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 61 of 92.
“But we have this CLTPA as a backup. The third situation that I would share with Members is the unlicensed moneylenders (UML). CLTPA has also been used against persons involved in loansharking activities. We have been clear about that in this House. The Moneylenders Act was amended in 2010. It gave the Police broader powers to tackle the UML situation. We attack the UML situation from different aspects and that has resulted in, again, a drop in the number of DOs issued for UML. If Members look at 2004 to 2010, on average, during that seven-year period, we issued about 20 DOs per year for UML. If Members look at 2011 to 2017, that has dropped to about two per year. Again, we have used the Court processes to prosecute UML offenders. But again, there will be cases where the runners will refuse to testify against the kingpins. The towkays, those higher up in the organisation, they operate behind the scenes, they do not have direct dealings with the debtors. In 2015, for example, the Police arrested the mastermind of a loansharking syndicate. Many of the syndicate members were also arrested. The main operators were based in Malaysia and Thailand. They do so to avoid arrest and detection. The lowest tier – the harassers, runners and bank account holders – they operate out of Singapore out of necessity. That syndicate alone was responsible for more than 600 cases of harassment since 2006. Members of Parliament (MPs) will know this; residents come to you. These people who harass would set fire to the residents' doors, they lock them up – serious safety issues; they splash paint, they break flowerpots, they scribble graffiti and, of course, they deliver "hell notes" as well.”
“The first one is on drugs. It is a very simple picture. But we want to retain the CLTPA as a tool of final resort, if necessary. It is useful to give Members a picture of the total number of detainees, not just for drugs but the total number. In 2010, seven years ago, the number was 317. Members will see from the chart, it is now just about 103. Again, the approach is, where we can, we move to the criminal justice system and use CLTPA as sparingly as possible. I have to tell the House, while the drug situation is under control, the challenges are significant and they remain. I have spoken at length over the last few years about drugs, the issues in the region, in the world and in Singapore. If you look at the World Drug Report, for this region, if you look at the sources of methamphetamine in East Asia and Southeast Asia in 2015, East Asia and Southeast Asia were amongst the highest globally among regions and we have achieved an unwelcome record in that we have overtaken North America for the first time as a source. Southeast Asia, together with East Asia, is also the second-highest source of opium. The seizures of heroin and morphine related to the production of opium in Southeast Asia grew by nearly 90% in the five years between 2010 and 2015. We turn to ketamine. The seizure of ketamine, if you look at what was seized in the world and what proportion was seized in this region, 97% of all ketamine seized in the world was from this region in 2015. So, that is the nature of the problem that we face. I have shared with Members before that 50 million people passed through our airports. Another 150 million passed through our checkpoints. We have to be very, very serious about the drug situation. So, the Misuse of Drugs Act is very effective.”
“We also used the CLTPA again in the context of drugs. The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) uses it, and many drug trafficking syndicates have been crippled using CLTPA. Often, because they fear attacks on them and their families, the couriers will not want or refuse to testify in Court. And if we let that situation develop, it will affect our ability to deal with the leaders of the drug syndicates. So, the use of CLTPA has helped us keep the drug situation under control. But, and I have given instructions on this, the approach has to be that, wherever we can, we must use the criminal justice system and not CLTPA. And that is the approach that is taken. In fact, if Members look at the Detention Orders (DOs) that are issued under CLTPA against drug traffickers, in 1998, there were 192 such DOs. Last year, none. Zero. Sir, with your permission, can I put up the slides? I will just show two slides to Members.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLTPA) was last extended in 2014. As Members know, it will lapse after five years unless extended. Let me, first, give some examples of how CLTPA has been used, before I go into the specific amendments. In 2017, CLTPA was used to cripple two gangs operating in Singapore. The first comprised mainly young Indian gang members, most of them in their teens to the 20s, led by a headman in his 30s. They carried out armed attacks against rival gang members. They also attacked a fellow gang member as punishment for leaving the gang. A member wanted to leave. They ambushed him. At least 10 of them assaulted him. Then, the headman called up all the others and said, "If any of you dare to leave the gang, the same thing will happen to you. You will be attacked as well." The Police got on to the case. The members did not want to testify against the headman and CLTPA was used. They were prepared to give evidence; they were prepared to testify but they did not want to do so in public. They feared as to what would happen to them. The second gang comprised Chinese males in their mid-20s to 30s. Many of them had antecedents for very serious criminal offences. They attacked others, used weapons to settle their disputes. They attacked innocent club patrons, including women. The attacks were quite brazen. They also openly threatened club staff. Again, in both cases, the victims were unwilling or unable to identify the attackers. The gang members were prepared to give evidence but not in Court, for fear of reprisals. And really, without CLTPA, it would have been difficult to deal with the gangsters. So, that is, if you look at gangsters.”
“The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is working with other Government agencies to enhance security measures in public spaces against hostile vehicle attacks. This includes existing spaces and selected new ones in the pipeline where measures can be designed upfront. We adopt a risk-based approach in identifying locations to fortify and the type and extent of measures to put in place. We have to strike a balance between enhancing security, the cost of the measures, and the impact on the public's daily activities. We have started to deploy anti-hostile vehicle measures in the Orchard Road area. Crash-rated barriers and bollards were installed in some locations along Orchard Road in late 2017. More will be progressively installed. There are plans to install similar barriers in other areas later this year. We have been consulting the local business associations, such as to assess the viability of the proposed measures. Commercial building owners also have a part to play to protect their premises. Under the Infrastructure Protection Act, owners of large or iconic buildings, and critical infrastructures that deliver essential services, will be required to undergo a security-by-design process. They will have to incorporate measures to address security threats in the design of the building before it is constructed or, for an existing building, when it undergoes major renovation. In addition, as part of the Safety and Security Watch Group and SGSecure engagements by the Police, building owners are given practical advice on how to mitigate vehicle threats. Building owners can also refer to the Guidelines for Enhancing Building Security in Singapore published by MHA for advice on best practices and solutions to protect their premises”
“The current entry format does not allow collation of this data accurately. Further, even if the information were available, there are a number of considerations, on whether such information should be released. The release of data on the number of Singaporeans, in specific locations, in the region, as well as around the world, may, for example, not be in the interests of the Singaporeans in some of these locations. In the context of Johor Bahru, our assessment is that the information should not be released.”
“From 2015 to 2017, an average of about 240 short-term visitors to Singapore were involved in road traffic accidents annually. This accounts for about 1.7% of all drivers involved in accidents in the same period. The numbers are low. The Traffic Police (TP) remind foreign motorists crossing land checkpoints to drive safely in Singapore, through distributing brochures and erecting billboards. To deter the commission of traffic offences, TP conducts regular operations at the checkpoints targeting foreign motorists with outstanding summonses. Any policy intervention might be excessive, at this point, with knock-on effects on other areas.”
“We do not have data on the number of overseas road traffic accidents involving Singaporeans. The Traffic Police (TP) leverages social media to publish advisories and videos on safe driving overseas. The Automobile Association of Singapore (AAS), a close working partner and the authority for granting the International Driving Permit in Singapore, provides pointers on safe driving overseas through its website and booklets available at its premises. TP will continue to work with the Singapore Road Safety Council and AAS to raise awareness among Singaporeans of the precautions they should take when driving overseas. These include familiarising themselves with local traffic rules, road conditions and driving culture.”
“We also actively engage private sector companies and public sector agencies to source for suitable job opportunities for our officers. In 2017, CTO publicised more than 150 job openings in sectors, such as engineering, logistics and private security, to retiring Home Team officers. Officers are also encouraged to use the internal job portal developed by the Public Service Division to explore job opportunities in the Public Service. The Ministry is committed to assisting retiring officers, as the steps set out above, show.”
“The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) set up the Career Transition Office (CTO) for Home Team officers in April 2016. CTO will seek to help retiring officers. Some officers will be suitable to be re-employed within the Home Team, depending on the nature of their work, and manpower needs. CTO will also help the other retiring officers. This will include assisting them in finding new employment. MHA has now set up a structured framework for this. The retiring officers will be engaged early to consider their options. A number of initiatives have been launched. (a) We give officers days off to attend courses to learn new skills to enhance their employability after retirement, and provide subsidies to defray the cost of such courses; (b) we organise workshops to help officers identify the occupations that would suit them, and to guide them on reskilling or upskilling to improve their employment prospects; (c) we have begun a secondment and job attachment programme to help officers transit into their post-retirement career. Officers may apply for secondment to another public agency or to take up a job attachment in a private sector company prior to their retirement, to try out potential job opportunities. This will help both the officer and the prospective employer assess the fit before formal employment. During this period of secondment or job attachment, which can extend up to three months, officers would continue to receive their salaries from their Home Team departments; and (d) we also organise networking sessions with prospective employers for our retiring officers. Since this initiative started in the middle of last year, we have organised three such sessions, attended by about 50 officers at each session.”
“Since the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act came into force on 1 March 2015, the Ministry of Manpower and the Singapore Police Force have received information on and investigated 166 cases of alleged trafficking. Eight were found to be substantiated. Of the eight cases, five were sex trafficking cases and three were labour trafficking cases. Four of the sex trafficking cases have been concluded with four accused persons convicted. The accused persons were sentenced to imprisonment ranging from 38 to 80 months and fined up to S$30,000. The remaining four cases are still undergoing Court proceedings.”
“I will send the copy of the judgment to Mr Gan offline because it is 150 pages or more. The judges explained their thinking. In summary, they feel that when the law was drafted, when section 409 was drafted, it was some time ago. It could not have been the intention of the drafters to deal with the directors, because Company Law had not been developed to the extent that it has now. And therefore, it could not have been within the minds and the drafting intention. Therefore, you would need new provisions which deal with it. There are different approaches to interpretation. The other approach is to say, "Well, you take those words and you apply it as circumstances evolve". They also explained why they did not want to do that here. That is in two lines; I am probably not doing full justice to it but that is the sense.”
“For the cases involving directors, or similar sorts of senior officers, where the cases are already before the Courts, obviously, you will now have to apply the law as determined by the Court of Appeal. For the cases which are being investigated, where AGC is considering the charges, again obviously, the AGC would have to take into account the decision by the Court of Appeal. If there are any charges to be brought in respect of actions that have taken place before any legislative changes, I am sure AGC will take into account what the appropriate charge is. It does not automatically mean that any changes will not apply. I do not want to go into those things but I think we identified a lacuna. I mean, it has been identified for us. And we need to deal with it.”
“I think one has to be careful about this. A beneficiary who receives proceeds without the appropriate knowledge does not automatically become a criminal. Supposing the person took the money and donated it to another charity, does the recipient commit a criminal offence? I think we need to be careful. The law, as drafted, is wide enough to deal with people who act with criminal intention, conduct, misuse property. There is a lacuna in that section 409 does not apply to directors, senior officers in the way the Court of Appeal has construed it, and we should fix that lacuna. But knowing receipt of property to the extent that it needs to be criminalised, you will find it in the law.”
“I said earlier that since 1976, the position has been settled, clear law from the time the Tay Choo Wah case was decided. I mentioned that there are at least 16 reported decisions in the books confirming that decision over the years. There must be many others which are unreported. So, the position has been consistently applied by the Courts over 40 years. No doubts or uncertainty were expressed by our Courts; prosecution, defence, everyone proceeded on that basis. There was no suggestion that the law was in need of any review. There was, therefore, no reason for Parliament to review the position or amend the law. Parliament does not legislate in vain.”
“The fake headline that I referred to earlier in the Facebook page is part of a mob mentality, to hound the lawyers, to intimidate them into not acting in cases which the mob disapproves of. It is quite shameful. Supposing no action is taken when public Facebook pages do this, then what is there to prevent the media itself from publishing such articles in the future? By action here, I do not necessarily just mean contempt action. If we accept such faking as normal, then you can see that the line between that and the current position of the UK almost disappears. You will then get in the mainstream media the headlines I earlier spoke about – about judges, abusing them and other similar sorts of things. We should not get there and it will be a sad day for Singapore if we do get there. Thank you, Sir.”
“In 1995, Prime Minister Goh, Senior Minister Lee and Deputy Prime Minister Lee, as they were then, sued the International Herald Tribune (IHT) for libel. The IHT came to me. The conversation as to whether I would act for them took about two minutes. I told them they must know I was a PAP MP, and were they comfortable that they would get the best possible advice from me, given my position? They knew that I was a PAP MP. They said it was okay with them, if it was okay with me. It was okay with me. I did not see any need to clear with the Party or anyone connected to the Party or Government. By taking on the case, I was simply doing my professional duty. I did not need to take on the brief. I was very busy with other work but I thought the IHT had a right to counsel of its choice. They were faced, obviously, with particularly formidable plaintiffs who could get counsel of their choice, and so, I should help the IHT. The import of my acting for the IHT, when it went to Court, did not escape Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew. In Court, after his evidence was over and before he stepped out of the witness box, he said he had to point out the situation. He said that I was close to the three of them, meaning the Prime Minister, Senior Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. I was a PAP MP. The decision by the IHT, despite the situation, to instruct me was, and I quote "the highest tribute to the integrity of the counsel" and "possibly reflected also on the integrity of the Government". Over the years, I also acted for various others whose conduct will not be approved of by the general public and some of whom were impecunious and could not pay fees. I acted for them whenever I could, based on certain principles which I do not need to go into here.”
“I have asked the Police to take a serious view of those who scandalise the Court. Not only for this case. If there are other comments which cross the threshold and are in contempt of the Court, our approach is that action will be taken. That has been so before the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, or AOJP, and it remains so after the AOJP. In coming to a decision whether to prosecute for scandalising the Courts, the factors will include assessing who said it, how seriously is the statement likely to be taken, how wide was the publication, other relevant factors. That has always been the case, even before the AOJP. AGC will assess the various statements that have come to their notice in this context. And quite apart from whether the fake headlines scandalised the Court, there is another point. Defendants are entitled to get a lawyer of their choice. Rule of law, a civilised system of having trials in Court depends, amongst other things, on lawyers being able to act for defendants, whatever offences the defendants are accused of. As I have said before several times, even a child rapist is entitled to his day in Court and to be defended. It does not mean that we or the lawyer defending the person approves of child rape. But the defendant has a right to choose a lawyer to defend him, and we must not take that away from him. Lawyers should not be made to feel that they will be hounded online if they take up cases. Let me share a personal example with Members from when I was in practice. I am probably in the unique position in Singapore of someone who has both acted for the three Prime Ministers of Singapore and also of having acted against all three of them.”
“You get newspaper headlines screaming banner headlines labelling judges as "enemies of the people", "you fools" because the courts have the temerity to decide in a way that the media did not like. If we are not careful, we will easily go down that route. Let me give Members a current example. There is a public Facebook group with a Chinese name which I understand can be translated as a "policy discussion forum". I was informed that a copy of a news article was posted on 2 February, last week, on this Facebook. The article had appeared in the Chinese news daily Wanbao on the same day. It was a report on the City Harvest Church matter. The title of the news article, the banner headlines had, however, been faked in the Facebook post. The original title translated was, and I quote, "Outdated laws saved the accused from harsher penalties". Someone appeared to have faked the title into, and I quote, "PAP lawyer saved the accused from harsher penalties", making it look as if a mass circulation newspaper had done so, probably to give more credence to the headline. AGC takes the view that the suggestion from the fake title is that the PAP MP was responsible for an unfair, unjust outcome and the Courts have let off the defendants lightly because of him. AGC's view is that this is a case of contempt by scandalising the Courts. I do not want to go into the meanings of the fake title because the matter is with AGC and it will be dealt with in accordance with the law. Whatever the meaning of the statement and regardless of whether or not it is in contempt, one can see that this sort of attack based on deliberate faking is quite unacceptable. I cannot see how any reasonable person will justify such faking as a legitimate expression of free speech.”
“I thank the Member for the question. I think Mr Edwin Tong would not be entirely happy to be called "a so-called lawyer and MP". I think he is a qualified lawyer and a Senior Counsel. I said earlier that it is entirely legitimate to express one's unhappiness about Court decisions. But some statements have, indeed, gone too far, abusing the judges personally, ascribing improper ulterior motives to their decision. And it is, really, a clear case of abusing the anonymity of the Net or anonymity to the extent that it exists. Just because you do not agree with the judges does not mean that you have the right to abuse them and challenge their integrity. People who abuse judges, challenge their integrity will be prosecuted if a case for contempt can be made out. I will set out later some factors which will be relevant in this context. The Courts should not be pressured by public opinion. They should be free to decide in accordance with what they believe the law to be. Criminal cases must be tried in a Court of law, not in the court of public opinion. A few years ago, I already expected that there would be more and more of such scurrilous attacks on the judiciary. If left alone, they will become the norm. That is why we legislated into law the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act. One of those opposing it, I think, it was Mr Leon Perera who asked me in this House why the need for this law. This is one relatively small illustration. If we do nothing, it will get much worse and become unsolvable. We do not want to end up like the United Kingdom (UK) where the press freely attacks the judiciary.”
“The Court of Appeal also pointed out that the obligation of the Court is to set out the legal position correctly on what the law says, and to leave it to Parliament to amend the law as it deems fit. It is now up to Parliament to amend the law, and that we should do soon. We will ensure that legislation provides for higher penalties for directors and other senior officers who commit CBT. We hope to make the amendment, together with the other wide-ranging amendments to the Penal Code, which I have spoken about. To the House, let me make one final comment – we are aware that many have expressed their dissatisfaction with the outcome. Expressing one’s unhappiness with Court decisions is fine, but it should not sink to the level of abuse, insults and contempt. We have seen comments online that the judges let off those who are rich; that some judges were lenient because they were Christians, and so on. That is not right. Judges should not be personally attacked and their integrity impugned, just because people do not agree with their decision. There may be unhappiness. People are entitled to disagree with their decision. But let us not attack the judges. The Government believes that the sentences are too low but the sentences reflect the law, as it stands, after the High Court's decision last year and confirmed by the Court of Appeal. The Courts decide these matters. All of us have to respect the decision, regardless of whether we agree or disagree with it. Thank you, Mr Speaker.”
“After that decision, the position was clear, settled law. The law was applied in that way for over 40 years, by Courts in other cases. There are at least 16 decisions – reported – applying this principle and there must be many other unreported decisions. In April last year, however, the position changed. The High Court ruled that directors cannot be liable under section 409. That was contrary to the decision in 1976 and the way the Courts have applied section 409 over these 40 years. The Government asked AGC what should be done, what further steps ought to be taken after the High Court's ruling. AGC advised that a clarification should be sought from the Court of Appeal by way of a Reference. We now have two conflicting positions from the High Court. One, Tay Choo Wah and the line of cases that applied Tay Choo Wah. And second, the City Harvest Church case where the Court disagreed with Tay Choo Wah. The Court of Appeal gave its decision, as I said earlier, last Thursday in response to the two questions of law submitted by AGC. The Court of Appeal's decision means that there is now a lacuna in the law. As it stands today, ordinary employees can be charged under section 408 of the Penal Code. That provides for more serious penalties for CBT compared with section 408. It is punishable by mandatory imprisonment for up to 15 years, and an optional fine. Directors, however, can only be charged under section 406 – which provides for a lesser punishment up to seven years’ jail or fine or both. The Court of Appeal itself acknowledged this gap in the law and it said that there was no "good policy reason" to ignore the “heightened culpability” of directors and key officers of charities, societies and companies who commit CBT.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to make this Statement. The Attorney-General's Chamber (AGC) made a Reference to the Court of Appeal on the City Harvest Church Case. Two questions were asked. On 1 February 2018, last week, the Court of Appeal released its decision on the Reference. I want to set out the Government's position, now that the Court of Appeal has said what the law is. The key question is related to the liability of company directors, governing board members, key officers of charities and officers of societies. When they commit criminal breach of trust (CBT) or property which belongs to the organisation, what happens? The Court of Appeal ruled that such officers are liable to be punished under section 406 of the Penal Code that provides for a maximum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment, or fine, or both. The Court of Appeal also ruled that these officers do not come within the term, the meaning of a professional “agent”, and therefore, they were not liable for the more serious penalties under section 409 of the Penal Code for CBT. Section 409 provides for a maximum of life imprisonment. The Government's policy is clear. If you are a senior officer, director in the organisation, you are in a position of greater trust. You have considerable authority to make decisions in relation to the organisation’s assets. If you abuse that trust, you should be more culpable and should be liable for more severe punishments, compared with an ordinary employee. That is really common sense and there can be no question about that. For the last 40 years, the law, as applied by the Courts, reflected this principle. In 1976, the High Court ruled so in the case of Tay Choo Wah. It said that directors are liable for the aggravated offence provided under section 409.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is an important Motion on an important issue. I think it is good to have on record the position of Members. I ask for a Division, Sir.”
“And Ms Thanaletchimi and Asst Prof Mohan also suggested that online, fact-checking platforms be created for the public and Nominated Member Kok Heng Leun also made a similar point. I think these are points that the Select Committee can consider. That is why the terms of reference are drafted widely enough. Ms Thanaletchimi said that the Select Committee perhaps can have people from specialised sectors, including media, if I had not misheard her. The Select Committee will comprise Members of Parliament but they can hear from experts from different areas, sectors, including the media and other sectors. Mr Zaqy Mohamad and Ms Thanaletchimi referred to measures taken by Germany, the EU, UK, France and New Zealand. In that context, Asst Prof Mohan also talked what the Select Committee can consider. I think these are all very important points, important questions. But those are questions for the Select Committee to consider more fully when it starts work. That is why we have crafted the terms of reference broadly, so that different perspectives can come in. Ms Sun Xueling asked how the Select Committee will be organised. Mr Kok also expressed the hope that the Select Committee would consult broadly and consider a number of issues. Those are again for the Select Committee to consider after it is constituted. For my part, I hope that different stakeholders will come forward – experts, media, technology companies and the public. I think the process will benefit from different views, different perspectives. Hopefully, the process will help Singaporeans better understand what is at stake. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.”
“You can see that they are different, and I assume that that is something that the Select Committee will consider and how we respond, what sort of responses are suggested, may have to take into account the nature of the falsehoods and the intentions behind the falsehoods. As Mr Kok Heng Leun pointed out, fake news is often used to divide, mislead and conquer society. And he asked how this segues into biased commentary, and I think these are viewpoints that should be made to the Select Committee. As I have said, strongly held viewpoints but based on inaccuracies is one type of falsehood. What is the impact on people, what sort of reaction it gets; it is quite different from deliberate, targeted falsehood. How do you react to this? What is the impact of the falsehoods and what sort of reaction, what sort of responses you give to these? I think these are matters that should be considered. Mr Rajaram called for a multi-pronged approach, including not just legal measures, but also others like public education and digital literacy. He spoke about the need for false information to be counted with immediacy and magnitude to make sure that the accurate response drowns out the falsehood. I listened carefully to the points made by Mr Rajaram and I agree with many of them. Of course, one of the problems that many countries face with falsehoods is that falsehoods tend to travel much better than truth because they are targeted at stoking up anger and unhappiness. The truth is generally less exciting and, therefore, travels less well. I think you have seen enough articles that point to research which comes to that viewpoint. Mr Seah Kian Peng and Asst Prof Mohan both suggested that we should strengthen fact-checking capacity of technology companies.”
“So, if it appears in many places, it must true, right? Mr Henry Kwek referred to the susceptibility to online falsehoods in view of people's psychological make-up, and how falsehoods linger in our minds longer than we think. Mr Rajaram spoke about how false information will become only more prevalent, not less, as the world becomes more digital. A number of Members also spoke about possible responses − what this Select Committee ought to consider. A number of points were made. Mr Seah Kian Peng put out some principles which should guide our response to falsehoods. I think this is something the Select Committee is explicitly asked to consider. Methods might change, but we must be clear about the principle, what we are trying to achieve. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah suggested that the Select Committee pay particular attention to whether any measures taken will affect free speech online or silence the critics of the Government. I think Mr Zaqy Mohamad, Mr Kok Heng Leun also made similar points. I think the precise form and ambit of any measure to be proposed, including legislation, is something for the Select Committee to consider. But I think most Singaporeans would agree that free online debate − including the expression of critical comments − should not be predicated on deliberate falsehoods. My own view is that combating falsehoods is not contrary to the exercise of freedom of speech. In fact, keeping falsehoods out of our discourse enables freedom of speech to be meaningfully exercised. Deliberate falsehoods, I think, have got to be contrasted with factual inaccuracies, resulting in false statements being made.”
“Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank all Members who spoke. I think hon Members ended with a very passionate speech from Er Dr Lee Bee Wah. I thank her for that. Seven Members of Parliament (MPs) and four Nominated MPs (NMPs) have spoken, all supported the Motion. Many important points have been raised. Examples have been given of the problems caused by falsehoods. Er Lee Bee Wah reminded us about the 1969 race riots caused by rumours of Chinese attacking Malays − examples of real world consequences which have very serious downstream impact for the entire country. Minister Yaacob talked about the experience his Ministry has had with "The Real Singapore" website − fabricating articles, creating tensions within different racial groups in Singapore − just one example. Mr Zaqy Mohamed brought up the 2015 Australian example − a misinformation campaign by Australian anti-Islamic groups that halal certification funds terrorism. Ms Sun Xueling told us of her experience where a false story was spread that the roof of Waterway Terraces I in her ward collapsed. Within 30 minutes, we had Police and Civil Defence vehicles, all despatched, and resources used up. Ms Thanaletchimi spoke about the online survey scam relating to NTUC FairPrice that it was rewarding customers with a $500 gift voucher. Members also spoke about the difficulties we face in responding to falsehoods, and our vulnerability. Ms Rahayu Mahzam spoke about the difficulty with viral falsehoods, the formation of echo chambers, and the jury is still out on fact-checking mechanisms that Facebook and others have put forward. Mr de Souza referred to the danger of proliferation and perceived corroboration through automated accounts and multiple websites putting up the same falsehood.”
“So, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am asking Parliament to appoint a Select Committee, to examine and report on the causes and consequences of deliberate online falsehoods; and the countermeasures that will be required to prevent and combat them in Singapore. The Government has been studying this problem for a while. The Select Committee can study the issue in depth with a smaller group of Members of Parliament (MPs), and then present a report to Parliament. It will be open to the Select Committee to decide whether to hold public hearings, whether to hear from witnesses. I think it will be useful to do so. The process will allow for a formal dialogue with selected groups. The composition of the Select Committee, we suggest, the default position is for 10 members − nine Government MPs and one MP from the Opposition bench − but we propose replacing one of the Government MPs with a Nominated MP, to have more diversity. So, we will have − eight Government MPs, one opposition MP and one NMP. The Terms of Reference have been broadly framed, intentionally. So, the Select Committee will have to consider relevant views and options. Sir, I ask that a Select Committee be appointed to examine this problem thoroughly, consult as widely as possible, and come up with countermeasures on how we can protect Singapore against this threat. I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 2.46 pm”
“Third, our international position, both in this region and internationally, makes us an attractive target. We are a key strategic node, a key player in ASEAN. We are a trade hub, commercial hub, financial hub for this entire region. What we say on regional issues and international issues carries weight. So, if we can be influenced and swayed, then foreign interests can be advanced through us. We have been the subject of foreign interference in the past. The Green Paper again sets those out. Those are the obvious known examples. For example, a Malaysian politician financing a newspaper in Singapore which campaigns against National Service – you cannot get a more obvious example. Of course, technology has added a completely new dimension. Minister Yaacob will touch on the points relating to technology and how it has completely changed the landscape. What can this do? Wide spreading of falsehoods can drown out the facts, can cause people to be disillusioned, can be manipulated to create rifts and damage social cohesion. So, the people who shout loudest and shout falsehoods are those who will get hurt. Falsehoods, because they tend to be focused on playing to people's feelings and getting them to be angry by putting forward points which are completely fabricated. A very senior officer in Sweden is reported by BBC to have said – and this was reported last week – disinformation as a tool, as a campaign, in the context of Sweden has had effect. It affects Sweden's "fundamental values: freedom of speech, democracy and individual rights". Ultimately, if left unchecked, such deliberate spread of online falsehoods can undermine trust in the country, in the institutions, in democracy and affect social cohesion.”
“Sir, the deliberate spread of online falsehoods today is a serious problem around the world. You see the details in the Green Paper that has been filed. It gives a framework for the Government’s reasons for bringing this Motion. Countries across the world have been the subject of organised deliberate disinformation campaigns − conducted both by state actors, targeted at destabilising other countries, and also non-state actors and they spread the falsehoods deliberately to both interfere with the democratic processes within countries and to also destabilise and undermine institutions within a specific country Most Members, if not all, would have come across these examples reported almost on a daily basis in the media. And the Green Paper sets out in a summary some of the more serious ones. Why are we concerned? Because we are highly susceptible. Let me share three reasons. First, of course, the very high Internet penetration in Singapore. More than 91% of Singaporean households have Internet access. So, it is easy to attack and spread falsehoods in Singapore. We have seen it happening. Second, our diversity − as a multi-racial, multi-religious society. That makes it easy to exploit the fault-lines through falsehoods. You get completely fabricated stories spreading. For example, in June of last year, that cat and dog meat were mixed into a marinade of satay in a Geylang bazaar. That is a relatively minor example, though it can make a lot of people very angry. But you have more serious examples from other countries. You see some of them in the Green Paper. People can and have targeted specific sections of populations. They can target specific sections of our population − using falsehoods based on race, religion.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the Motion* standing in my name on the Order Paper for today for Parliament to appoint a Select Committee to examine and report on deliberate online falsehoods. [(proc text) *The Motion reads as follows: (proc text)] [(proc text) “(1) That Parliament appoints a Select Committee to examine and report on: (proc text)] [(proc text) (a) the phenomenon of using digital technology to deliberately spread falsehoods online; (proc text)] [(proc text) (b) the motivations and reasons for the spreading of such falsehoods, and the types of individuals and entities, both local and foreign, which engage in such activity; (proc text)] [(proc text) (c) the consequences that the spread of online falsehoods can have on Singapore society, including to our institutions and democratic processes; and (proc text)] [(proc text) (d) how Singapore can prevent and combat online falsehoods, including (proc text)]: [(proc text) (i) the principles that should guide Singapore's response; and (proc text)] [(proc text) (ii) any specific measures, including legislation, that should be taken. (proc text)] [(proc text) (2) That the Select Committee shall comprise – (proc text)] [(proc text) (a) Deputy Speaker Charles Chong as Chairman; and (proc text)] [(proc text) (b) seven Members from the Government benches, one Member from the Opposition benches, and one Nominated Member, to be nominated by the Committee of Selection. ’” (proc text)]”
“Fire safety is absolutely important, which is why SCDF makes that assessment first, while the testing is going on, because testing takes some time. But they make an assessment as to whether the building is safe or not safe and announce it publicly. Where there is no unrestricted public access to the buildings, SCDF requires the building owners to inform all their tenants of the nature of the cladding and the issues surrounding it, so that the tenants can make a considered assessment. Even though we say it is safe, we believe it is safe, but we think the tenants ought to know. Where there is unrestricted public access, we think that should be made public and it is up on the SCDF's website. That is the approach that is taken, and regardless of whether it is 5%, 8%, 10% or 50% cladding, we require them to take it down. For example, on Alubond, I think 17 have taken down, 18 are in the process of taking down. In respect of Bolliya and Bolli-Core, I think three have taken down. The other four are in the process of taking down. Another building, a church, has been identified more recently. We are in the process of talking to them. So, all of them are in the process of being taken down. In respect of other brands of cladding, what is doable has been done, in the sense that we have contacted industry partners, we have required QPs to give us returns to explain and relook at their buildings, make second round of checks. We have identified these brands as being problematic, and they better check, which is how it, for example, Bolliya and Bolli-Core came up. We have also asked for the annual audits to be expedited and this should cover all the others.”
“And by definition, if you want to do a 100% testing, there will be no material left. So, you have to do sample testing. As to how this will be reviewed in the context of public safety – in all the things that we do, I think that is front and centre. Everything else has got to work around public safety, which is why, for example, let us take this issue of cladding. In contrast with what happened at Grenfell Tower, Cladding is one aspect. How does it compromise public safety depends on a variety of factors. For example, is the entire building clad with this material? If we say 5% of the building façade is clad with this material, obviously, the risk is very different from 100% cladding. Some of the buildings identified have less than 5%, less than 8%. So, that is one factor – how much of the building has been clad with such a cladding? Second, what sort of fire sprinkler system is there? The Member would know the contrast with Grenfell Tower again. In Singapore, the requirements for, for example, the fire escape routes are very stringent and they have to be fire protected as well. What is the height of the building? How much of the building is occupied? These are composite factors and then there are other aspects of safety like how much training do the staff have in commercial buildings. What sort of fire drills were done? So, SCDF, in respect of these buildings, has gone down to look at all these aspects together and worked with the management, while they are taking down the cladding. Because even for buildings with 5% or 8% of cladding, we require them to take down, and at the same time, we are making sure that these other, what I call the human safety factors, are being practised.”
“On whether the integrity of certification systems been compromised, I think that will be too quick a conclusion. Let me explain why. I said investigations are ongoing. For example, Alubond. Again, I need to be careful about what I say because the matter is under, not just SCDF investigations, but also Police investigations. SCDF has issued a public statement as to how it believes non-compliant panels came to be put up on the structures. If we go back to the public statement by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), there was one type of cladding which complied with the certification requirements, another that could not be used on the façade. SCDF believes they had been mixed up in the warehouse. So, it is not a question of integrity of the testing system. But if you had asked me to speculate in August as to how this came about, I think it would have been difficult for me to have speculated that it is because there was a mixture in the warehouse. One has got to be careful about jumping to conclusions, at this point, as to whether the entire certification system has been compromised. The certification system relies on identifying international institutions of repute, which are recognised worldwide, and also institutions in Singapore, which can either rely on those certificates and make sure that the testing has been done, or test themselves. At this stage, we have no evidence, no reason to suspect that any of them has been suborned. But I think we will obviously be investigating all possibilities, including whether there could be manufacturing defects, and differences between samples and actual material. I have answered the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament previously, sampling is the method worldwide. The way of testing is to burn the material.”
“May I have the last question again, please? Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Whether SCDF will be extending the retesting to all brands of cladding? And if so, when will this be completed?”
“Thank you. Sir, after we issued our statement, we advised our industry partners to approach the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) if they had reason to suspect that the cladding used for their building projects were in any way not compliant with Fire Code requirements. Industry partners meaning building owners, qualified persons (QPs) and so on. A building owner proactively submitted samples of two models of composite panel that were used in its building project for tests. They submitted it for tests – Bolliya and Bolli-Core FR. Those two models had been issued Certificates of Conformity (CoCs) by local certification bodies, which had certified them to be compliant with Fire Code requirements for use as cladding. The tests, however, found the samples to be non-compliant. The building owner then informed the SCDF about the matter. SCDF had made a further announcement on 8 December 2017. It has identified six other buildings that could have used these two models of composite panel, and investigations on how this came about are still on-going. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: I thank the Minister. A few supplementary questions. I would like to ask the Minister: whether the integrity of the certification system has been compromised; when the review of the system to tighten the processes would be completed; and what remedial steps would be taken in the meantime to ensure public safety? And this is referring to the certification system. Another set of questions is: whether SCDF will be extending the retesting to all brands of cladding? And if so, when will this be completed?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I think on 24 August 2017, we announced the facts relating to the non-compliant Alubond cladding. I need to know from the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament, he said there were two brands of aluminium composite panel – is he referring to the Bolliya and Bolli-Core FR? Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Yes.”
“I will ask my Ministry to liaise with the GPC. Thank you.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, the Internet content providers (ICPs) include web-hosting services and they are all class-licensed under the Broadcasting Act. So, they are required to comply with the Internet Code of Practice and ensure that prohibited material, such as child sexual abuse content, is not hosted on their websites. If child sexual abuse websites are verified to be hosted in Singapore, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) can: (a) direct the ICPs to take down the content; (b) issue directions to the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to the websites; and (c) suspend or cancel the class licences of the ICPs. Where there is child sexual abuse content, the Police will also investigate, as appropriate. I mentioned yesterday that there is a major review of the Penal Code. We are looking at whether there should be dedicated laws dealing with activities related to child pornography – from the making of pornographic material involving children, to possession and distribution of such material, and also whether such laws should carry higher penalties to send a stronger deterrent message. Those review proposals will be tabled for public consultation later this year.”
“I will reflect it to my officials, but we work fairly quickly and stakeholders must also revert to us quickly. Enough time will be given for feedback but everyone has got to work quite hard on it.”
“We set up this Committee in July 2016 to review the Penal Code. Some of the areas that are being looked at by the Committee include attempted suicide, marital immunity for rape, punishments for sex offenders and the need to create new criminal offences to deal with the changing crime environment. In that context, the feedback on these issues, both from Members of this House and outside, have been noted. They are being considered in the review. In addition to these, the Committee is also undertaking a fairly fundamental review on the principles which underlie our penal laws, including elements of criminal liability, the required mental element, intention, knowledge, the scope of mental health defences, as well as some of the language used in the Penal Code. The Committee aims to complete its work later this year. We will then invite feedback from the public on the recommendations.”
“Sir, with your leave, can I take both Oral Question Nos 10 and 11 together?”
“From 2012 to 2016, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) received an annual average of about 6,600 Singapore Citizenship (SC), 8,700 Permanent Residence (PR) and 16,600 Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) applications from foreign spouses of Singaporeans. Over the same period, an annual average of 4,500, 4,300 and 13,900 foreign spouses of Singaporeans were granted SC, PR and LTVP respectively. The corresponding success rates were around 68%, 49% and 84%. ICA is unable to break down the data by whether these individuals had any SC children.”
“The portal will be further enhanced later this year to include animated videos of the top causes of accidents, mock theory tests, and updates on road traffic regulations. In addition, the Safe Driving Course was introduced in November 2015 to impart safe driving techniques to motorists who have accumulated a high number of demerit points. TP is also updating the Highway Code to ensure its continued relevance in today’s landscape. The online basic and final theory handbooks will also be periodically reviewed and updated so that the latest information on traffic signs, rules and regulations is made available to the public.”
“Raising awareness is one of the Traffic Police's (TP's) key strategies to enhance road safety. TP introduced the "Use Your Road Sense" movement in 2015 to actively reach out to road users. The objective is to influence and shape the right behaviour for better road safety. The outreach targeted not only general road users, but also vulnerable groups, such as motorcyclists and elderly pedestrians, and vocational drivers, such as taxi and heavy vehicle drivers. TP is also working with the Land Transport Authority to raise awareness concerning the dangers of riding personal mobility devices (PMDs) on the roads. Among others, signs have been installed at hotspots to warn PMD riders to stay off the roads. PMD riders are also reminded of the rules and code of conduct for cycling and the use of PMDs through campaigns and programmes, for example, Safe Riders Campaign and Safe Cycling Programme, including the safe use of pedestrian crossings, such as stopping and looking out for traffic before crossing. The basic driving and riding curricula at the driving schools have been and will continue to be regularly updated to remain relevant as the traffic landscape changes. TP is also leveraging new technology, for example, it will mandate driving and riding simulation training for all learner motorists in 2019. This will enable them to acquire the necessary skills and know-how to react properly in common traffic situations within a safe, controlled environment. To promote continual learning for motorists, TP launched the one-stop Online Learning Portal in July 2017, which allows free public access to the latest driving theory handbooks.”
“Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers Police Officers of or above the rank of Sergeant to require a person to surrender his travel document. There are two requirements. Firstly, the Police Officer must have reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed an offence. Secondly, the Police Officer must obtain the written consent of an authorised officer. This is a Police Officer of or above the rank of Deputy Superintendent, who is specifically authorised by the Commissioner of Police. Section 112 can be used, regardless of whether the person has been arrested. Section 113 allows a person who has surrendered his travel document to apply to the Police for the return of his travel document. The Police will review such applications. If the application is refused, the person may then apply to a District Judge for the return of his travel document.”
“But operational needs are growing significantly everywhere, including our checkpoints. Visitor numbers are growing and, at the same time, the threats of terrorism have risen substantially. The security situation has become more complex, requiring more officers. Therefore, we have decided to allow Taiwanese APOs to be deployed at the land checkpoints alongside Singaporean APOs, because there are not enough Singaporean APOs available.”
“Auxiliary Police Forces (APFs) are important partners to the Home Team. Auxiliary Police Officers (APOs) are deployed for a range of security functions, including protecting sensitive installations and providing security at major events. The APFs are regulated by the Singapore Police Force. The demand for APOs will grow due to the rising threat from terrorism, and major infrastructure projects that require security manpower like Changi Airport Terminal 4 and the new Tuas Port. Our clear preference is to recruit Singaporean APOs to meet this rising demand. The APFs have made significant efforts to do so, for example, providing signing and retention bonuses and enhancing career progression. This has allowed the APFs to add over 300 Singaporean APOs over the past year. But this is still not enough to meet the projected demand over the next few years. There is a manpower shortage everywhere. Local workforce growth is slowing, and it is difficult for the APFs to find enough Singaporean candidates who meet the requirements. To meet the shortage, we have allowed the APFs to hire Malaysian APOs. But even that pool has been shrinking, and our APFs have been finding it difficult to recruit enough Malaysian officers who meet the requirements. They needed to look for officers from other countries. Thus, the Minister for Home Affairs said in this House in 2017 that we will allow APFs to recruit Taiwanese APOs. In deciding where non-Singaporean APOs can be deployed, the Ministry of Home Affairs considers the operational needs and risks specific to each security-sensitive location. Our requirement was that land checkpoints, for example, be manned only by Singaporean APOs, and that has been said in this House.”
“Arising from public feedback on the traffic management at SCSM 2017, TP, together with LTA and SportSG, are looking into whether Ironman Asia had fulfilled all permit conditions and complied with the road closure plans.”