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 70 of 92.
“And the public, having already formed an opinion of guilt, would they be able to accept the Court's decision to acquit? Would they even bother reading the Court's judgment or just assume the Court must have been wrong? Whatever the outcome, the credibility of the trial and the Court would be damaged. If the Court orders a severe sentence, the public will assume this was because of the media campaign. If the Court acquits the defendant and says the defence succeeded, the public will assume the opposite – that the judge wanted to show that he had not been influenced by the media. At least some members of the public could assume that. In either case, the public will question the integrity of the outcome. How then is the judge to react in the face of all these conflicting sources of pressure? That is why our law provides that you can make your comments, just wait for the proceedings to be over. These are comments which can prejudice the trial. Other comments you can make at any time. Wait for the facts to be established; do not create your own facts. Those have to be established by the Court, whether it is a Coroner's inquiry or a trial. Then, you can comment on the defendant, the case, the judgment, the general practice, the general policies, on any matter really, subject to other laws. Our judicial system has worked for us. Let us keep the system as pristine as possible and protect it from outside influence. That way, you know you have a good system, a system that will deliver justice and give everyone a fair trial. There are many examples from other countries where trial by media takes place. Some of you would find the name "Amanda Knox" familiar. She, together with two others, was accused of killing her flatmate. The international media went to town with the story.”
“We do not have juries, true, but we have witnesses and we have expert witnesses as well; people who go to court to give evidence. Do we want them to be put under pressure? Say an expert takes the view on the mental state of the defendant which will potentially give the defendant a defence. Do you want the mass media to carry articles which suggest that such defences are phoney and should not be allowed, that such defendants should be severely punished? Do we want to get into arguments discussing the media's right to discuss matters of public interest versus the individual's right to a fair trial? Because the media will say and has said in other countries that the defence, through psychologists and psychiatrists, is a matter of public interest. And, of course, they are matters of public interest. But there is a time and place to discuss it. Can we discuss it after the trial is over? It is not as if these discussions are prevented entirely. When a public mood is created, everyone in the trial will be under pressure, including the judge. They are human, too. Any expert who wants to give evidence on behalf of the accused runs the risk of being tainted in the opinion of the public. He does it first time, and, say, he gets a lot of flak. Do you think he will want to do it a second time or a third time? The prosecution will also be placed under enormous pressure to charge and secure a conviction. The Public Prosecutor's decision to charge should not depend on public opinion. I had earlier talked about expert witnesses, so in the conduct of the trial, think of other witnesses. Would they become reluctant to testify because their evidence is contrary to public opinion? Or would they modify their perception of the evidence?”
“Do we really want to say, in this House, to the ordinary man in the street that it is okay for his trial to be prejudiced and it is okay for him to be unfairly treated because it is incidental to someone else's right to comment? Hon Members, the people who are the loudest on these issues are usually the people who can take care of themselves. We are here to protect all Singaporeans, including those voices which are not heard – the majority. We are trustees of their interests. It will be quite shocking for us to say that the rights of someone who wishes to comment should be put above the rights of the person who is facing a trial, for a fair trial. I say it is shocking for us to say to such a defendant, "It is okay, my friend, your trial has only been a little bit prejudiced. So what if the chances of you being found guilty have increased?" If we are not strict, it can easily get out of control and the Courts will lose control, as has happened in other places. Let us say there is a high profile child rape case. The child is dead, there is obviously a lot of unhappiness among the general public, and it is high profile, and there is a lot of interest. Let us say the defendant comes from a certain background, it can be race, it can be religion, it can be education level, sexual preferences – it does not matter, he comes from some background. Assume the national media were to publish prominent articles on a daily basis saying that people of that particular background, race, religion, educational level or sexual preference are prone to committing these types of offences; and such people should be severely dealt with. Can such a campaign colour the public mood?”
“Do you want the world saying he is guilty before his guilt or innocence is established? Do you want his right to a fair trial to be prejudiced and then someone to come and say, "Yes, I prejudiced it, but I did not seriously prejudice it." Do you think that makes good policy? Another comment that is made against this provision is it "curtails free speech". You know, to raise this spectre is, by itself, not an argument. One has to go beyond the rhetoric, get to the specifics. What is being curtailed? What does the clause provide? What is the right that is being curtailed? You can comment on policies. You can debate public issues. What you cannot do is to say something that actually prejudices a specific case. Or has a serious risk – real risk – I should use the words in the Bill – real risk of prejudicing a specific case. This legal position has worked well for us all these years. If you want to change the law, if you want the right to prejudice ongoing cases, you have to put out cogent reasons why; why your right to speak and prejudice an ongoing trial should override someone else's right to a fair trial. It is for the same reason I cannot agree to any suggestion that clause 3(1)(b) be qualified by some general provision that provides for discussion by the public as a defence. Again, what you are saying is that an observer's right to speak as he wishes should override a person's right to a fair trial; it does not matter if the trial itself is prejudiced as a result. You know, most of the people who get charged in the State Courts, they are ordinary folks. They do not write fancy blogs. They are not lawyers, Members of Parliament or journalists – not usually anyway. They find themselves on the wrong side of the law.”
“Do we really want to say that it is acceptable to prejudice his right to a fair trial? What happens to the presumption of innocence and the basic right to a fair trial? You balance that against someone's wish to comment on the proceedings, which prejudices the proceedings. You balance the chap in Court who is facing a criminal charge, you balance his rights against somebody else's desire to comment on those proceedings; not just comment, but comment in a way that prejudices those proceedings. That is the right that we have to balance against the right of free trial and presumption of innocence. Is it acceptable for such a commentator to say, "Yes, I prejudiced the trial, but I didn't seriously prejudice the trial"? Do we want that? Why should someone's right to comment, sitting in the security of his home, be given precedence over the right to a fair trial and prejudice a person who faces a jail sentence? Is it not better to wait for the trial to be over, for the facts to be established, before comments are allowed? Again, I emphasise, it is not all comments. What are the proscribed comments? They are those which prejudice a fair trial or pose a real risk of doing so. Comments which do not fall into that category are not within the clause. After the judgment, one can comment as he or she wishes on the judgment on the conduct of the parties. The words of a New Zealand Chief Justice put it well: "If Joe Public is accused of an offence of which he believes he is innocent, he will not wish to be tried in the media. When charges are laid in court, the public must be assured the issues will be decided in the court and nowhere else." As Members of the House, ask yourself, each one of you, to bring it to the personal level. Say someone you know is facing a criminal trial.”
“Every party to a criminal or civil trial is entitled to a fair trial and everyone facing a criminal charge is entitled to the benefit or the presumption of innocence. These are fundamental pillars of our justice system. Persons in Court cases should not face prejudgment by the media or the public in a way which whips up sentiment and creates a real risk of interfering with their trials. Not every comment will be sub judice. Parties to civil proceedings frequently make comments. Lawyers do as well while their client's case is ongoing. The test is whether it prejudices or interferes with ongoing Court proceedings or poses a real risk of doing so. So, you have to show that it prejudices or interferes or poses a real risk. On these questions, one may have to consider a whole host of factors, including who made the comment, the content of the comment, the extent of the publication, the likely impact on the trial. These are all matters for the Court. Let me deal with some of the questions that have been raised about this provision. As I do so, I should make clear that the clause reflects the existing common law; it does not change the common law. So, the suggestions and the requests are, therefore, requests to change the law as it now stands. One suggestion is to add the word "seriously" before "prejudice" in clause 3(1)(b) so that the contempt is actionable only if it "seriously prejudices" Court proceedings. I would say this is not right. Consider what, in effect, is being proposed with such a suggestion. If we agree to it, we are then saying it is acceptable for the trial to be prejudiced, so long as it is not seriously prejudiced. Think about it. A person who is a defendant in a criminal trial could face years in prison.”
“Court proceedings should be sacrosanct. They should be free from all of these extraneous interferences. Secondly, within the same rubric, clause 3(1)(d) deals with the situation when someone disrupts Court proceedings by his own conduct. The offence is made out where a person intentionally insults or causes any interruption or intervention to any judge who is sitting in any stage of a Court proceeding, for example, where a person shows up in Court, starts shouting from the public gallery of the Court room, and interrupting ongoing Court proceedings. The Court is a place where serious issues are dealt with, some affecting life and liberty, and there is no place for disruptive or insulting behaviour. Similarly, clause 3(1)(e) also deals with the situation where any other act would interfere, obstruct or cause a real risk of interfering or obstructing, with the administration of justice. The overarching purpose is to ensure Court proceedings are respected and allowed to complete their full course, without facing obstruction or interference from persons. These provisions reflect the current law. I will now turn to discuss sub judice contempt, set out in clause 3(1)(b) of the Bill. In essence, sub judice contempt deals with conduct, for example publishing something, that would prejudge an issue in pending Court proceedings; and such prejudgment either prejudices or interferes with ongoing Court proceedings, or poses the real risk of doing so. So, it is conjunctive. This clause, again, reflects the current law. Every year, approximately 60,000 criminal charges are dealt with by the State Courts. Others are dealt with by the High Court. There are thousands of civil cases in the lower Courts and in the High Court.”
“On the other hand, there is a need to be fair to the person if he honestly and reasonably did not understand what the Court had ordered and the Court takes the view that he ought reasonably to be excused. Clause 21 of the Bill provides a defence in such a case. The provision is intended for those who intentionally disobey Court orders. The Court will have to take into account the seriousness of the breach and whether the breach is intentional, in deciding whether to proceed and how to proceed. I have given an example of an order from the Family Court which is disobeyed. The rule, of course, applies to other types of Court orders as well. To sum up, defaulting parties will face serious consequences if they intentionally disobey the Court's orders. Such disobedience often takes place in the lower Courts, including the Family Court. Most disputes are heard and resolved in the lower Courts. We have, therefore, raised the maximum punishment vis-a-vis the lower Courts, to send a clear signal that such conduct will not be tolerated. The intent is to allow the lower Courts to deal with the more serious contemptuous conduct that can occur before those Courts. This will complement other changes we are making to the civil and family justice systems. And the intent is to protect the more vulnerable parties. They can then receive the full protection of the law. Let me now deal with contempt by interfering with Court proceedings. Clause 3(1)(c) deals with the situation where there is interference with Court proceedings. It is a fairly straightforward provision. This can occur where someone disrupts Court proceedings, interferes with witnesses or intimidates them. Likewise, when someone interferes with, or intimidates judges, parties, lawyers and witnesses.”
“Clause 2 of the Bill sets out the interpretation of the key terms used in the Bill, for example, the Courts to which the Bill applies; and when a Court proceeding is "pending". The heart of the Bill is found in clauses 3 and 4. These clauses set out conduct which amounts to contempt: disobeying Court orders, interfering with Court proceedings, sub judice contempt; and scandalising the Court. There are other ancillary types of contempt which are also dealt with in this Bill. Let me deal, first, with contempt that is committed by disobeying Court orders. The Court often directs a person to do something or not to do something. If he intentionally disobeys, that is contempt. That, in essence, is the current law. Clause 4 sets that out. For example, take a case where a former spouse applies for maintenance for herself and her children. In cases where the Court orders maintenance, and if the husband refuses to comply and deliberately chooses not to pay, his former wife and the children suffer. They may depend on the maintenance to pay for their schooling needs or even their basic necessities. We undertook significant reforms to the family justice system. Amongst other things, we improved the enforcement of maintenance orders. That has helped. But there are ex-spouses who simply refuse to obey maintenance orders, despite their ability to pay. There are also those cases where, for example, the wife disobeys an order granting the husband access to the children. For such people, the threat of a significant jail term can help. They may become more likely to obey Court orders. Under this law, the defaulter can be punished if he intentionally chooses to disobey the Court's order.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time". Mdm Speaker, this Bill seeks to set out in statutory form the law of contempt and the processes in enforcing the law. In my speech, I will deal with the need to set out the laws in written form. I will then take Members through the clauses in the Bill. And in doing so, I will deal with concerns that have been raised and some of the points that have been made, as reflected in the Motion of Amendment which has been filed. Mdm Speaker, contempt of Court was famously described by a jurist as "the Proteus of the legal world, assuming an almost infinite diversity of forms". He said this because the law on contempt developed through the common law over several hundred years and covering different facets. Thus, to many, including lawyers, it is often a mystery. They do not understand it fully because of its diverse forms. It is the only criminal law in Singapore that is based on case law. That is not satisfactory because criminal laws must be set out in statute. Former Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong made this point. He pointed out that the law on contempt in Singapore was an anomaly and he said all our criminal laws are based on statutes, whereas the law on contempt was not. The punishment for contempt is unlimited, unlike other criminal laws. The Chief Justice (CJ) requested that I consider putting it in statutory form and I agreed with him that I would do so. In many Commonwealth countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, the law started as a common law offence, and the need for setting it out in writing has been recognised. Let me now turn to the Bill.”
“Mdm Speaker, if there is any process for allowing Mr Low to ask a question, I am happy to take the question. But I leave that entirely to you.”
“I thank Mr Low for his considerable interest in the matter and I am glad that he takes such a serious view of process errors. First of all, what is correct and not correct has got to go on the basis of the law. And I think Mr Low heard me say quite clearly that what we have done is according to advice from AGC. Let me give the Member some scenarios. There are different types of wrongs. First, there is process error. Then, there can be an error in substance. Then there can be an error both in process and substance. One must keep these distinct. What happened here is a pure process error. If you look at that, and contrast with an error in substance, which may or may not have legal consequences, for example, let us say you have an association and there is going to be a challenge for the chairman at the annual general meeting. The Chairman quickly brings in new voting members to defeat the challenge. That process is legal. But from the view of substance, is it correct? It depends on the circumstances. Take another situation. Let us say a group takes over an organisation. The organisation has a lot of money. The new group appoints its friends. It sets up a structure which helps to vacuum money out of the organisation and its own accountants say in writing, "Despite repeated requests, the organisation did not provide us with all the critical documents relating to the transactions with the friends"; and assume they repeat it every year and yet the organisation does not do anything. That is an error, both in process and in substance, and that is unlawful and that must have consequences. So, let us keep things in perspective. Since Mr Low is so interested in this process error, I am sure he will be interested in errors of substance as well.”
“There should be no knee-jerk reaction. I have set out what we are doing. We talked to AGC to look at the law. If it can be corrected, it will be corrected, which we have done and taken care of the processes. Not only have we done that, I have asked for a review of the actual rate of allowance. If and when the review is completed, we will act according to the review.”
“Besides spending two evenings a week as a training instructor, he also took up additional policing duties, serving on Friday or Saturday nights at Tanglin Police Division. These officers, 734 of them, do not serve because of the $3.60 per hour. They come forward to serve Singapore. If any Member of this House seriously thinks $3.60 is too much, then please let me know. Our VSC officers make considerable sacrifices to step forward to partner the Police Force. They help keep Singapore crime-free. They do not do this for the money. So, let us keep this whole issue in perspective. If there is no complaint about the actual amount paid, then the only question is the process. On the process, I have set out what happened. The officers involved made a mistake. The matter has been handled with advice from AGC. And the officers have been advised to be more careful.”
“After the Auditor-General's Office (AGO) findings were brought to my attention, I agreed with the rationale for the payments. It was right that the payments should have been made. We sought advice from the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC). AGC advised that under the Police Force Act, I can authorise the payment retrospectively, and I authorised the payments. The Regulations were amended, with some provisions deleted, also in accordance with AGC's advice. I should add that I have asked my staff to review the VSC allowance rate further. The current quantum of $3.60 an hour is, in my view, still too low. This is not a case of officers making decisions to increase allowances and deliberately bypassing the Minister. The officers responsible for handling the earlier approval have been spoken to about their mistake. Mdm Speaker, VSC celebrates its 70th anniversary this year. Our VSC officers have been doing good work for many years. They work alongside our regular Police Officers, hand in hand. They have shown tremendous dedication and commitment. Let me share two examples. SSGT(V) Mohamad Ariff Bin Said Abdul Kader, aged 36, is a Project Manager in the construction industry. He joined VSC in 2010. Despite his busy schedule juggling a full-time job and looking after his family, he performs frontline policing duties on Fridays and Saturdays in the evenings. He does so with regular counterparts from the Jurong Police Division. Another VSC officer is 55-year-old SSI(V) Johnny Boon, who had just extended his service for another three years, after having served VSC for 26 years. He joined VSC in 1990. As a full-time swimming and martial arts instructor, his skills were recognised and he was selected to serve as a training instructor.”
“He is the Accounting Officer for the Ministry's budget, which runs into several billions of dollars. For example, the budget for this year for the Ministry of Home Affairs is $5.34 billion. The PS also has the authority to approve expenditures up to $10 million. The decision to increase the VSC allowance in 2008 was taken at the highest senior civil servant level in the Ministry and, in money terms, well within the PS' authority. But the Police Force Act requires the Minister to approve the increase. The additional 80 cents per hour, per officer, amounts to about $2.62 million over the seven years from 2008 to 2015. In addition, SPF had also paid allowances for VSC duty beyond the four-hour cap stipulated in the Regulations; and pro-rated allowance for duty for less than an hour. Since the payments had been made without the Minister's personal approval, AGO classified them as overpayments. That is how AGO has put it, since the Minister's approval should have been obtained. But it will be fair to describe what happened as a procedural error. When assessing the nature of the error, the following points need to be considered: (a) the policy intent was to increase the allowance; (b) Ministry HQ agreed that the allowance should be raised and approved this; (c) no one in his right mind could complain or suggest that the VSC officers should not get $3.60 per hour as allowance for their out-of-pocket expenses. Indeed, most people will consider it as underpayment; (d) nor can anyone reasonably say that it is wrong for the officers to get the allowance, if they volunteered for more than four hours; or that it is wrong if pro-rated payments were made when they volunteered for less than an hour.”
“The Volunteer Special Constabulary (VSC) is an integral part of the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and has been so for the last 70 years. In 2008, the VSC strength was slightly over 1,000 officers. As of June this year, there were 734 VSC officers. Our VSC officers come from all walks of life: university students, taxi drivers, accountants and lawyers. They have the same powers, they put on the same uniform and perform the same duties, similar to those of regular Police Officers. They are deployed for frontline duties at Police Land Divisions, Neighbourhood Police Centres, Traffic Police and also deployed for major events like the National Day Parade. VSC officers face personal danger and risks in their line of work similar to regular Police Officers and they undergo rigorous basic training, twice a week in the evenings, over 24 weeks. After passing out from training, these officers have to contribute a minimum of 16 hours a month. Many volunteer for more hours than that. On average, each VSC officer contributes about 32 hours a month and they are not paid salaries. Instead, they are given a small allowance and that is to offset out-of-pocket expenses, such as transport and food. In 2007, the Police Force conducted a review of this allowance. At that time, the allowance was $2.80 per hour. SPF recommended to increase the VSC allowance rate from $2.80 per hour to $3.60 per hour. The reasons for the increase were considered and evaluated at the Ministry headquarters (HQ) and it were approved by the Permanent Secretary (PS). However, the officers did not take the next step of seeking approval from the Minister, as was required under the Police Force Act. Within a Ministry, the PS is the Chief Executive Officer.”
“Mdm Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 7 and 8 together?”
“Between 2013 and 2015, 2,254 young persons aged between 16 and 18 years have been charged for criminal offences in the State Courts. The most common types of offences which these young persons had been charged with are the offences of theft and cheating under the Penal Code, and offences under the Moneylenders Act, Page: 99 Tobacco (Control of Advertisements and Sale) Act and the Road Traffic Act. While we continue to underscore the need to maintain law and order in our criminal justice system, we recognise the importance of rehabilitation as well for young offenders in appropriate cases. Between 2013 and 2015, 2,046 young persons aged between 16 and 18 years were convicted, of which close to half of these young persons were given probation (or probation and other types of sentences, such as a fine), while about 30% were sentenced to a fine (or a sentence of fine and disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence under the Road Traffic Act) and about 15% were sentenced to Reformative Training (or Reformative Training and other types of sentences such as a fine).”
“Section 359 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) allows for claims for compensation in criminal proceedings and makes it mandatory for a Court convicting a person of any offence to consider whether a compensation order should be made and the Court will make such compensation orders where appropriate. The number of victim compensation orders that were granted by the Courts under section 359 of the CPC in 2014 and 2015 can be found in the table below. Of the compensation orders made in 2014 and 2015, 84% were made in relation to cases involving hurt, mischief, theft, cheating and criminal breach of trust. In 75% of all instances where compensation orders were made, the compensation amounts were less than $2,000. In the remaining instances, the compensation amounts were between $2,000 and $10,000, with one compensation order amounting to $57,000 (rounded) for a charge of criminal breach of trust. The State Courts track the total number of compensation orders made under section 359 of the CPC. No breakdown is available on the number of orders made under the different sub-sections in that provision.”
“The Singapore Academy of Law (SAL) manages two websites which contain judgments, namely the Singapore Law Watch website (at www.singaporelawwatch.sg) (the SLW Website) and the Singapore Law website (at www.singaporelaw.sg) (the SgLaw Website). According to SAL (a) All judgments from the Supreme Court of Singapore are published on the SLW Website and the SgLaw Website. There is no selection process. (b) Judgments from the Supreme Court of Singapore are published on the SLW Website for a period of three months and on the SgLaw Website in perpetuity. (c) Judgments are redacted or not published only where this is required by law or by an order of Court. Page: 98 (d) The SLW Website and the SgLaw Website only publish judgments from the Supreme Court of Singapore. They do not publish judgments from other jurisdictions.”
“As of 31 May 2016, more than 1,800 individuals were found to be consuming liquor during restricted hours since the Liquor Control (Supply and Consumption) Act came into effect on 1 April 2015. Within the Liquor Control Zone in Little India, about 230 individuals were found to be consuming liquor during restricted hours. Most of these individuals were first-time offenders and were issued with advisories. There were 48 repeat offenders island-wide, of which three were within the Little India Liquor Control Zone and they have all been offered composition fines. For subsequent repeat offences, SPF will commence investigations with the view to prosecute and the offenders will be subject to stricter penalties.”
“The Police deploy APOs and Security Officers (SOs) in Little India on a daily basis to deter crime and disamenities such as urination, littering and spitting. During the peak periods on weekend nights, eves of public holidays and public holidays, more than 90 APOs and Page: 97 SOs are deployed. This is in addition to the Police officers on patrol. Currently, there are 34 Police Camera Zone CCTV cameras installed within the Little India LCZ and SPF has plans to install an additional 50 cameras in this zone by the end of the year. The APOs and SOs will patrol the common areas, as well as specific areas of concern. This includes the higher floors and staircase landings of HDB blocks where specific feedback has been received about congregations or disamenities.”
“Together with the National Crime Prevention Council, the Police will continue with its public education and outreach efforts to create more public awareness about the various scam tactics. Members of the public are advised to exercise caution and vigilance to avoid falling victim to such scams.”
“The widespread use of social media and messaging platforms on mobile phones has given rise to new scam tactics. Scams are now being committed not just through phone conversations but also over the Internet accessed through mobile phones. Such scams include credit-for-sex scam, Internet love scam, kidnap hoax scam and lottery scam. There were 2,450 of such cases in 2015, as compared to 1,015 cases in 2014. These cases are typically committed by sophisticated scam syndicates based overseas. The transnational nature of these crimes present significant enforcement challenges. The syndicates know that such transnational crimes are not easy to solve. They hide behind the anonymity of the Internet platforms, leverage the ease of online payment and choose victims that are not from the country where the syndicate is based. Where foreign law enforcement agencies are willing to cooperate, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) will work closely with them to take action against these overseas syndicates. In 2015, the SPF conducted a joint investigation with the Ministry of Public Security of the People's Republic of China into a credit-for-sex scam syndicate that targeted Singaporean victims. The syndicate operated from China, using social media platforms to deceive Singaporean victims into paying money for non-existent sexual services. According to the Chinese Police, this syndicate may have also targeted victims in Australia. As a result of the joint investigation, the Chinese Police conducted successful raids at various locations in China that led to the arrest of 43 individuals. These individuals will be dealt with by the Chinese authorities. The best defence against the online and phone scammer is prevention.”
“Noise complaints among neighbours, whether in condominiums or other types of housing, are often related to underlying problems, such as disputes, inconsiderate behaviour or intolerance. Such problems are best addressed through a community-based approach, where community partners, Government agencies and grassroots leaders work together to settle such disputes. First, we must promote good neighbourliness to prevent disputes from arising, as residents on friendly terms are more likely to be considerate and tolerant of differences. Second, we encourage Page: 88 mediation to mend relationships where disputing parties find it difficult to resolve issues on their own. Third, we provide options of legal recourse as a last resort. The Community Dispute Resolution Tribunals (CDRTs) were established in 2015 to provide simple and specialised Court processes to help neighbours resolve disputes. A Police response should only be considered where there are law-and-order concerns – for instance, when the noise arises from fights or large congregations that pose safety and security concerns. In such cases that warrant Police's attention, Police would dispatch frontline resources to maintain law and order.”
“Permanent Residence (PR) is not automatically granted to foreigners who are married to Singaporean Citizens (SCs). Each PR application is evaluated holistically on a range of criteria, such as the financial ability of the SC spouse to support the foreign spouse. The fact that there are SC children from the marriage would be a plus factor. Foreign spouses who do not qualify for PR yet may be granted a Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) or Long-Term Visit Pass-Plus (LTVP+) for them to remain in Singapore with their families. Those who are granted LTVP and LTVP+ are allowed to seek employment to help support their families. In 2015, ICA implemented the Pre-Marriage LTVP Assessment (PMLA). The PMLA provides greater clarity, prior to marriage, on whether the foreign spouse can qualify for long-term stay in Singapore. It helps prospective Singaporean-foreigner couples better plan for the future. Prospective Singaporean-foreigner couples are strongly encouraged to undergo the PMLA before marriage.”
“The Identity Card (IC) is made of a highly durable polycarbonate material that has been subjected to stringent tests to ensure its durability. It is not easily damaged with normal handling. Apart from a small number of cards that may be damaged due to excessive wear and tear over time, there is no need to replace all ICs at regular intervals. The $60 fee for replacing a damaged IC is to cover the production cost, which includes manpower, material, as well as other costs incurred in producing a new card. This fee has remained the same for many years. ICA will consider a waiver of the fee for cases which warrant special consideration. This includes situations where the card was damaged due to circumstances beyond the cardholder's control, such as accidents or fire. Singapore residents are currently required to register for an NRIC at age 15 and to re-register at age 30 with an updated photograph. Given longer life expectancy, ICA is studying the feasibility of introducing a second NRIC re-registration at an older age.”
“The Protection from Harassment Act was introduced to strengthen harassment laws and provide a range of criminal sanctions, civil and self-help remedies to better protect people from harassment and related anti-social behaviour. Cases filed under the Act are managed with a view to assist parties to explore ways to resolve the issues effectively and promptly without proceeding to trial, including the use of counselling and mediation. The Act took effect on 15 November 2014. According to the State Courts, as at 30 April 2016, 203 applications for Protection Orders had been filed. This includes applications by victims of sexual and workplace harassment. However, the State Courts do not track the specific number of Page: 71 cases for each type of case. Of the 203 applications filed, 32 cases were sent to the State Courts Centre for Dispute Resolution for mediation as at 30 April 2016. Sixty three Protection Orders and 55 Expedited Protection Orders had been granted. Seventy three applications were withdrawn. Out of the 63 Protection Orders granted, 38 were granted by consent, constituting more than half of the orders that were granted. This suggests that a good number of cases were resolved amicably. The remaining applications have either been dismissed or struck off, or are pending resolution as at 30 April 2016.”
“There were 955 residential fires in the first four months of 2016, about 6% and 10% lower than the same period in 2015 and 2014 respectively. About 98% of the residential fires this year are small-scale fires which did not result in casualties. About 50% of these fires were caused by the indiscriminate disposal of lighted materials, such as lighted cigarettes and charcoal embers, down the rubbish chute or into rubbish bins at common areas. Unattended cooking, which accounted for about 20% of the recent residential fires, is the second main cause. A large number of residential fires can, therefore, be prevented with better awareness of fire safety at home. To increase awareness, the SCDF actively promotes fire safety and public education messages through community-based programmes and initiatives. Residents participate in fire drills at Emergency Preparedness Day Events and learn emergency preparedness skills, such as operating a fire extinguisher, when they take part in the Community Emergency Preparedness Programme. The SCDF also disseminates fire safety advisories to homes and regularly collaborates with grassroots organisations to include articles on fire hazards and fire safety tips in their newsletters and magazines. The SCDF does not monitor the percentage of homes that currently own a fire extinguisher. Fire extinguishers are sold by private vendors who are not required to report their sales to the SCDF. However, the SCDF encourages each household to be equipped with a fire extinguisher to be prepared for fire emergencies. This message is regularly emphasised through SCDF's community-based initiatives, as well as in fire safety advisories.”
“In 2015, the Registry of Moneylenders received 129 reports lodged by members of public against licensed moneylenders. The reports included complaints against moneylenders charging high fees and interest rates, as well as extending credit in breach of the unsecured credit limits. The Registry also conducts regular inspections on moneylenders so as to ensure that their practices are in compliance with the Moneylenders Act and Rules. Where moneylenders or their officers are found to have committed offences under the Act or Rules, the Registry will take decisive action against them. In 2015, 17 moneylenders were subjected to licensing action, such as revocation of licence and forfeiture of security deposit. Nine moneylenders or officers of moneylending companies were warned or offered composition, while six other such individuals were prosecuted and convicted in Court. These included matters that arose from complaints made in 2014. In regulating the moneylending industry, we seek to maintain a balance between protecting borrowers and ensuring that there is reasonable access to credit from licensed sources. Over the last three years, there has been an increasing trend in terms of the value of loans granted by the industry. During the same period, a number of measures were also introduced to strengthen protection for borrowers, such as controls on interest rates and fees, which were implemented in 2015. We will be implementing further regulatory changes in the coming months.”
“In the last three years, a total of 33 fires have broken out in coffee shops in Housing and Development Board (HDB) blocks with residential units located above them. There were 14 such fires in 2013, 12 in 2014, and seven in 2015. The Fire Code, which is administered under the Fire Safety Act, stipulates fire safety requirements in buildings, including coffee shops that are sited within HDB blocks. The requirements applicable to coffee shops include the provision of ventilation openings for smoke dispersion, and separation of kitchens via fire-resistant walls if open flame-cooking appliances are used, in order to reduce the risk of fire spreading to other adjoining spaces. Alternatively, the Fire Code requires that the kitchens be equipped with fire-extinguishing systems to minimise the risk of fire spreading. There are also a number of other risk mitigation requirements. The Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) has been working closely with HDB to ensure that operators of food and beverage outlets in HDB premises including coffeeshops, comply with the fire safety measures. The SCDF also partners the National Environment Agency (NEA) to advise NEA food establishment licensees to clean the exhaust systems and ductings in their regular maintenance regimes. The SCDF takes a risk-based approach, assessing the benefit of any requirement, against the risks. The current SCDF requirements take into account that the fires at coffee shops in HDB blocks over the past three years have been confined to the affected premises, with no fire spread to the residential units above the coffee shops.”
“The recent multiple-vehicle pileups have mainly been caused by motorists' failure to keep a proper lookout or maintain proper control of their vehicles. These core driving skills are already included in the driving school syllabus for learner motorists. The syllabus for learner motorists includes both theory and practical components and is designed to teach the basics of driving. The syllabus is regularly reviewed to ensure that it remains up to date with the latest road traffic rules and regulations and the road safety situation. Over the last few years, Traffic Police has updated the syllabus to include new elements, such as driving on slope for those learning to drive automatic-transmission motor cars, and emergency braking on wet surfaces and expressway familiarisation for those learning to ride motorcycles. The syllabus is taught by driving instructors who are regulated by the Traffic Police through a licensing regime stipulated under the Road Traffic Act and the Road Traffic (Driving Instructors and Driving Schools) Rules. Driving instructors at the driving schools take an annual Instructors' Skill and Knowledge Evaluation to ensure that they continue to keep up to date. Learner motorists have to complete the syllabus and pass the driving test before obtaining a driving licence. Beyond learning driving and passing the driving test, motorists have to continue to drive safely and obey traffic rules when on the road. This is especially relevant in our efforts to improve road safety and reduce accidents. Traffic Police will continue to educate road users and step up enforcement efforts to maintain safety on our roads.”
“The Prosecution has filed an appeal against the High Court's decision in the recent case of Public Prosecutor vs Zunika Binte Ahmad. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) will await the outcome of the appeal before considering our next steps.”
“MinLaw and Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) regularly review the criminal laws and practices to ensure that our law enforcement agencies have sufficient powers and, at the same time, we have a fair and robust criminal justice system that is fair to all sides. One area that we are studying specifically is the Community Based Sentencing regime, to consider whether and how it can apply to more persons so that it helps in the rehabilitation process. This review of the criminal law system will be quite extensive. I have asked for it to be very extensive and as I have said something earlier in the speech relating to MHA – we will release details when we are a little bit more down the road on this. Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah will take the remaining cuts.”
“If you look at the handout, which will come to you in a minute, the schemes provide support to firms seeking to develop new capabilities, to become more productive and to expand to other jurisdictions. Lawyers can also use their SkillsFuture credit to pay for some of the continuing professional development courses offered by SAL, Law Society and our universities. SAL and INSEAD recently developed the "Law Firm Leadership Programme" to address the business challenges faced by law firm partners. UniSIM Law School plans to offer courses that are relevant to family and criminal law practitioners when it is up and running. We are also working with the Law Society more specifically to identify how to strengthen our small- and medium-sized law firms. The Law Society is conducting a six-month study to identify the technology and capability needs of these firms. That will then enable the Ministry to provide support more directly and effectively, for example, how they can access and use technology. We Page: 97 encourage lawyers and law firms to participate in this study actively. Mr de Souza asked about the reforms to improve the civil and criminal justice systems. My Ministry is undertaking a broad-based review of our civil justice system, from the time a dispute arises until it is resolved in Court or otherwise. Some of the things that we are considering include reviewing the entire framework of legal costs and fee structures to ensure affordability; and enhancing judicial control over litigation, by managing time and costs. Further details will be announced in due course after we have engaged the stakeholders. As for the criminal justice system, given how quickly technology has advanced and crimes have evolved, our laws and practices must keep pace.”
“A recent survey of those who handle regional work shows that Singapore law is the second most common choice to govern cross-border transactions, after English law. My Ministry will continue supporting the adoption of Singapore law through education and promotional efforts. We cannot direct but we can promote. We encourage law firms, both local and foreign, to promote Singapore law to their clients. We work with the agencies to engage companies, the ultimate end-users, on the benefits of adopting Singapore law in their cross-border contracts. We also look at our laws to make sure they are friendly for people to use, in terms of international parties. We support our law schools in their aim to become global thought leaders, not just in Asia. So, with our strong support, the NUS Faculty of Law has set up four research centres covering areas of business, banking, financial and maritime law, and on Asian Legal Studies. When I say strong support, that includes providing money. This will, we hope, help to produce a steady pipeline of high-quality legal talent and build a strong faculty and a strong core of practitioners. The aim is for us to play a leading role in developing and shaping laws where we have a strategic interest or comparative advantage. So, that is why these areas were chosen. Specific to small- and medium-sized Singapore law practices, we are aware that they may not be able to compete at this level with the bigger law firms or regional law firms. Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked how we are supporting these law firms. A number of initiatives and measures are available to help the law firms. Because there is too long a list, I do not want to read it out but I will circulate it. If the Clerks could circulate that to Members, please?”
“We are focused more on getting the smaller firms to try and take advantage of IT, but while we have the schemes and we have the money available, the take-up rate is not very high. The Senior Minister of State has written to the law firms. She has tried to engage them. We will continue trying. We can make them available, but people must make use of them. As for the other questions, I will try to touch on them in the context of my speech. Our lawyers need to step up against the competition and offer greater value to clients, compared to the region. This will require having stronger overseas knowledge and networks to better serve businesses; building deeper expertise and experience in key practice areas; and forging strong and extensive networks and relationships. We will help. We want our law firms to be successful, not just internally, but externally. We will create the framework. We are actually putting taxpayers' money into it and we focus more of the money on small and medium law firms. The big firms, we also have some money on the table through a number of schemes and it is for them to decide whether they will take them up. So, we do actually put some money to try and get them to make some money. Page: 96 On the promotion of Singapore law, Mr de Souza suggested the promotion of the use of Singapore law. Cross-border transactions, for obvious reasons, tend to be governed by New York or English law, as parties prefer to use these laws because of the law firms involved and because the ultimate end-purchasers of these bonds and other instruments tend to be located around the world. And they tend to be more familiar with New York or English law. 6.30 pm But there are some signs that Singapore law is becoming more popular.”
“The new transformation will bring around more work and the legal sector has to be prepared for that. We will support the universities and make sure that they train their lawyers for these new fields. He also asked how legal service providers can be incentivised to help in industry transformation. Well, in a way, you are asking me how we can use taxpayers' money to help lawyers make more money through industry transformation. I am not sure that is a popular subject. The fact is we do also put taxpayers' money to help lawyers in a number of ways. I will come back to this. And we will certainly help in industry transformation, to make sure there are jobs available. We will help in the training of lawyers. We do invest very substantial amounts there. As the Asst Prof knows, but probably in the other university, we helped set up a number of key centres to make Singapore the thought leader in a number of fields and I will talk about that in a short while. With all this help, it is now for the lawyers to go and see how they can take advantage of the situation. How can we, you asked, work with the Supreme Court and other institutions? We work very closely to create Singapore as a clear leader in Asia, which we are today, for example, by having the SICC and launching the Asian Business Law Institute with the support of the Supreme Court. It only works in Singapore; it is not possible in other places. This is because the Government works closely with other stakeholders to put these forward and in record time. So, we look at the whole sector and we work with everyone. How do we help firms innovate? We have a number of schemes and I will talk about this in a while.”
“Let me explain what the Government is doing to help our firms to take advantage of these opportunities. In terms of creating a framework, we offer the full suite of dispute resolution services. We are one of the most preferred seats of arbitration in the world. The year2015 was a record for SIAC, with 271 new cases involving S$6.23 billion in disputes. SIAC grew because of a very targeted and focused effort by the Government to make sure it is internationally attractive. We did away with some archaic rules that held it back. Second, we set up SICC and SIMC to provide for a broader range of dispute resolution services that will address the needs of the commercial users. And, as Mr de Souza noted, we introduced the Choice of Court Agreements Bill this week, which will help make our Courts more attractive for resolving disputes. And later this year, we plan to introduce a Mediation Bill to strengthen our mediation framework. We are also studying, more broadly, other areas of potential growth that may be available to the legal industry. Page: 95 Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah and Mr Chaly Mah co-chair a Working Group, under the Committee on the Future Economy, to identify key areas of demand and potential growth, strategies and capabilities to ensure that our law firms remain relevant and how we can increase the export of services and seize the opportunities that are available in the region. The Working Group has organised discussions with relevant players to seek their views on how we can grow this sector. Asst Prof Mahdev specifically asked what is the role of the legal sector in industry transformation. As the industry transforms, there will be a lot of work arising from the transformation.”
“There is a part for the Government, but there is also a part for the private sector and the profession. The profession must ensure that it is in a position to attract and handle high-value work; and be entrepreneurial, competitive and innovative in identifying and capturing opportunities, because they are competing. The legal sector's prospects are, ultimately, dependent on the economy. It will be impacted by the rate of economic growth. If economic growth slows, then the legal industry, as a support industry, will be affected. But even when the economy slows down, lawyers will have some opportunities. The world's economic centre of gravity is shifting towards Asia. I have said this very frequently when I was the Minister for Foreign Affairs. As Asst Prof Mahdev mentioned just now, ASEAN is the seventh largest economy in the world. ASEAN economies have grown significantly over the years and, by 2020, on current projections, it will have a GDP of US$4 trillion. International trade flows will increase and international investment will increase. Establishing AEC to allow a freer movement of goods, services, investments, skilled labour and capital will help. If we have agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) or the proposed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), that can help, too, to increase economic activities. In addition, there is also likely to be more work involving regional cross-border debt restructurings, for example. We are well-placed to serve as the lead jurisdiction to manage these sorts of complex work, provided our lawyers are able to do that. Given Asia's infrastructure needs, for example, China's One Belt One Road initiative, the amount of legal work in the area of projects and infrastructure will increase.”
“Essentially, in the recent survey, Members will see: (a) 92% of Singaporeans stated they had trust and confidence in our legal system; (b) 96% agreed that Singapore is governed by the rule of law; (c) 92% agreed that we have a fair legal system; (d) 92% agreed that we have an efficient legal system; (e) 75% agreed that legal aid is accessible to those of limited means; and (f) 62% agreed that our legal system is affordable. These results reflect the collective hard work put in by the Government, the Courts, the Attorney-General's Chambers and the various agencies in the legal industry. We thank them for their efforts. We must continue to improve our legal system for the good of all. Members have touched on some areas where they think we can do more. I will cover three areas in my speech: first, what we are doing to try and grow the legal industry; second, how we are helping small- and medium-sized Singapore law practices; and third, how we are trying to improve the civil and criminal justice systems. Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah will cover the other points. First, on growing the legal industry. Mr de Souza and Asst Prof Mahdev asked how we plan to do this. Page: 94 There are always two aspects to issues like these. First, on the Government's part, we have to make sure we have a framework that is conducive for the business environment. This includes upholding the rule of law; updating and making sure our laws and legal frameworks are relevant; providing the necessary support or incentives; and, fundamentally, ensuring good governance as a whole. If we had poor governance, or if we were not successful as a country, then it is a pipe dream to talk about the legal industry growing. But at the same time, it is not just the Government.”
“Mr Chairman, I thank the Members who spoke. As I deal with the questions, I would like to put some context to it. We have a strong reputation for upholding the rule of law. Can I ask for the distribution of the first handout from the Clerks, please?”
“Yes, in all of these, there is always a balance between the risk of abuse and allowing the agencies to use the information. The guidelines, the rules, framework, on how the data can be used, can be put in place. But you have seen from past incidents, not just from Singapore, in other places as well, there are always possibilities that some individuals may then not use it appropriately. They have to be dealt with when they are picked up. We have dealt with Page: 87 them by charging them in Court or other measures. That does not, therefore, lead to the conclusion that because there is a possibility of abuse, you do not collect the data or use it in the first place. That would be the other extreme. Then, you are opening yourself up for an attack which you cannot do anything about and, post-attack, you do not have the tools to investigate. In the end, not just this power, a variety of powers that are placed in the hands of the Government, they have to be used within the framework of the law and for the purposes they are given.”
“In the normal way, such data will be meta data, huge amounts of data. It is not just travel patterns; it is people coming into Singapore. We are talking about literally millions of bits of data every day and no one has the time to sit down and monitor individuals. Technology has got to come in to a large extent and it has to help us in identifying suspicious patterns. I do not want to go into too many operational details but, today, you have the ability to often predict some events happening even before they actually happen based on data that is collected and then analysed through technology. Then, the human intervention comes in, post that, to try and assess the likelihoods. Should an incident happen, then you would also want to track. This happened in Paris. Where were the terrorists? What were the places they visited? They found evidence in dustbins based on cameras which caught their movements. You track the entire movement chain from beginning to the end, through a series of cameras. You will use it post-incident for investigations, pre-incident for analysis and predictions. The control for all of these is within the Ministry, not just this data, any data can only be used for the purpose that it is collected. There is a sort of a framework or a position on that which is in place for the Ministry to do that.”
“On the first point, yes, if they are able to work, obviously, it helps in their self-esteem. We would like as many of them as possible to work, provided always that, in the first place, they qualify. I have set out some of the criteria, including our assessment of the risks they pose to the prison environment and the possibility of infecting others and how dangerous they are. Some do not qualify, for example, those on the capital punishment list. As to the 15% who are waiting for work and the average waiting times, can I invite the Member to file a question and I will answer?”
“I thank Mr de Souza. The importance of rehabilitation, the importance of reducing recidivism, we all accept that. In fact, I said we are even going upstream to see whether we can even prevent offending in the first place. And I said, specifically in answer to Ms Lim, we look at them before they come in, try and identify who is at risk during the period to see how we can help them and then post-release. And that applies to DRC inmates as well. The specific points that Mr de Souza made about counselling, psychological training, those are already being done. There is fairly intensive effort made to try and get them to kick the habit. First of all, of course, by isolating them from drugs but, second, also trying to get them to understand the dangers of the drug, seeing how they have got into this habit and how they can be helped to kick the habit. It involves physical regimen as well. 5.45 pm And post-release, we try a fair bit of intervention but I have to say quite a bit also depends on the family environment and family support. We have not received the kind of family participation in programmes that we would like. We have programmes that are catered to try and get the kid better but also working with the family. But parents often do not come for this. So, you see, the state trying to do this by itself is really fighting the problem with one hand tied. The more important hand is really the family and we have programmes to bring the family in. I have asked my officials to see in what other way we can bring the family in more effectively. We have to look at those options and try and see how families can, for example, be directed to come in and help, work with them. Page: 85”
“I think you would recall, I told my officers to relook at it and whether there are any other solutions that we have to consider, including taking the matter up with the Committee that was set up, to try and see whether we can decentralise to the extent possible, provide facilities and amenities elsewhere. While it is a situation where the best answer I can give you is that I can see that the Police officers, the Auxiliary Police officers, as well as the other uniformed personnel we have put without full Police powers, are doing a very good job. But, nevertheless, we cannot put our hand on our heart, given the numbers who are congregating, that something may not happen, and we have to see what else we need to do. Page: 84”
“I thank the Member for those questions. On the second question, MHA gets involved in specific context, for example, liquor shops, massage establishments, then the Police get involved and say this is allowed and this is not allowed. And you will see, generally, where massage establishments are allowed, liquor shops are allowed. As for the rest, it is not something that MHA deals with. HDB and MND deal with that. But, of course, some of the regulatory agencies have some supervision. For example, moneylending outlets, the Ministry of Law gets involved. Pawnshops, too. It is an assessment of need versus where is an appropriate place to allow – usually, in town centres, because there is a need for this. If you completely rule them out, then, they go underground. But, housing estates, perhaps, if there are specific examples, the Member can let us know. But I would say, primarily, what is allowed and what is not allowed in housing estate void decks is something that comes within HDB's purview. If I may go on to talk about Little India. We walked together. We spent, I think, close to three hours, maybe even more. And we chose a day when, specifically, it was expected to be crowded, the first Sunday of the month. The Police are doing everything they can to deal with the situation. But that does not necessarily mean that the entire situation cannot lead to another incident. We saw. What we are getting in a small area is a very large number of young men. We have very strict rules on consumption of liquor and where they can be consumed, but we cannot prevent them from congregating in a variety of places as long as they do not have, say, liquor openly being helped. But every time you get these large congregations of young men, there is always a potential for some trouble.”
“We will press on with our transformation journey, build our capabilities, develop our officers, work closely with the community to meet these challenges head-on and continue to try and keep Singapore safe and secure. My colleagues will answer the other questions.”