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 71 of 92.
“The seriousness with which the Government is approaching this is shown by the fact that we set up a statutory board, which then also works with the private sector, identifies companies which might have an interest in employing these prisoners. Of course, a fair bit of this is also to reduce the social stigma in employing these prisoners. That is why we try and remove or reduce – I think "remove" is quite an ambitious aim – but to reduce the social stigma by giving the Yellow Ribbon programme very substantial prominence. The Prime Minister launches events relating to the Yellow Ribbon programme, other senior Ministers as well, and keeping it in the public consciousness, and then working with the private sector to try and get them employed. As I have said, if I can call it a "scaffolding"; when they are released, you need to try and make sure they move into something. It is a much more direct involvement approach that we have taken. This investment bond idea has been a very recent one from the UK. We will study their experience. If it works better than what we are doing ‒ we do not have a "not invented here" syndrome ‒ so, we will always be happy to look at what works. If I may say this: seven days a week, 24 hours a day, the work of the Home Team never ceases. Our officers are on the ground, constantly working to keep Singapore safe and secure. Page: 73 You saw this during the Christmas and Chinese New Year periods, especially at the checkpoints. More officers were on duty during these peak periods, so that Singaporeans can enjoy the festive seasons. The demands on the Home Team will continue to rise because of external threats and local developments.”
“There are also religious counselling programmes, family programmes and other counselling programmes to address inmates' drug addiction issues and criminality. Ultimately, I would say one good indicator of where we are at is the recidivism rate of 27%, which is much lower than what people might call first-world prisons. If I could give you some statistics. I do not have the figures for the UK, but if you take Scotland, it is about 40%. Australia ‒ if we take New South Wales ‒ it is about 48%; Western Australia, 31%; New Zealand, 36%. Our own recidivism rate was about 40% in the year 2000. Through these interventions, we have brought it down to 27%. But I do not want to say, therefore, we have reached the best possible state or that it may not go up again, because it is a rate depending on how hardcore these prisoners are. But you can see the broad trends. Parliamentary Secretary Amrin will elaborate on the through-care approach to rehabilitation that SPS adopts. Mr Perera asked about social impact bonds and whether that can be used to reduce recidivism, almost like the private sector investing in the matter. The approach we have taken is to be even more direct by asking the private sector to come in and work with us to employ the people. That is even more important. There is a requirement for private sector investment, if I may put it in that way. But it is done through, first, identifying while the prisoners are in prison, what are the kinds of job they can do when they come out. And then seeing the extent to which we can train them. Where it is possible to do in-house training, we do it in-house. Where we need outside consultants to come and help train, we do that, too, so they get trained. The statutory board, SCORE, takes care of a number of these things.”
“The only people who give them comfort often are not even their families, but their friends who led them astray in the first place. So, we have focused quite a bit on what happens post-release. It is not perfect, but the hand-holding ‒ the Government, as a partner, bringing in the private sector. SCORE, as a statuary board, has been set up specifically to focus on some of these aspects, so that when they come out, we do the best we can to try and get them a job, and we have to do more. Again, there is a shortage of people that we can use, but we work closely with the private sector to try and get that part going. We have been doing this for a number of years and we can do more. In terms of the specific questions that have been raised, we enhance their employability through getting them Workforce Skills Qualification training, for example, in numeracy and literacy programmes. We have over 12,000 who qualify for training. First, we do an assessment on how many qualify. Of those who qualify, as of today, 85% of those who can work are engaged in work programmes and 15% are awaiting work allocation. In terms of specific drop in numbers, rather than going into specific factors, what I could say is this: the Prison has introduced a programme recently where those who are about to be released, 10 Page: 72 months pre-release, they will go for intensive counselling. That means that they may not be able to go for work programmes. That could be one of the reasons why there is a drop in numbers, but there are a number of factors. The proportion of qualifying inmates who are engaged in work programmes has actually been increasing.”
“While in prison, the Singapore Prison Service (SPS) has a key focus on rehabilitation. The idea is we have to look at it as a continuum, try to do what we can before they offend. The Second Minister of Home Affairs Mr Masagos chairs the Committee that looks at that, because we want to try and prevent people from coming into prisons in the first place. Today, there is data that show what is the likelihood of someone offending from a young age. The fact that someone drops out of school is usually an indicator, and there are other indicators. And then, prisons and then post-release. You have got to look at this as a continuum and try to treat them in such a way that, first, you reduce the likelihood of them coming into prisons; and, second, when they do come in, you reduce the likelihood of them re-offending. So, we take that approach, one picture, not just to look at the period that they are in prison. What do we do when they are in prison? They need to, first of all, be taught discipline, some self-control, the ability to control themselves. Second, once their discipline is established, they should be given training and work programmes – and there are qualifying criteria. Not everyone qualifies. It depends on their risk assessment. It depends on how much they might infect the other prisoners, a variety of factors. But based on a set of risk assessment tools, prisoners are selected for training, work programmes, so that after they are released, they can get jobs. Also important is the post-release period. Immediately after release is the period when many of them are very vulnerable. Their old friends approach them, they are ostracised in society and they may not have a job.”
“There must obviously be a process to pick and train people who are suitable to do the job. On the specific case, perhaps if Ms Lim gives me the details, I will ask LTA or check with MOT to see what actually happened. But a word about age. I think the fact that someone is 60 should not be a limiting factor, because one can be very fit, and we have to emphasise that. So, age of 60 itself should not always be seen as a barrier here. But, of course, the personality must be the right fit, and I think, on the specific case, maybe LTA can give an answer. Ms Lim also asked about the psychological support for prison inmates and the use of their time in prison. These are important points. Our prison regime is strict, it is rigorous, with a strong focus on discipline. There is no question that it is a no-nonsense environment. And that has to be so. But the fundamental point is we cannot see prisoners simply as detainees for a period. We have to focus on rehabilitation so that, when they leave, they do not go out and re-offend. It does Page: 71 not help anyone. It does not help them, society and the Prison to have them back in the prisons. Specifically on mental health, the Prison has a multi-disciplinary set of teams, comprising, of course, prison officers, medical officers, psychiatrists, psychologists and counsellors. When Prison officers observe inmates exhibiting signs of mental health issues, they will refer them to the psychiatrists and psychologists. In addition, members from the Board of Visiting Justices and Board of Visitors conduct regular surprise visits to prison institutions and DRCs to check on inmates' well-being. Inmates can also approach them during their visits to raise any requests or provide feedback.”
“They are used as a complement of Police resources. Police then can perform core functions like crime-fighting and countering terrorism. There are today about 7,000 APOs deployed in Singapore. They are either Singapore Citizens, PRs who are Malaysian citizens, or Malaysian citizens. Ms Lim asked if there is a ratio of five Malaysians to one Singaporean. No. That is not correct. Thankfully. More than half of the APOs are Singaporeans and that is not by chance. My Ministry has deliberately required that there be a Singaporean majority in the APOs, despite the manpower challenges. If there is any change to that, it will only be done after a careful review. 4.45 pm Again, our preference would be for there to be more Singaporean APOs. But getting Singaporeans with the right qualifications and personality fit has been a challenge for the companies. Again, because of the overall manpower shortage, of course, you will get someone who will come forward to become an APO but not accepted for the role because the companies do not find him suitable. We have fairly strict requirements on APOs. On the deployment of APOs, this depends on the risk assessment and operational requirements of the post. We are conscious of the implications of hiring and deploying Malaysian APOs. My Ministry requires that all APOs deployed at our land checkpoints be Singaporeans. Ms Lim also spoke about civilian personnel who are recruited for law enforcement duties and spoke about the gentleman who was deployed by LTA for enforcement duties. I think some Government agencies do appoint civilians, including volunteers, as auxiliary officers. These agencies will have to have a procedure to recruit, train and audit the officers to ensure that they carry out their duties effectively and professionally.”
“Police will also enhance its scheme of service to attract young people to join the Force and to retain the good officers we already have. First, Police will implement a unified rank structure, moving away from the separate schemes for junior officers and senior officers that we currently have. There will be a unified single scheme and a single rank structure for all Police officers. And good Diploma holders who join the Force can look forward to seamless advancement opportunities up the ranks. Second, Police will introduce expert tracks to build deep specialty in the key domains of investigations, intelligence and special operations. There will, therefore, be new career developmental pathways for officers with specialised skills. These measures will help enhance the operational capability and preparedness of SPF. Details will be announced at the Police Workplan Seminar later this month. We will also progressively extend the changes to the rest of the Home Team departments. Another group of officers who play a vital role in the Home Team is our National Servicemen. Mr Melvin Yong had observed that the number of full-time Home Team NS officers will decrease Page: 70 over time. That is so. Thus, SPF and SCDF have embarked on and completed their NS transformation reviews. We are restructuring our plans for full-time NS officers and reservists to focus their deployment on operational roles that will have a direct impact on ground situations and give them more opportunities to assume leadership and specialist roles. Beyond the Home Team, Auxiliary Police forces are important partners. I think Ms Sylvia Lim spoke about APOs. APOs are deployed for a range of functions, including protecting sensitive installations and supporting Police deployment at major events.”
“This year, SPF will be making a major investment to extend Police cameras to public areas in our HDB residential estates, such as town centres, neighbourhood centres and pedestrian walkways linking HDB blocks to bus interchanges and MRT stations. This programme, which we will call PolCam 2.0, will build on the ongoing PolCam 1.0 programme which installed video cameras at all HDB blocks and multi-storey carparks. They are a key plank in our counter-terrorism strategy and crime-fighting strategies. Another area where technology can help us is at our checkpoints. By year-end, all motorcycle counters at our land checkpoints will be equipped with automated clearance facilities. Motorcyclists entering Singapore will have their passports verified by a machine and have their thumbprint scanned for identity authentication. This is similar to the automated lanes available for Singaporeans at passenger checkpoints. More efficient, more convenient, without compromising on security. Likewise, the new Changi Airport Terminal 4 will feature a new operating model with more self-service immigration facilities powered by technology and creating a hassle-free experience and reducing reliance on manpower. These initiatives will enhance our operational effectiveness. They will allow us to do more with a limited number of officers and free up our manpower resources to be re-deployed to more critical duties. But technology and systems are not effective without good officers. Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Louis Ng highlighted the importance of attracting Home Team officers and optimising our manpower resources to meet increasing demands. Police will step up recruitment this year to fill new posts in its ERTs and to build up the Special Operations troops.”
“Based on statistics, Members can see from the indicators, overall crime rate, dealing with emergencies, our drug situation, I think, on most criteria, we are among the best in the world. I set this out in some detail because I want to acknowledge the central point that Ms Lim makes about manpower challenges and explain the broad limitations on what we can do about it. But beyond the present, the fact that we are doing okay today, we are doing well today, is no guarantee of the future. And I am focused on the years ahead, how will our challenges develop and how will we respond. We need an operating model to enhance our operational effectiveness and manage our workload. We need to use technology even more. For example, with our limited resources, it is going to be difficult to respond to all incidents within the same response time. The Home Team needs to be data-driven, tiered and differentiated in its frontline response. This means employing data analytics to anticipate ahead of time where safety and security emergencies might arise and intelligently deploy our resources to focus on those hotspots. The end result? More resources into higher priority areas for a faster response time and inevitable trade-offs will then have to be made. Page: 69 Coming back to the Police and counter-terrorism, I want to make another point. Despite the significant manpower challenges, we are working on considerably enhancing the size of our Emergency Response Teams (ERTs). Numbers will have to be increased. There is really no choice. If we do not, then, in my view, we take unacceptable risks. This is going to require on-going conversations about our manpower caps, even as we increase the size of our ERTs. Let me say something about the use of technology.”
“We would like to have more manpower across the Home Team – to answer Ms Lim's question specifically – whether it is Police, ICA, SCDF, as prison officers. All our other departments face manpower challenges. The macro situation in Singapore is that there are smaller numbers of younger Singaporeans entering the workforce each year as a result of our birth rates. The private sector also needs people. If the public sector takes more, then the private sector will be squeezed even more. So, the Government imposes some caps on the growth of the public sector. This discipline is necessary, for the sake of the country. Within the public sector, other Ministries, agencies, also need manpower. And so, the Home Team is squeezed. Likewise, everyone else is squeezed. I was in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I know. They had difficulties, too, and I spoke about them. So, everyone has to live with less manpower than ideal and that is the situation in Singapore. That is a reality. In the Home Team, we are certainly not in an ideal situation, in terms of manpower. Given the limited overall manpower pool and, in particular, the stringent requirements of the Home Team, uniformed services, for obvious reasons, the requirements are stringent and strict, both in terms of fitness and character, in terms of our assessment of the person's suitability. It does not mean we always get it right but there are a number of requirements. So, we are not able to get all the manpower that we need. But we will do our best to ensure the safety and security outcomes remain good. As it is, in a less than ideal situation, with the far fewer number of Home Team officers, Police officers, how are we doing?”
“This will change a lot of the work that we do. For example, emergency ambulance calls have increased by about 5% annually for the past five years. At this rate, the volume of calls will easily double in 15 years and it is likely that it will not grow at a standard 5% rate as our population ages quickly. Second, our traveller and cargo volumes are growing. Last year, our land checkpoints handled close to 400,000 travellers per day. At Changi Airport, we expect the volume of travellers to increase by up to 50% in 10 years – from 120,000 per day to 180,000 travellers per day. Third, the Home Team now has to confront new manifestations of crime. In 2015, a rise in cybercrime led to an overall rise in the crime rate in Singapore. And most of these are committed from abroad. Given technological advancements, we can expect the volume and complexity of cybercrimes to grow. Senior Minister of State Desmond Lee will say more about this. Page: 68 Fourth, public expectations. They are growing and, in some situations, the way some people treat our officers is unacceptable. We have observed an increasing trend of hurt and verbal abuse towards Home Team officers. They have been threatened, insulted, punched, kicked and bitten. Last year, 344 such cases were reported, about one case every single day. We will take firm action against such abusive persons, including prosecuting them and pressing for stiff sentences. All these factors increase the workload on the Home Team. As it is, our overall manning levels are not high. We only have 170 Police officers per 100,000 population, which is quite low, compared to other cities like London, New York and Hong Kong. There will be limits to how many more ambulance crews, immigration officers or Police officers we can employ.”
“These contain important data that can be vital to our safety and security. We had initially taken the position that some of these data would not be used. And I have said so in Parliament. Mr Mah Bow Tan and Dr Yaacob Ibrahim had all said that in the past. But the changed security environment means that we have to change the position on not using such data. I wish to state that clearly here, since it is a change from what we had said previously in Parliament. 4.30 pm In this changed security environment, the Home Team must be able to collect and analyse suspicious travel patterns and respond swiftly and decisively, for our collective security. If we do not rely on the existing data, then we have to spend taxpayers' money to redo the entire infrastructure to look at how people move because that is one of the ways in which you will now analyse its patterns, apart from other data. The fight against terrorism must begin, must be fought, beyond our borders as well. Mr de Souza pointed out that effective regional and international partnerships are key. We have strong reciprocal intelligence and information exchanges with our foreign counterparts. In June 2015, we signed a comprehensive MOU on counter-terrorism with Australia. We have also strengthened legislation to enable quick and effective action against terrorism and terrorism financing, and we have enhanced our international cooperation capabilities. However, even with our best efforts, we cannot rule out the possibility of an attack in Singapore. Let me now talk about the growing demands on the Home Team. Over the next 10 to 15 years, four major developments will have a profound impact on the complexity and volume of work that the Home Team handles. First, our greying population.”
“Because a release before rehabilitation means that they may perpetrate more crimes and, in Indonesia, the cost of their decision to release was the blood of innocents. That is the cost that societies take. It does not mean that when we release, we can always be absolutely sure that the person will not get back to his ways. It may happen. There is always a risk, but, at least, we do not need to release until we have made that assessment. I agree with Ms Rahayu Mahzam that we also have to exercise sensitivity in the way we do the messaging, making it clear that our fight is against extremism and violence and not against any particular race, ethnicity or religion. Indeed, the Government, through my speeches as well as the speeches of others, has made that absolutely plain. And, in fact, we have emphasised the responsibility that the majority in Singapore have to make sure that there is social cohesion, Page: 67 harmony and peace. We have to make it clear that our fight is against extremism and violence and not against any particular religion. We have to stay united, instead of being divided. We have to take a collective stand against those who threaten our harmony and way of life and do all we can to protect the multi-racial and multi-religious soul of Singapore. Mr Patrick Tay spoke about the need to better tap on existing data and platforms to support our counter-terrorism operations. In this heightened threat environment, we have to use all available resources at our disposal to detect and respond to threats. The Home Team will use all intelligence and investigation tools available and make better use of available data, for example, public transport video cameras and the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system.”
“We look at who is likely to pose a serious and imminent threat and a Detention Order will be made under the Internal Security Act against them. The rest ‒ and we have done that frequently over the years ‒ if we believe that they have extremist leanings but they are quite far removed from actually carrying out or doing something, we advise them, we may put them on a Restraining Order. So, they are free to move around but with some restrictions. So, that is the difference. We treat our citizens differently but, when they are foreign workers, we ask them to leave for obvious reasons. And if we look at Indonesia, for example, again, the differences in approach. Four Indonesians recently came through, including a 15-year-old boy. ICA did it quite well, we picked them up and we realised that they were going to go off to the Middle East to fight. So, we handed them over to the Indonesian authorities. In Singapore, they would have been subjected to the Internal Security Act. No questions. But the Indonesians have released them. They are free to go around, thinking of more things to do and, perhaps, making further attempts to get to the Middle East. Again, difference in approach. The reason I have set out our position quite comprehensively on this is that we need to be guided by our assessment of what is and is not safe for Singapore. If other countries wish to treat would-be terrorists in a different way, they do so taking the consequences of their decisions. For example, two of the suicide bombers who took part in the recent Jakarta attacks had just been released from prison. In Singapore, when we pick them up, we make an assessment and we do not release them until we believe that they have been rehabilitated.”
“And he told students, "You should prepare for jihad without any delay, you should get jihadist training from wherever you can and we are also ready to offer our services" and so on and so forth. In Britain, that passes for free speech. We will not allow that. So, there are different approaches. If such a person came to Singapore, first of all, he would have been prevented from Page: 66 coming to Singapore; and, second, if he said those things here, he would be arrested and deported. If a Singaporean said these things, he would be advised not to say them and, if he continued, he would be detained. So, it is a different approach. Let us turn to Bangladesh. The 27 men we deported possessed material on them on silent killing, on jihadist propaganda and how to engage in jihad. They were not thinking of doing it in Singapore, they were discussing it generally. There can be a time gap between thinking about these things and actually carrying them out somewhere. Bangladesh was prepared to put 13 of them on surveillance while detaining the others. For us, these were 27 foreign workers. We made a security assessment. The question is whether we allow them to stay or ask them to leave. So, it is different question from Bangladesh which has got to deal with its own citizens. For us, they are foreign workers. Do we, say, 13 of them, we put on some sort of surveillance and expend our resources, or do we ask all 27 to leave? I think the acid test will be this question if I were to pose it to Members, "How many of your residents will be happy if I put 13 of them in foreign workers' dorms in your constituency? Would you rather have them in Singapore or out of Singapore?" I think those are the questions for us. Supposing they were 27 Singaporeans, then we make distinctions.”
“I am not saying solely, but it certainly has contributed. Other reasons – you have ghettos, you have significant under-employment or unemployment – but the key is the spread of ideology, free and unfettered, in a permissive environment because many of those who get involved are not unemployed, they are highly-educated and well-employed. If you then turn to the UK ‒ and I want to refer to this article – not so much to assert the truth of it from the BBC but more to indicate if we had such a situation ‒ how would we deal with it? Almost like, if I were to give you a situation, how would Singapore deal with it? It is about a gentleman by the name of Masood Azhar, a Pakistani. He was a VIP guest of Britain's leading Islamic scholars. He went to Britain in 1993 for a lecture, and I quote, "When one of the world's most important jihadist leaders landed at Heathrow Airport on 6 August 1993, a group of Islamic scholars from Britain's largest mosque network was there to welcome him. The visiting preacher was Masood Azhar. Today, he is wanted by the Indian authorities following the attack on the Pathankot military base in January this year." A BBC investigation revealed an astounding insight into the way in which hardcore jihadist ideology was promoted in some mainstream UK mosques in the early 1990s and involved some of Britain's most senior Islamic scholars. He addressed the students and teachers, telling them that a substantial proportion of the Koran had been devoted to "killing for the sake of Allah" and that a substantial volume of sayings of the Prophet Muhammad were on the issue of jihad. He spoke on "the divine promise of victory to those engaged in jihad".”
“It will have a sharper focus on vigilance and on preparing the community to respond appropriately to potential threats. The success depends on the community responding to the call, though we intend to do everything we can to bring it to the community. We will roll out programmes which seek to touch almost every section of our society − on awareness, on responses and on coming together, if there is an attack. Mr Singh also asked how the Home Team assesses if an individual has been radicalised and how Singaporeans can be inoculated against extremist teachings. We draw the line quite clearly on support for terrorist groups like ISIS. For example, we have taken action against those who sell ISIS flags. We have taken action against those who propagate ISIS' ideology. And those who intended to go to fight in conflict zones, we have taken action against them as well. Our experience, and the global experience, is that radicalisation is a process that can happen without forewarning, and very quickly, in a matter of a month in some cases. We make an assessment of an individual – his motivations, actions, personality and character. What danger does he pose to society and to the country? We need to be alert even to the slightest indication of danger and take action and leave no one in doubt as to where we stand. Mr Singh said that other countries ‒ I think he mentioned Bangladesh ‒ perhaps had taken a more nuanced view and, indeed, they do. I want to dwell on this a bit because it is a very important point. Let us take a few examples of countries which have taken a different approach from us. Let us start with Belgium. For years, they allowed hate speech, in the name of civil liberties. That has contributed to the situation that you have in Belgium today.”
“In Malaysia, in the last year, more than 100 people have been arrested, including commandos, police officers, military officers, civil servants, because of their allegiance to ISIS or terrorist leanings. At least one plot was disabled a few hours before it was to be carried out, right in the heart of Kuala Lumpur. Some Members have asked how we will deal with this heightened terror threat. My Ministry will significantly enhance our counter-terrorism efforts in three areas. One, strengthen the protection of hard and soft targets and take other measures, including enhancing the video camera network around Singapore. Two, enhance our security response capabilities to respond quickly and effectively to any attack. Three, strengthen our community response through a new national movement which we will call SG Secure. 4.15 pm Dr Tan Wu Meng and Ms Rahayu Mahzam spoke about the need to have a whole-of-society mindset in security and to start young. This is important. The community has always played an important role in keeping Singapore safe and secure. Parliamentary Secretary Amrin Amin will speak more about our partnerships with the community. SG Secure will build on the foundation we have set so far as part of the Community Engagement Programme (CEP). It will try to take the CEP to a new level. We will seek to empower the community to stay alert, stay united and stay strong in the face of the terrorist threats. But, ultimately, SG Secure cannot just be a public awareness campaign. It will be a call to action. It will build on what we have achieved through the CEP. Page: 65 CEP was focused on maintaining and enhancing social cohesion and harmony. SG Secure will be larger in scope and scale in its outreach.”
“How we get the balance Page: 64 right depends on our assessment of the threats, which can vary from time to time, and the overall general situation. Moving on to the topic of terrorism, Mr Singh asked about the nature of the threat of terrorism. I have explained this in recent speeches on terrorism, including how, in terms of scale, network, finances and propaganda, ISIS poses a far graver threat than Al Qaeda ever was. That is our own serious assessment based on available information. Many experts agree with that assessment. For example, Sidney Jones, Director of Jakarta-based Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict, said that the January attacks in Jakarta "may be a harbinger of more violence to come" and that ISIS "has already transformed the terrorism threat in Indonesia". But as Mr Singh pointed out, there are some who have said that the threat is exaggerated. After Paris, Jakarta and Brussels, all within five months of each other, I think Members will agree we cannot take that approach, that since some experts think that the threat is exaggerated, therefore, we do not have to take the threat seriously. We have to step up measures. Mr Singh specifically asked about Katibah Nusantara. I have spoken about this. Returning foreign fighters, such as those from Katibah Nusantara, pose a particular threat, a serious threat. They are battle-hardened with combat skills, violent tendencies and extremist ideology and completely intent on perpetrating violence. Katibah Nusantara issues videos in Malay, aimed squarely at the Malay populations in this region. They are very serious.”
“Again, I think that is reflective of the way we all feel. Specifically, Ms Lim made the point that there may be some under-reporting of crimes. I accept this possibility. In particular, I accept that victims of sexual offences may sometimes be unwilling to report and there could be a variety of reasons for this: fear, in a situation of power imbalance, particularly when the victim is young and knows the offender. And I accept that these victims need to be helped. Our sense is that, in general, in terms of the statistics, the under-reporting is unlikely to make a significant difference to what we have set out as the crime statistics, but we must help those who do not report out of fear. We have undertaken another major review of our criminal processes and criminal laws in general. That review will look at these issues. As I have said before, we do these reviews regularly. A couple of months ago, I asked for such a review to be done. I will ask my officers to consider, in the context of the review, the points made by Ms Lim, including the possibility of surveys to establish the level of under-reporting. Our own sense, as I have said, is that in Singapore, at least, given the levels of education, the concerns about the Police or fears about the system are unlikely to be major reasons for under-reporting, and classification is a matter of assessment, but I think the point is, at this stage, worth looking at. Ms Lim also asked about measuring checkpoint efficiency. At our checkpoints, we track efficiency as an internal measure. It is important that we turnaround travellers quickly, for Singaporeans and also because we are an international tourist destination. But, of course, efficiency will not be pursued at the expense of security. It is a balance.”
“Thank you, Mdm Chair. I thank the hon Members who have given valuable comments. Mdm Chair, 2015 was especially challenging and intense for the Home Team. Our tempo of operations was very high. But despite the challenging environment and the very substantial number of major events, I think what we can say, looking back over the year, is that crime has remained under control. The unlicensed moneylending situation hit a 10-year low. Drug abuse and recidivism rates are stable. Road safety, immigration offending and the fire safety situation are all stable. Ms Sylvia Lim made a number of points about KPIs and I thank her for her comments. What the Home Team does on the ground and what is achieved must obviously go beyond what is in the Budget Book. And they do. The KPIs reflect some broad measures which we published. In addition, we have internal measures, norms, surveys and also references to serious international benchmarks, which help us achieve our aims and provide a framework for measuring performances, which is important. All of these, taken together, must lead to the answer to a very basic question: what is the trust and public support that the Home Team agencies, Home Team officers enjoy in Singapore? That is the most fundamental question. Our most recent safety and security survey was carried out in 2014 and 90% of Singaporeans felt safe in their neighbourhoods. I think no Singaporean will really question that because we know whether we feel safe or we do not feel safe in Singapore. Globally, the 2015 Gallup Global Law and Order Report ranked Singapore first out of 141 countries. This was on people's sense of safety in their neighbourhoods and their confidence in the police force. Nine in 10 respondents in Singapore said they felt safe walking home alone at night.”
“From 2006 to 2015, an average of 18,795 persons were granted Singapore citizenship (SC) annually. Of this, a significant majority came from Asia, mainly from Southeast Asia. In 2013, in answer to Ms Sylvia Lim in Parliament, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean had said "In some cases, we provide aggregated information or data instead of a more detailed breakdown because it may not be in our interest to do so. It may have implications on specific groups of persons or create sensitivities in the countries of origin for those who are working here or those who have migrated here… For similar reasons, we provide data on the number of immigrants by broad categories of the regions they have come from but have not provided the detailed breakdown of immigrants by specific countries of origin. I think Members understand that there may be some sensitivity with regard to this." That remains the position. Disclosing a detailed breakdown of the data may, among other issues, have implications/sensitivities for specific groups of persons and create sensitivities in the countries of origin.”
“The 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. Nonetheless, there are a small number of cards that may be damaged due to excessive wear and tear over time. 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 at the same level 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.”
“As at 15 February 2016, Police have installed Police cameras at about 92% of all HDB blocks and Multi-Storey Car Parks (MSCPs) across Singapore. Police are on track to complete the installation at all HDB blocks and MSCPs by this year. Police will work with HDB to continue to install Police cameras at new BTO flats coming onstream thereafter.”
“The Singapore Police Force (SPF) equips Police officers with the skills to handle their jobs effectively through various structured and customised training programmes. All Police officers undergo a three-month Police Basic Officer Course when they first join the Force. During the course, officers are trained to handle different situations, including encounters with persons who show signs of mental illnesses. After the basic three-month course, officers attend a customised course based on their vocation. Those deployed to patrol duties attend a three-month Neighbourhood Police Centre Ground Response Force (NPC GRF) course. During the course, they learn techniques in dealing with situations where there are disputes or violence, including taking control of the situation, preventing escalation of violence, rendering and requesting for medical assistance, investigating possible offences committed and providing the parties involved an avenue for conflict resolution. The training would involve officers having to deal with situations where they come across people with mental health conditions. In addition to training, SPF works closely with agencies, such as the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) and the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC), to manage persons who may have mental health conditions. When our frontline officers suspect that a person is suffering from mental health conditions but the person does not pose any danger to himself or others, they will liaise with AIC to follow up on the case. In cases where our officers take the view that the person is of unsound mind and poses a danger either to himself or to someone else, Police officers may arrest him under the Mental Health Care and Treatment Act for referral to IMH for expert medical assessment.”
“Foreign worker dormitories are subject to a number of guidelines in terms of what we allow and do not allow. The sizing, how they are structured and so on, have to be cleared by the security agencies. For example, quite apart from issues of terrorism, there are other issues related to possible violence and we need to be able to move in and deal with that. The issue of overall security is an ongoing conversation, not just with people who manage foreign worker dormitories, but we need to involve the broader Singapore society and my Ministry will be announcing some plans soon. With regard to the second question about the gathering of foreign workers in specific places, I will start with this caveat. If you look at the incidence of crime, it is actually lower amongst the foreign workers because they are here for a purpose. If they get into trouble, they will be sent back straightaway and it is a huge economic cost. So, the crime incidence within the foreign worker population is lower than that of the general Singapore population. Having said that, I think we recognise the point the Member has made and there are some imperatives. First, we need them here, for example, for construction and some of the other types of work. Second, we have to manage that and the growth of the foreign worker population has been managed significantly. But then, that imposes cost on businesses and the economy. At the same time, we have to manage the gatherings. For example, by using the Police and other uniformed services; sometimes, you do not need a Police officer dealing with these issues. We are looking at all of that. I do not want to give the impression that, therefore, everything is perfect, but it is certainly a problem that has been recognised.”
“Mdm Speaker, our security agencies will continue to monitor and investigate signs of radicalisation in Singapore. These threats can come from within Singapore or from foreigners in Singapore. As part of the overall counter-terrorism effort, we also share intelligence with foreign security partners to deal with the transnational nature of the threats. But it cannot just be the security agencies. The larger Singaporean society has also got to play a part in protecting us against this threat. Singaporeans need to help safeguard family and friends from becoming radicalised. Employers need to pay attention on what is going on in workers' dormitories, for example. Workers, too, can play a part in reporting suspicious activities that they may come across. In short, everyone has a part to play to enhance our collective security. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): I thank the Minister for the response. Can I just ask two supplementary questions? Firstly, are there specific action plans that we can put up or come up with dormitory operators because they are an important resource for us and they are the eyes and the ears on the ground, especially where foreign workers congregate, for example, in the dormitories? Secondly, there are locations in Singapore and throughout Singapore where there are frequent, repeated and recurrent gatherings of foreign workers we know and many of them do not create any major problems or issues. But what would be our threshold for stimulus or to take action, for example?”
“I thank Ms Tan for that. But that sort of reverses the onus. It is not for them to make the allegations and then for us to respond. The law is the same on reporting before a pending hearing or inquiry; whether it is a physical world or online world, the law of contempt is the same. Everyone should observe it. Just because you are online does not mean that you get a free pass and you can say what you like. So, we start with what is the law. As I said, you can raise some general issues; you can raise the issue of policy, whether in the media, physical media, print media, broadcast media or online media. What you cannot do is to make allegations of fact when those facts could be the subject matter of dispute or have to be found in an inquiry or would necessarily be part of what an inquiry would have to decide. It is even egregious when they are a bunch of lies. I think the starting point is people who want to express their views have to be responsible and the law requires them to be responsible. We will be as open as is legally possible. Where it is possible, we will publish the information.”
“I think we were right, we were observing the law but others were not so careful. In fact, they were cavalier and which has then required us to come out today and clarify.”
“I think the first question essentially raises the question whether we should have an Appropriate Adult present. What I have said is we had considered a lot of that very carefully previously and I have explained in my Statement the considerations. And I have said that we will review. We will do a review. We will look at the findings in the Coroner's Inquiry. We will consult stakeholders and we will decide. I have explained why we should not have knee-jerk reactions. I think I should express, as the Minister for Education has expressed, our condolences to Benjamin's family. And equally, we share the grief of the family of the 11-year-old girl because they are also grief-stricken. I think they all have the same feelings. As I said in my Statement, either child could have been a child of any of us. We got to approach it with that perspective. At the same time, whether the Police should wait for the parents or somebody else to accompany, whether there should be someone else present, I think these are the same type of questions that Ms Denise Phua and Mr Dennis Tan have raised and which I myself have raised in my Statement. We will review it. On the second point as to whether we will release more information, I have spent quite a bit of time explaining why in this case we actually decided not to go into the facts. I think it would be unseemly for this matter to get to a stage where there are series of allegations and counter allegations, and statements and counter statements with the families, the commentators, the Police – you will have a "free for all". That is precisely what legal proceedings are destined to avoid. We will have a proper process for finding out the facts. Otherwise, who is to say my truth is superior to your truth?”
“It is quite clear from my Statement what I thought of the coverage. I think it is a calculated, cynical attempt to tar the Police using falsehoods. And I have said what should happen hereafter is not something I should be commenting on today.”
“I assume on the second question, what the Member is really asking is whether we will pay for it. Yes, that is something that we would look at. I cannot give a guarantee on that but we will certainly look at. On the first point, I have already said that both in my Statement and in answer to Dr Tan's question, that the review would cover this particular aspect as whether an Appropriate Adult should be present when young persons are interviewed. But I have taken some considerable pains to point out why it is not a straightforward issue and what are possible issues that might arise. We have to balance between the need to move quickly, investigate, particularly when it is a serious crime, a terrorism-related issue, and balance that against the need for the young person to have some support. I have mentioned the systemic risk could be minimised as well. We will try but I just want to be very open, clear and transparent about our considerations as we look at this.”
“First of all, the suggestion that this case would have died down long ago is ridiculous because there is going to be a Coroner's Inquiry. That is what normally happens when there is an unnatural death and an announcement was made on the 1 February, as I said, that is six days after the Police started investigating; on the sixth day. So, that is just absurd. But I am not saying that the father is saying absurd things; I do not want to assume that what I see in TOC is what the father says. But any such suggestion would be absurd. What I can say is what the father said to us. On 24 February last week, he had told us in the presence of a number of officers that the family would prefer to keep the Coroner's Inquiry private. They felt pressurised by the media. They would appreciate if Police could inform the media not to publish the family's pictures or names, and I elaborated upon that in my Statement. Mr Lim, the father, confirmed that yesterday with the Police. He told us yesterday that the family's earlier set of requests remained. He continued with the request that the media not harass him, that the family's privacy be respected and that the Coroner's Inquiry be held in private. That was yesterday, the same day the Member referred to this article coming out. Many possible explanations; I have not sought to ask why. Is it the case that the father is saying different things to different people? Or is it the case that, as usual, you cannot believe what you read on TOC? I do not know. Or could there be some other explanation? Your guess is as good as mine.”
“That is why we place a lot of emphasis on the Guidance Programme. We are very pleased with the results of the Guidance Programme at 89% success rate; but 11% recidivism. That means you have really moved the young person from one path to another path. As Mr Tan would know from practice, many of those who turn up in prison in their early 20s would often have had minor infractions in their teens. The experience of criminality is a very strong indicator of subsequent life of crime. A life wasted. So, for us, the way we want to approach it is, lives saved. So, we will look at all suggestions to see how our process can be made better. But I do want to emphasise this, on the facts today, I cannot say that it was the processes that led to this tragic result. I have given you the facts that we have got to consider, but that does not mean that we sit back and say we do nothing. We will review and we will consider the point. Madam, I think I have answered the questions on behalf of the Acting Minister for Education.”
“I thank the Member for his two questions. On the first point as to when the review would be completed, I have told my officials that we should start the work but we should hold back on any decisions until after the Coroner's Inquiry. Let the Coroner's Inquiry go through, let there be a finding, we will take reference from that. The second thing that we need to do and that is why I do not want to rush into it, is also maybe consult the stakeholders. I do not really want to start consulting stakeholders before the Coroner's Inquiry. So, we will review it and that will really cover the Member's second point because in a sense, the Member's point is, can there be an adult accompanying the young person from school until he gets to the Police station? I think we will have to review those as part and parcel of this process. I have said earlier in my Statement that we will consider the suggestion of the Appropriate Adult scheme but I also pointed out the many considerations and why it is not so straightforward and some of the people involved would not be considered vulnerable either. I gave you a range of cases and I gave you three major reasons why one should take a pause before rushing to conclusions. So, those things have to be considered. I want to assure Members and Mr Tan on one thing. The reason why I gave you the statistics about 70% flowing through as it were without a charge, some of them after investigations are not guilty, but some of them would, in Police's view be people who have committed an offence. But why is it that seven out of 10 are not charged? It is, therefore, not a Police versus a young person situation. The Police look at it as a stakeholder in a community to try and make sure the young person gets rehabilitated.”
“He saw one officer at first and then three brought him back, one left the car so there were only two which is the minimum number that you will need in a car. And then he was interviewed by one officer in the division. So, you look at those facts.”
“I thank Mr de Souza. I think the question is not so much focused on why five. Because I agree with Mr de Souza that the focus should be on rehabilitation and the impact on the boy. Therefore, you focus on how many spoke with him. One officer spoke with him. The three officers who went down from NPC were the bridges between the Police and the school. When they go down, the school is familiar with these officers. They are able to know who to go to, who to speak with. There are regular interactions between the NPC and that school, not just that school, but schools in the neighbourhood and the communities. They are the bridges. They open the doors, they speak with the Principals, they speak with the teachers and they say, "This matter needs to be investigated, our officers from division are here". They smoothen the path. They were not present when the boy was interviewed. In fact, only one of the officers from the division was present. They went in unmarked cars in plain clothes. So, let us focus on what happened with the boy. He was interviewed by one officer. I am not saying that one is always the right number. I think the point is, he must be interviewed in a way that is conducive for a fair, neutral approach to obtain the facts and to obtain the truth. I think that must be the fundamental aim. How you approach it is something that ground officers should be given the discretion to decide on a case-by-case basis. I am not going to go into it and say, "It should have been five or it should have been three or it should have been four". I think those are ground decisions that we should leave to the officers. But we should look at it and we will certainly look at this case. What did the boy see?”
“I thank the Member for the request for clarification. But I have gone into this in my Statement and suggested that we approach it with the facts known to the Police at that point in time. When they went down to the school on 26 January, they did not know who the boy was. They did not know what his antecedents were. Some may have been reported; some may not have been reported. If he had committed another molest, Members would be asking me, "Why did you not go down faster?" As a matter of principle, I think all Members will agree with me that when an offence has been committed, you want the Police to move as quickly as possible. But we have the right Protocol on how a visit to a school should be handled. So, the Police went in plain clothes. There is a Protocol worked out with MOE. You saw what happened here. The boy was brought to the Principal's office; he was interviewed in the presence of the educators and then, he was brought back to the Police station in an unmarked car. So, as little possibility of publicity as possible. But move, we must. Unless as a society, we say that regardless of what happens, we should never go to the school. I do not think Members will think that is a right approach.”
“Mdm Speaker, when we pick up 1,300 on average, you can imagine the range of offences which I have described. Although not common, we have had murder; we have had physical assault; we have had young people being picked up for gang riotings. If my memory serves me right, about maybe over 500 were picked up for rioting in the last five years, rioting involving serious gang activities. We have young people involved in unlicensed moneylending activities, particularly arson. I think almost all Members would have come across that and how your residents fear for their safety. So, it presents a wide range of challenges. At the same time, our own research and approach show that, at a young age, the criminality or criminal conduct can, with the right approach, be limited in time or limited by age. That is why we send a very large number − again, if my memory serves me right − about 600 per year to Guidance Programmes where, in return for not proceeding with a charge, they have to undergo a six-month Guidance Programme, about 20-over sessions where they are taken through the need to understand the nature of the act involved, including the criminality, the impact on the community, how to manage themselves better in their social interactions. This is a programme that, in a way, of course, involves the AGC and MSF. The recidivism rate is only about 11%. That means 89% go on to lead crime-free lives. That is the fundamental Police approach − not criminalise, move them on to a crime-free life but, at the same time, when the incident happens, we have to move. A few years ago, we had a case of a 13-year-old boy raping his domestic helper. You have to act.”
“And with your permission, Mdm Speaker, in the interest of clarity and expedience, may I request that Members raise clarifications relating to my Statement first, followed by those relating to Minister Ng's Statement. Thank you, Madam.”
“We must also avoid attacking institutions and individuals based on those hasty conclusions. We must allow the facts to be established first. This is Singapore. There are proper processes for all facts to come out. Second, if there are going to be public hearings, we should not prejudice or prejudge the hearings. There can be a full, open discussion, once the hearings are over. Even prior to the hearings, there can be legitimate discussions on general principles and approaches but it has to be done with some care. We will relook at the law to see how we can try and achieve this better. The discussion today that we are having in the House should not become an automatic precedent for the future. I think Members will agree that the facts that I have set out should ideally be first dealt with at a proper inquiry and people must have the ability to test those facts, and police officers may have to be cross-examined. The Judge will make the finding and then we can discuss. We should not get into this mode. I have addressed the following points today, Mdm Speaker. I have outlined the facts of the case as we know them. I have set out the Police procedures. I have set out some of the untrue statements that have been made about the Police. And I have explained why we had not seen it right to discuss this matter earlier and, at the same time, why at this stage, I decided that we will discuss it. If I may say this in conclusion, Mdm Speaker, at the end of the day, every life matters. It matters to the Police, it matters to the Government and it matters to all of us. Mdm Speaker, Minister Ng will now speak on the support that schools provide for students under investigations. After which, Madam, with your permission, we will both address clarifications that Members may want to seek.”
“Next, let me say about the discussions today. I have gone into some detail. We have the following set of circumstances. Assertions which go to the integrity of the Police Force have been repeated several times, including untrue factual assertions, and Members have filed many Parliamentary Questions (PQs). In these circumstances, not everyone will know why the Government has not responded and people may misunderstand if the Government did not respond. Thus, I decided, with some regret, and considerable reservation, and after consulting the AGC, that we will have to set out the facts and discuss the matter. Amongst other things, public confidence in the Police Force must be maintained. The law is as follows. The rules of sub judice generally preclude discussions which may prejudice proceedings, but public officials like myself can make statements if they believe it to be necessary in the public interest, even if there is a hearing pending. I have myself commented on some occasions in the past, when a case is pending. When I have done so, I had carefully considered the legal position and kept within the principles of sub judice. TOC and some others have ignored the pending Coroner's Inquiry and have made wild allegations in this matter. It is in the public interest that we clarify the position. As to what happens to the people who have made those allegations, I will prefer not to comment today. As we go forward, from time to time, there will be other incidents in the future. The incidents will raise legitimate public queries. We must have a clear proper framework to deal with them, such that when an incident happens, first the facts have to be established. We must avoid jumping to conclusions.”
“A lawyer should know that it would be useful to get some expert evidence. For example, get assessments from psychologists. My officials and I personally have spoken with the former Chief Psychologist of IMH, Prof Long. He told us you look at the following things amongst others. People sometimes take their lives when they reach a point of hopelessness; they give up on life. What were the possible reasons Benjamin gave up on his life? This may involve having to look at, one, his mental state before the incident – depends on a variety of factors, surrounding circumstances and the time period could stretch some way back, even years. One has to also consider what were the stressors in Benjamin's life before the incident. What led him to engage in this incident? If the behaviour was not normal, what was going on in his mind? Two, you look at the events on the day, including his conduct during the incident and the interview. And, three, the events after the interview, including his various interactions. So, there were many aspects to look at and it would not be accurate at all at this stage to fix on any one particular point and say with certainty that that was the reason why the suicide took place. Mdm Speaker, I have focused on Benjamin's case. Mr Thio and others have also referred to other issues, early access to counsel being one of them. On early access to counsel, there are reasonable arguments both ways. Our position on early access to counsel has been made clear previously. We had arrived at this position after thoroughly considering the matter and taking into account all the relevant factors. I am prepared to explain again our reasons and thinking behind this position in due course at a more appropriate time. Today, I would like to keep discussions to this case.”
“And Police said in their statement that all relevant facts would be presented, and where the family would be able to raise all questions that they may have. This is Singapore. There is no such thing as a cover-up. Yet, some, like TOC, continued making accusations, insinuations, speculating on the facts, well after that. As I have said, it is understandable when the family said some things. But TOC and its ilk should not engage in this, prior to the Coroner's Inquiry. TOC also used some other tactics. They tried to get the Police to comment on allegations relating to this case and further assert that since the Police and the Ministry were not responding, therefore, the Police must be guilty of the various allegations, assertions that have been made. The Police, out of respect for the Coroner's Inquiry process, were right in not responding. It is surprising that even a lawyer, Mr Thio Shen Yi, has made some comments which should never have been made. He has said five Police officers spoke to Benjamin. That is false. He has said that five officers took Benjamin to the Police station, that is also false; and that Police should have behaved in a less intimidating way. He seems to make the assertion of intimidation, based on his other statements which are themselves false. His statements practically imply that Benjamin killed himself because of police intimidation. Mr Thio has a duty to be fair to the Police officers. He need only to have referred to the Police statement of 1 February to know that many of the assertions he is making are untrue. And without knowing anything about Benjamin, his mental make-up, his family background, one cannot reach such conclusions that he was intimidated and that is why he took his life.”
“The CI will, to the extent possible, try to establish the cause of Benjamin's death and the facts. All Coroner's Inquiries in Singapore are held in public, unless the Court decides that some part of it should be in private. For example in this case, it can be argued that the identity of the 11-year-old girl should not be revealed. She is a young victim who has been deeply traumatised, and it could be argued that the CCTV footage of what happened within the lift should be viewed in private as well, for the sake of Benjamin's memory and for the young girl. Once the Coroner announces his findings, both facts and conclusions, then people can offer their criticisms, viewpoints, comments on what the Police did, what my Ministry did, or did not do. That is the official version of the facts, after people are cross-examined on the stand. Sub judice principles set out what can and cannot be said when a Court hearing or Inquiry is pending. The various pronouncements, suggestions, statements which imply and allege that five officers interviewed him, that the Police pressured and intimidated Benjamin into wrongly admitting to guilt and that these must have been amongst the reasons why he committed suicide; all these allegations possibly infringe the principles of sub judice, apart from being highly improper at this stage, prior to the Coroner's Inquiry. The Coroner decides on the scope of the Inquiry based on the Coroner's Act. Some of these issues may be raised at, or become relevant, at the Inquiry. Police came out publicly on 1 February – six days after the incident, five days after they went to the school – to say there would be a Coroner's Inquiry once Police investigations into the death were completed. They made it public.”
“They could have referred to the open plan office; they could have referred to him making a detour from school to home and going into the lift with the girl. They could have shown that he went up; the incident took place; he then got out and ran back down. But is that the right thing to do? To have a public trial by media, at this stage; rebut the family in public and add to the family's grief? The answer, in good sense, is clearly no. We can understand that the family, in their grief, may genuinely believe some things, and, perhaps, even assert them in public. But we chose not to respond. These matters can be dealt with at the Coroner's Inquiry. And even at this stage, I have decided that we should not release the CCTV footages of what happened in the lift, out of respect for Benjamin's memory and to help the young girl as well. Police have also continued to engage the family. When Police spoke with Benjamin's family last week, his father told us that the family felt pressured by the public and media attention. Photographers and reporters have been loitering around their house. He asked for privacy and explained that he would like his family to be kept out of the spotlight. He asked that we inform the media of this and tell the media that the family did not want their identity, names, pictures published. The family even asked for the entire Coroner's Inquiry proceedings to be held in private. Attorney General's Chamber (AGC) will give their request careful consideration. Ultimately, it will be up to the Court to decide. Yesterday, the father spoke with a Police officer. He repeated those requests. Now, let me deal with the second reason why we did not comment in detail, until today.”
“It is sad to see this level of dishonesty and politicisation of this matter. Where the Police are wrong, we must and we will take action. But we should not allow deliberate, dishonest attacks. I have asked my Ministry to study how the Police and other institutions can respond in future to such falsehoods. Others have also commented on this matter. Many of them are honest, reasonable people, who have genuine questions. But as I read the commentaries, it seems that many based themselves on a misperception of the facts which I had referred to earlier. That brings me to my fourth major point: why has my Ministry not commented substantially, particularly to correct these inaccuracies, until now? Mdm Speaker, I told my Ministry, earlier on, that we should refrain from commenting too much, or in detail, on this matter. I decided that for two reasons: (a) out respect for the family, to give them some space and time to grieve; and (b) there will be a Coroner's Inquiry (CI). That is the right forum for the relevant facts to be dealt with. I think Members will know when I keep quiet, usually there is a good reason; a good legal reason. Let me touch on both reasons. A family has lost a 14-year-old boy. They issued a statement, an open letter, signed by Benjamin's father. That statement contradicted some of the things Police had said on 1 February and made some additional points which the Police disagreed with. The family also suggested that Benjamin had been coerced into admitting to the molest. The Police could have immediately rebutted the family's statement. The Police could have set out their version, like what I have set out today. The Police could have released the CCTV footages, which would show, quite objectively, what happened inside the lift.”
“The overall narrative and impression conveyed by the various TOC articles are: (a) Police were lying; (b) Police intimidated the boy; and (c) Police put pressure on him to confess to a crime that he did not commit, allegations, implications which are false, practically leading people to conclude that Benjamin committed suicide as a result. I have prepared a table, listing some of the articles and the falsehoods, unfounded implications which they convey. Mdm Speaker, with your permission, I would like the Clerks to distribute this table after my Statement, not now.”
“There have been a number of inaccurate statements that have been put out. We say "inaccurate", based on the facts the Police have. Some of the inaccurate statements are as follows: (a) that the Police were not in plain clothes when they went to the school to identify Benjamin, effectively alleging that the Police were lying to Singaporeans when they put out their statement of 1 February; (b) allegations that Benjamin was interviewed and intimidated by five Police officers; (c) that he must have been coerced to make an admission to an offence that he did not commit; and (d) some have even suggested that the girl might not have been molested and might have made a false Police report. A number of these falsehoods have been put out by The Online Citizen (TOC). It has gone on a planned, orchestrated campaign, using falsehoods and has published about 20 articles or so, as part of its campaign. One example of the falsehoods, as I had said earlier, Police have said on 1 February that they went down in plain clothes, yet TOC published an article on 5 February saying that Police wore attire stating the word "Police". The suggestion is that the Police were lying to Singaporeans. They supposedly relied on a posting by a lady, Mary Anne Pereira. She had stated that her son saw Police officers in Polo T-shirts with the word "Police". Police checked with Ms Pereira. She says she had gotten it wrong. She got her dates mixed up. She is wrong because the Police went to the school in plain clothes on 26 January. She has taken down her post. People make many statements online. They can be mistaken. That is why there is a Court process to establish the truth.”
“We have to ensure that we have a system that minimises the risks. I say minimise, because there is no system in the world that I know of which eliminates the risks completely. This factor of needing to minimise the risk will be taken into account when we review the Protocol. In this context, Police will look at past experience, the thousands of young persons who have been investigated. Members can see that there are many aspects to this issue, many questions which need to be carefully considered. The current Protocol had considered these, but we will review again. This is not a situation where we should have knee-jerk reactions or come to hasty conclusions. Any of our children could have been in Benjamin's position and any of our daughters could have been in that 11-year-old girl's position. We will approach the review of the processes with that perspective. Mdm Speaker, let me add another point. My Ministry has the responsibility for the Protocol that is in place. And ultimately, responsibility is with me, as the Minister. It is not with individual Police officers. Their responsibility is to act according to the Protocol in place. In this case, on the facts that have been given to me, I believe that they have carried out their duties faithfully and properly in accordance with the rules and the Protocols. If there are questions about the Protocols, I will answer, as I am doing now. If there are issues with the Protocol, the responsibility is mine. Let us not attack the Police officers who cannot defend themselves. They are doing their job every day in difficult circumstances. Madam, now let me turn to the deliberate falsehoods that have been put out to tar the Police unfairly. This is the third of my four major points.”