tele-consultation to deliver their services, such as video conferencing, text-messaging, and telephone calls. SPS and IMH will continue to work closely to support inmates and ex-offenders with mental health needs. IMH will also regularly review the operations of FPCS and the regional care teams so that services can continue to be provided effectively and safely during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
“All inmates admitted to prison are assessed on the state of their mental health. Inmates diagnosed with mental health needs but whose condition is more stable are housed with the general inmate population and seen regularly by prison psychiatrists. They undergo a prison regime similar to that for other inmates and benefit from mainstream rehabilitation programmes and work and education opportunities. Inmates who are diagnosed to require specialised treatment are housed in the Psychiatric Housing Unit (PHU) in Changi Prison Complex. The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) engages the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) to conduct psychiatric treatment programmes, including therapy and counselling, for the inmates at the PHU. A multi-disciplinary team comprising prison officers, psychiatrists, psychologists and occupational therapists work together to manage the inmates in the PHU. About 12% of inmates in our prisons as at 31 December 2020 received care for mental health needs, with the most common being insomnia, adjustment disorder and depressive episodes. Most of these inmates’ conditions are stable and do not require specialised treatment at the PHU. Depending on the inmate’s mental condition and needs, SPS may make referrals to IMH or polyclinics for follow-up care after the inmate’s release from prison. Inmates whose conditions are severe enough to warrant immediate follow-up are sent directly to IMH for further assessment on the day of their release. The Forensic Psychiatry Community Service (FPCS) was set up by IMH in 2012 to provide continued treatment and services to ex-offenders with mental health needs.”
“Also, cases where the perpetrators are outside Singapore, which is most of the cases, will take much longer and it may not even be possible to identify the perpetrators. As such, SPF does not track the amount of time it takes to complete investigations. It is not meaningful since each case would differ in its facts and circumstances.”
“During the same period, the ASC also worked with telecommunication companies and online marketplaces to terminate more than 2,200 scam-tainted phone lines and remove more than 3,300 suspicious online monikers and advertisements. Third, better training of officers. Officers performing cybercrime investigations and digital forensics are given specialised training. For example, officers attend courses such as those offered by renowned cybersecurity training providers like the SANS Institute and Black Hat, to enhance their understanding and knowledge of various technical cyber areas, spanning malware analysis, intrusion detection and network penetration testing. Fourth, harnessing technology to help solve crimes, such as digital forensics. One example is the Digital Forensic Kiosk, which is a self-service platform for Investigation Officers (IOs) to easily retrieve and analyse information from digital devices such as mobile phones and portable storage media. Fifth, developing strategic partnerships with local stakeholders and international partners. In 2017, the Police set up a dedicated public-private industry platform – the Alliance of Public Private Cybercrime Stakeholders, comprising technology giants such as Facebook and Google, telcos, banks, web hosting companies, e-commerce platforms and fintech companies. The aim is to increase cybercrime awareness in the private sector through structured engagement and to establish key partnerships to achieve operational effectiveness in combating cybercrime. Police also work closely with our overseas counterparts and INTERPOL to investigate cases with a foreign nexus. How quickly a case is solved is dependent on many different factors and differs across the different types of online scams.”
“The Police are pursuing a multi-pronged approach to building their digital investigation capabilities to combat cyber and cyber-enabled crimes, including online scams. First, better organisation of resources. Since June 2015, the Singapore Police Force's (SPF) cyber-related investigations, forensics and crime prevention capabilities have been integrated under a single Cyber Crime Command (CCC) within the Criminal Investigation Department. The establishment of the CCC has allowed the SPF to achieve better coordination and coherence in their response to cybercrime. To better combat scams, the Police will be forming an Anti-Scam Command later in 2021. The Anti-Scam Command will serve as the overall command centre for all scam-related investigations within the SPF, enhancing sensemaking and allowing for quicker and more targeted interventions and enforcement actions. Second, formation of specialised units. The Police have set up three specialised scam suppression units that will report to the Anti-Scam Command. First, the Police set up the Transnational Commercial Crime Task Force (TCTF) in October 2017 to tackle transnational scams. Second, an E-Commerce Fraud Enforcement and Coordination Team (E-FECT) was set up in November 2018. Since its formation, the E-FECT has arrested 110 e-commerce scammers and solved about 2,250 e-commerce scams. Third, in June 2019, the Police set up the Anti-Scam Centre (ASC). The ASC’s focus is to mitigate victims’ losses, through the swift interdiction of the proceeds of the crime. Since ASC’s inception in June 2019, it has frozen about 16,000 bank accounts and recovered more than $120 million.”
“Police do not track Police reports involving neighbour disputes, as "neighbour disputes" by itself is not a criminal offence. That said, if there are criminal offences involved, such as Voluntarily Causing Hurt (VCH), or harassment under the Protection From Harassment Act, then these will be tracked under the relevant offences. As for Police reports over the past three years involving (i) road rage incidents; (ii) verbal assault; (iii) physical assault; and (iv) nudity or indecent exposure in public, the numbers are as follows:”
“This gives confidence to all communities that they can trust the Government to safeguard their interests and to hold the ring on our race relations. However, not all allegations and accusations that surface in the public sphere cross the lines for prosecution or legal action. If we prosecute every allegation, no matter how trivial, this could stoke people into making police reports for any perceived racial slight, real or misunderstood, or deliberately exaggerated. Over time, this could instead escalate tensions between races and undermine our hard-earned social harmony. The law cannot be the solution in every situation. It is important that we come together as a society to guard against social fractures and commit to growing our common space. While we should speak out against clear acts of racism, we should be judicious in how we raise issues, in ways that bridge differences and not deepen fault lines. If we do this, and continue to take action against discrimination wherever we see it, building on our already strong foundations, I am confident that we will become an even more cohesive and harmonious society.”
“Sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code cover acts that deliberately wound the racial and religious feelings of any person, that promote enmity between different racial and religious groups, or that are prejudicial to the maintenance of racial and religious harmony. The number of cases reported to the Police between 2016 and 2020 which were classified under sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code are appended at Table 1. The 2020 numbers show an increase. Timing wise, it is to be noted that a number of reports were filed during the period of the COVID-19 outbreak and also around the period of the General Elections. The Members of Parliament asked about Singapore’s readiness to navigate polarisation, which is a growing concern all over the world. In a 2019 survey conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) and OnePeople.sg (OPSG), about 97% of respondents said the level of racial and religious harmony in Singapore was either moderate, high, or very high. According to the 2019 Gallup World Poll, 95% of respondents in Singapore reported that Singapore was “a good place to live” for racial and ethnic minorities. The global average was about 70%. We were ranked first worldwide among 124 countries polled for this question. That said, as the Government has repeatedly said, we must accept that there remain fault lines along race and religion. And racism is also present. In the same 2019 IPS-OPSG survey, about a third of minorities perceived discrimination at work at least sometimes. The Government will have to continue to be an objective and neutral arbiter and take action against anyone, regardless of race, who commits acts that sow enmity and threaten our racial harmony.”
“When Police receive a report on a missing person, investigations will be conducted to locate the person’s whereabouts. Police will accord priority to missing persons who may be at higher risk. These include young children, elderly persons, persons with intellectual disabilities such as dementia and those missing under suspicious circumstances.”
“MHA will continue to monitor developments both globally and domestically concerning fentanyl and will regularly review our measures to ensure that they are adequate in deterring illicit activities involving fentanyl.”
“Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid that is used as a painkiller, but it is also liable to abuse. Fentanyl is estimated to be 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine. Globally, fentanyl abuse has contributed to an increasing number of opioid overdose deaths, particularly in North America. These overdose deaths are partly attributed to the activities of organised crime groups, which misrepresent fentanyl as heroin or adulterate other illicit drugs with fentanyl. These substances are then trafficked to unsuspecting users. Regionally, Asia has been frequently reported as a source of fentanyl found in other parts of the world. There are also indications that synthetic opioids such as fentanyl and its analogues are becoming increasingly available in the ASEAN region. Fentanyl is currently listed as a Class A controlled drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA). The trafficking, importation, manufacture and possession of fentanyl attract harsh penalties under the MDA. There are so far no indications that fentanyl abuse has taken root locally. Nonetheless, we remain vigilant against its trafficking. On 1 March 2021, Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers from Changi Airfreight Centre, Air Cargo Command detected a parcel containing 200 vials, which are believed to contain fentanyl, along with other illicit medicines. This is the first known attempt to traffic fentanyl in its pure form into Singapore. The detection prompted a follow-up operation by the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) which led to the arrest of three individuals, including the intended recipient of the parcel.”
“The Member has asked about plans to regulate "Alternative Legal Services Providers" (ALSPs), which is a term generally used to refer to a wide range of non-traditional legal services providers, from small legal technology startups to large professional services firms that offer legal services as part of a broader suite of services. Under our current regulatory regime, entities wishing to offer legal services involving the practice of Singapore law or foreign law in Singapore must be licensed as a law practice and comply with the licensing and regulatory requirements under the Legal Profession Act. This means that the entity must be wholly or majority-owned and controlled by lawyers. Therefore, an ALSP that wishes to offer legal services as part of a broader suite of services would need to adhere to this ownership and control structure. ALSPs may also offer legal support services, such as manpower outsourcing, paralegal or other support functions, which are not subject to regulation under the Legal Profession Act, but are subject to the other usual requirements applicable to businesses operating in Singapore. With increasing innovation and technological advancements, the services provided by ALSPs have been evolving in response to changing market needs. Law practices have also been innovating and adopting new technology tools and business models. Some have given feedback that the current regulatory requirements may not be flexible enough to accommodate their proposed innovations and service offerings. MinLaw has been studying these developments closely and is assessing how the current regulatory framework may be enhanced to support greater technology adoption and innovation in the legal sector, while ensuring continued consumer trust and confidence in the system.”
“Notwithstanding that the secret society situation remains under control, the participation of youths in secret societies remains a concern. That is why the we invest significant resources to educate and engage youths to deter them from joining secret societies. For example, Police conduct regular anti-secret society talks at Secondary schools. They also work with partners such as MSF, MOE and Volunteer Welfare Organisations to target at-risk youths. One such initiative is the Streetwise Programme, a six-month long diversionary programme for wayward youths to seek assistance and counselling from social workers and Police officers. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 situation, the Police are looking to enhance their online outreach. In 2020, the Police and the National Crime Prevention Council organised the e-Delta League Tournament, which saw more than 100 youths participate in an online football tournament. As part of the tournament, the Police conducted a virtual Youth Workshop to share crime prevention advice, as well as to deliver anti-secret society talks to the participants.”
“In May and June 2021, there were two cases involving congregation of secret society members at funeral processions. In the first case, Police arrested three men who were secret society members. The three men had allegedly chanted gang slogans and displayed gang hand signs to show off their secret society affiliation during a funeral procession along Havelock Road on 26 May 2021. In the second case, Police arrested 14 men for their suspected involvement in secret society activities, and another man for allegedly behaving in a disorderly manner while at a funeral wake in the Boon Lay Drive neighbourhood on 13 June 2021. Preliminary investigations found that two suspected secret society members were wearing shirts emblazoned with their secret society’s insignia. Today, secret societies are largely made up of loosely organised street gangs, comprising mainly of younger members who flit between different secret societies. The secret society situation in Singapore is under control as a result of active enforcement against secret society activities, which sends a strong and clear signal of our zero-tolerance approach. The number of rioting and serious hurt cases with secret society connotations remained stable at an average of 112 cases per year from 2016 to 2020. Anyone found to be engaging in secret society activities may be prosecuted in court for offences under the Penal Code or Societies Act. Depending on the facts and circumstances of the case, they may be liable for a fine, imprisonment, or both. For egregious cases, they may be detained under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act, in order to maintain the public safety, peace and good order of Singapore.”
“This will be in addition to existing mediation avenues such as the Law Society Mediation Scheme and mediation at the Singapore Mediation Centre which parties can already tap on. We will announce the details when ready.”
“The interventions in the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act were needed to help businesses and individuals deal with the sudden and extraordinary impact of the pandemic last year. The Act introduced exceptional relief measures for contracts affected by COVID-19. The main measure involved a temporary moratorium against certain types of legal action. Additional relief measures were provided for event and tourism-related contracts. The Act prevented the automatic forfeiture of deposits and the imposition of cancellation fees, notwithstanding a party’s contractual rights. As we said then, we do not intervene lightly, knowing the impact of such interventions on the sanctity of contracts. We are monitoring the situation closely. We have reviewed the feedback from event vendors and customers affected by the Phase Two (Heightened Alert) measures. On the whole, the impact is less severe than that of the circuit breaker period last year. In many of these cases, the parties have looked beyond the strict contractual position and worked out the matter by themselves, either by postponing the event or if the event is cancelled for good, for the unutilised deposit to be used for other goods or services. In some of these cases, the parties took the cue from the approach adopted by the Assessors appointed under the Act. In the minority of cases where parties have not been able to work out a mutually agreeable way forward, they will benefit from some assistance from a mediator. The Min Law is therefore working on a mediation framework that will make mediation available to parties that have been unable to reach an agreement with their vendors.”