S Jayakumar
Singapore
“It is well and good for countries to announce various targets and emissions. But one vexing issue ultimately is: what will be the method for verifying compliance with each country's announced measures? Another vexing issue, of course, is the issue of financing.”
“I would appreciate it if she were to give me some specifics of the negative feedback. But the general feedback I have had about our judiciary, both of the Supreme Court and the Subordinate Courts, has been nothing but positive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the information that I have is that there is always medical advice present when caning is administered and that if the medical opinion is that caning cannot proceed beyond a certain point, that medical opinion will be observed and the caning will not proceed.”
“Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport in view of the recent announcement to make immediate improvements to the public transport system (a) whether the Ministry has set a timeline for the increase in frequency of feeder bus services; and (b) whether the Ministry can immediately target such services that are currently running at…”
“SCDF will continue to work with HDB and other relevant agencies to ensure that such older buildings with one exit staircase meet the prevailing fire safety requirements when they undergo major renovation or upgrading works. CIVIL SERVICE PENSIONERS 3.”
“The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mr Teo Ser Luck) (for the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Mrs Jessie Phua's and Dr Lim Wee Kiak's questions together as they both relate to the same issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,291 lines we hold for S Jayakumar, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 22 of 66.
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs administers Singapore's voluntary contributions to: (i) The four International Organisations (IOs) within the United Nations as follows: United Nations Development Fund (UNDP); (ii) The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) (with effect from 1991); (iii) The United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) (with effect from 1996); and (iv) The United Nations International Commission on Trade Law (UNCITRAL) (only one ad hoc payment was made). Table of Singapore's contributions from 1988 to date: Singapore's Voluntary Contributions to International Organisations within the UN. Organisation 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 UNDP $305,230 $269,200 $255,356 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $260,000 $240,000 $220,000 $255,000 [$300,000] UNICEF $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 $40,000 $50,000 UNIFEM $10,000 $20,000 [$40,000] UNCITRAL $2,000 TOTAL $305,230 $269,200 $255,356 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $270,000 $250,000 $250,000 $317,000 $390,000 Notes: 1. All figures are expressed in US dollars. 2. Figures for 1998 are based on pledges/payments made as of 13 Feb 98. 3. Payments which have been pledged but not yet made are in square brackets. 4. Payments to the UNDP include contributions to the Government Local Offices Costs (GLOC) for its KL office. UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund UNIFEM United Nations Development Programme for Women TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMME 3. Mr Simon S C Tay asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether any country has received or applied for technical assistance for the environment under the US$3 million scheme announced by the Prime Minister in conjunction with the special United Nations session on the environment in June 1997.”
“Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Prof. S. Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ECONOMIC EXPANSION INCENTIVES (RELIEF FROM INCOME TAX) (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill seeks to amend the Medicines Act to enable Singapore to comply with our obligations under Article 39 of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property or the TRIPS Agreement which I have set out in greater detail earlier. Article 39 requires, among other things, countries to protect the test data of a pharmaceutical product against disclosure and unfair commercial use. I have already set out the background concerning the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement and its significance for Singapore in the debate on the earlier Bill. I therefore will confine myself to the changes to be made in this Bill. Sir, the Bill introduces new sections 19A and 19B which place upon the licensing authority for medicinal products, in our case either the Director of Medical Services or the Director of Primary Production, a duty to protect confidential information received in relation to an application for a product licence for a medicinal product which utilises a new ingredient. This confidential information can be in relation to the medicinal product itself or its applications. The duty to protect the confidential information is for a period of five years from the date of receipt by the licensing authority. There are some circumstances in which disclosure of the information is permitted which include disclosure to a Government department or statutory body for the purposes of that department or body and disclosure to the World Health Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organisation and any regulatory agency of a WTO member state. Sir, this Bill, as I said, is to implement a specific obligation under the TRIPS Agreement. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“I hope the message will be loud and clear that we are not soft on copyright piracy. We are, however, mindful of the need to respond effectively to continually changing circumstances, and we will do so. Of course, the public have to play their part also. Because the supplier of pirated goods exists only because there is a demand for the pirated goods. The public must therefore respect the rights of those who have put in efforts in creating computer software, artistic, musical, literary or other copyright works and refuse to buy pirated items. Finally, he asked me about further amendments to copyright laws, and he is right. As I said in my speech, the amendments today will not necessarily be the last word on the subject. We have to evolve our copyright legislation as we take into account information changes. As for the 1996 WIPO treaty, it does introduce various new rights relating to advances in information technology, especially for activities in cyberspace which he referred to. Let me assure him that the Government is looking into these trends at the moment. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Prof. S. Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. MEDICINES (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 2.18 pm”
“But these proposals are still under discussion and therefore the relevant Government bodies will monitor the developments and decide how we should act on these trends. I have noted what he said about remedies and enforcement and especially his concern that the Summit case may have given the wrong signals to those engaged in piracy and counterfeiting. Let me therefore take this opportunity to reiterate that the Government's policy is not to condone commission of criminal offences. Because tackling copyright piracy requires a comprehensive approach which involves the enactment of good laws, which we are attempting to do in this exercise, enforcement of stiff penalties and cooperation of the industry as well as constant review of the entire gamut of laws and enforcement. In the case of enforcement, the Intellectual Property Rights Warrant Unit set up under the CID in 1995, in fact, conducted over 500 IPR raids in 1997 and on copyright alone, there was an increase of 104% of raids compared to 1996. In terms of the number of fiats issued authorising prosecution by copyright owners, this went up from 64 in 1996 to 218 in 1997, more than 240% increase. Only last month, a 5�-hour raid on five retail outlets in Sim Lim Square was conducted. Several suspects were arrested with more than 3,700 CD-ROMs containing pirated business and games software and 270 VCDs containing pirated films were seized. Our courts also have consistently meted out fairly stiff and long term imprisonment for intellectual property offences. I think he would have read this morning, for example, that a proprietor of a shop at Sim Lim Square was sentenced to two years' imprisonment after being caught repeatedly for selling pirated CD-ROMs.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung for his useful observations. I would like to take up some of the points that he mentioned. He has asked about the time-table for TRIPS. I have pointed out that the work on implementing legislation in other areas, such as trade marks, industrial designs, integrated circuits, etc. is actually in progress. We have committed ourselves to bring our legislation in conformity with TRIPS by the end of this year, which is actually a year ahead of schedule. As for performers' protection, the stronger regime for performers which he has in mind is actually pursuant to other treaties, such as the 1996 WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty which came into effect after TRIPS. Let me assure him that the need to extend these additional rights will also be reviewed and, if necessary, changes will be made to the Act at the appropriate time. I have noted what he said about databases and compilations and the need to comply with Article 10.2 of TRIPS. But my understanding is that databases and compilations as of now already enjoy protection under the existing Act. I would refer him to the definition of "literary work" in the existing legislation of the Copyright Act. I believe our Act is therefore in compliance with Article 10.2 of TRIPS. After TRIPS, he is right that there were proposals made by certain member states of the World Intellectual Property Organisation to extend protection for databases and compilations under a special regime or what he referred to as sui generis regime. That was because of rapid developments in information technology. The proposals for that, I believe, were tabled in the 1996 WIPO Diplomatic Conference.”
“I hope that the Minister will study such measures and to introduce them in due course in Singapore. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“It seems clear, however, that most countries in the world are trying to draw a line between those two differing computer industry groups so that those who own the copyright in the leading programmes can maintain their strong copyright protection over their software, but that in certain circumstances others may decompile because there is a public interest in doing so. In the United States, use is made of the "fair use" defence, whereby courts are required to weigh up, on the facts of every case, whether the defendants could justify their activities. In Singapore, with the current amendment to section 35(5), I am pleased to see that the Copyright Bill brings the law of Singapore very close to that of the United States. This is especially welcome and should receive warm support from the industry. Finally, may I just say that the TRIPS Agreement was drafted in the early 1990s, the full impact of the information superhighways was not yet fully appreciated. Accordingly, little was done in TRIPS to ensure that the copyright law deals with many of the new problems to which they give rise to. This is what the WIPO Copyright Treaty of December 1996 seeks to do. It is a Treaty which sets out new rights for authors and others to ensure that they can control the copyright interests of works winging their way around the world in digital form one way or the other. There are also measures designed to protect those who are seeking to use technological means to dabble with anti-copying devices. For example, selling unlawful decoders, or interfering with copyright management information. These are matters of the utmost importance. The European Union has already introduced proposals to implement this particular Treaty.”
“Although at one time, Singapore's enforcement laws were thought to be strong, and Singapore has taken action to create additional enforcement machinery, rightholders' associations (eg, the software manufacturers) still maintain that more should be done by the Government and its agencies to ensure that enforcement receives a higher profile. Overseas, there is also a similar perception that more needs to be done in Singapore to show that the Government is applying time and resources to these matters. Steps must be taken to ensure that, with appropriate safeguards, civil and criminal raids to obtain evidence are available to assist the legal process. Without questioning the merits of the case, the Summit decision may have given the wrong signals to those engaged in piracy and counterfeiting, and it is to be hoped that the measures in the Bill will be sufficient to correct that perception. It is very important to ensure that there is a fair balance in any Copyright Bill between the interests of holders of rights in "cutting edge" software and the interests of competitors who want to design and market non-infringing competing programmes which interface or are inter-operable with the basic programmes. The Court of Appeal's decision in Creative Technology v. Aztech established that currently Singapore's copyright law does not permit most kinds of reverse engineering. Companies cannot decompile programmes to establish how they were put together and armed with that knowledge to develop new inter-operable programmes. Whether competitors should be able to reverse engineer and, if so, to what extent, is a very difficult matter to resolve.”
“2 into Singapore's legislation so that a Singapore court can ensure in an appropriate case that more general TRIPS' principle prevails. The Article states, and I quote: `Compilations of data or other material, whether in machine readable or other form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such. Such protection, which shall not extend to the data or material itself shall be without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material itself.' Producers of databases are particularly interested in this area, and there have been many developments in recent times to try to produce laws which give appropriate protection to databases. For example, a new European Database Directive has recently been implemented throughout Europe, whereby in addition to the fairly limited copyright protection for some databases, a new sui generis right has been created. A proposal for an international Database Treaty was made in 1996, and the matter is still under discussion although it is proving quite controversial. I should like to ask the Minister to consider what is Singapore's approach to such databases and whether it would be appropriate to introduce a new sui generis right similar to the European model. I turn to the remedies and enforcement. One of the most important features of TRIPS is the detailed code dealing with the enforcement of intellectual property rights.”
“Neither does Singapore in the current Bill. But it must be noted that today the situation is changing. Both from a cultural and an economic point of view, recognition of rights of performers is developing, eg. the European Directive on Rental and Related Rights confers much stronger rights on performers, seeking to equate them with owners of authors' works; and the WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty of 1996 also provides internationally strong rights for performers (certainly for phonograms, but not yet for audio-visual works). It could be argued that Singapore should go beyond that, and to show its concern for the encouragement of culture and the arts, it should provide similar stronger rights. Further, the Singapore Bill does not address some of the practical issues arising from the conferment of such rights. For example, the relationship between performers, producers of films and broadcasters. Should there, for example, be presumptions for the purpose of easier use and exploitation of works, that such rights are transferred in the absence of agreement to the contrary; in which event, should performers be guaranteed some form of reasonable remuneration? These matters have all been addressed in Europe. I hope that they can be addressed in Singapore as well. In today's information society, the compilation of data and material, especially for use in computers and networks, has taken on exponential proportions. Arguably, the protection of compilations under Singapore copyright law (as was the case in the UK until the implementation of the European Database Directive) does protect data and material itself. It is not clear whether this present state of the law is consistent with TRIPS. It seems that there is a case for incorporating Article 10.”
“The economic importance of copyright has become even more pronounced; in spite of some effective action being taken to deal with piracy, it still remains a problem; technological developments which are transforming our way of life - the global information society, Internet, multimedia, are throwing further strains on the copyright system, and the problems which they give rise to have to be addressed. I start with TRIPS (Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property). It is stated that one of the reasons for the introduction of this Bill is the need to comply with the TRIPS Agreement. Singapore, as a member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) with the status of an "advanced developing country", has to comply with the TRIPS Agreement by the year 2000. TRIPS, of course, deals with all areas of intellectual property. There is a need to amend or introduce new intellectual property legislation in other areas, eg, trade marks, industrial designs, integrated circuits, disclosure of confidential information, and so on. Can any information be provided by the Minister as to when all these other measures are going to be introduced and whether they will be enacted in time? The protection of performers has traditionally been weak. Their rights have often been severely limited as other rightholders have tended to oppose the strengthening of performers' rights, both because they reduce their own share of royalties and also because of the practical difficulties which could arise if so many people involved in productions have rights to them. Successful performers with strong bargaining power can sometimes satisfactorily safeguard their own interests, at least, by contract. Lesser performers have little negotiating strength. TRIPS actually does not confer strong rights on performers.”
“I should also say that the honourable Chief Justice in his judgment in the Summit case made various observations, amongst other things, on the possible need for safeguards where search warrants are obtained at the initiative of copyright owners. His observations are currently being studied. They have an impact, not just on the Copyright Act but also on other legislation and therefore any necessary amendments will be taken up subsequently in the context of a broader review, among others, of legislation like the Criminal Procedure Code. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung (Sembawang): Mr Speaker, Sir, intellectual property rights now play a major role in international trade. Copyright is an important component of many of the world's major industries: publishing, music, films, databases, broadcasting, telecommunications, computers and the media. Singapore must be seen to have "state-of-the-art" copyright laws, to help encourage such industries to invest, or continue to invest, in Singapore. The Copyright Act 1988 modernised Singapore's copyright law to deal, amongst other matters, with the evils of piracy and counterfeiting: of records, films, books and music. Rights were strengthened and methods of enforcement were improved. The 1988 Act was widely admired and held up as an example of what new copyright laws should contain. Since then, much has happened.”
“Changes to the Enforcement Provisions If I may touch on the provisions relating to enforcement, the main amendments are: (a) Clause 23 which repeals and substitutes section 134 so that in the case of proceedings for the enforcement of copyright, there is now a rebuttable presumption that what is stated on the label of a sound recording is sufficient evidence of the facts stated regarding ownership of the copyright in the recording. (b) Clause 24(e) amends section 136(4) to widen the offence of possession of equipment to make pirated sound recordings or audio-visual productions to include the possession of equipment designed to make pirated copies of all works; and (c) Clause 24(g) deletes and substitutes section 136(9) and introduces new sub-paragraphs (10) to (12) to regulate the seizure of articles and documents pursuant to a search warrant. In the existing Act, the execution of a search warrant is limited to only the pirated items themselves and the implements used for piracy. The new section 136(9) will extend the scope of search warrants issued under the Act to cover all articles and documents which are evidence of copyright offences. This will enable a more effective investigation and prosecution of copyright offences. Let me point out that some of these changes are the result of feedback received from various intellectual property bodies representing copyright owners. These changes, of course, are not the last word on copyright amendments or copyright enforcement. The Government remains committed to considering and exploring further avenues to deal effectively with copyright piracy in cooperation with copyright owners.”
“This is provided for in clause 9 of the Bill which repeals and substitutes section 45(5) of the Act. Other Amendments to the Scope of Copyright and Defences If I may quickly touch on other amendments on the scope of the copyright as well as defences, first, the deletion by clause 5 of section 35(5) of the Act will bring us in line with the United States, the United Kingdom, other European Union countries, Hong Kong and Australia, which do not bar the use of copyright materials for commercial research. Secondly, various new defences are to be introduced where the copying of copyright materials is: (a) to assist the intellectually handicapped; (b) for examination purposes; (c) carried out by educational institutions by non-reprographic materials; or (d) for a course of instruction in the making of films and soundtracks. All these changes are effected by clauses 10 to 13, 20 and 21 which insert new sections 50A, 52A, 54A, 115A and 115B and also amend section 116. Thirdly, clause 6 introduces various amendments to section 39 which lift the restriction on the making of back-up copies of a computer programme. This change brings us in line with the position in the United Kingdom and reflects in fact current industry practice, which is not to impose such a prohibition. Fourthly, section 74 of the Act, which deals with the overlap in protection under industrial design and copyright laws is amended by clause 16. The relevant period of protection stated in that section is increased from the present 15 years to 25 years, which is in line with the increase in the maximum term of protection for a registered design under the UK Registered Designs Act to 25 years.”
“Under clause 22, new sections 120 and 120A are introduced pursuant to which the Court may order, upon an application by a copyright owner, that infringing copies of works and devices used to make infringing copies be delivered up and destroyed or forfeited to the owner. Another significant amendment relates to border enforcement measures to prevent infringing intellectual property materials from entering Singapore. Clause 25 of the Bill gives effect to our obligation to put in place a border enforcement system by introducing new sections 140A through 140R on border enforcement measures. Section 140B(1) enables a copyright owner who suspects that any shipment of pirated goods is coming to Singapore to notify the Director-General of the Customs and Excise Department. Subject to certain safeguards, the Department may seize the goods when they enter Singapore. Implementation of provisions relating to the protection of test data under the TRIPS Agreement will also entail amendments to two other Acts, namely, the Medicines Act, which I will take later, and the Control of Plants Act, the amendments to which will be tabled in this House shortly. The Berne Convention Amendments Let me now turn to the amendments which are related to the Berne Convention. This Convention predates the TRIPS Agreement. Many of its provisions in fact are covered by the TRIPS Agreement, and Singapore is not presently a party to the Berne Convention but we intend to accede to it once this amending Bill has come into force. Acceding to that Convention will require us to permit libraries to allow the copying of works only if they are satisfied that these works cannot be obtained within a reasonable time at ordinary commercial prices.”
“TRIPS Agreement Amendments Sir, let me first deal with the provisions relating to the TRIPS Agreement. These can be broadly classified as changes which relate to: (a) rental rights; (b) ephemeral copies of recordings and works; (c) performers' rights (d) remedies; and (e) border enforcement. To take up rental rights, the TRIPS Agreement requires that in the case of computer programmes and sound recordings, a copyright owner's rights shall include the right to rent the programmes and recordings. This is reflected in clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill which introduce a new section 25A and amend section 26 of the existing Act, as well as clause 17 which repeals and re-enacts section 82. Next, as for ephemeral copies of recordings and works, the defences of reproducing literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works or sound recording for the purposes of broadcasting have been narrowed by the introduction of restrictions so that a broadcasting organisation may only keep copies made for the purpose of its broadcast, in general, for a period of six months. This is achieved by clauses 7, 15 and 19 which amend sections 43, 68 and 107 of the Act. As for performers' rights, clause 35 of the Bill inserts a new Part XII of the Act which confers upon performers of life performances of drama, musical and literary works, dances, etc, new rights in relation to these live performances. These include the right to prevent unauthorised direct sound recordings, the reproduction of such recordings, live broadcasts and communication to the public. The remedies for infringement of copyright set out in the existing Act are generally comprehensive. But the implementation of TRIPS has required us to expand them in one area.”
“The Government, however, recognises that technological advances and changing circumstances continually challenge us to strengthen and improve our IPR regime, and we are committed to doing so. Sir, this Bill will amend the Copyright Act to improve the level of protection for copyright in Singapore and to implement Singapore's obligations under the World Trade Organisation's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property or what is known as the TRIPS Agreement. Under TRIPS, all WTO members, except the least developed countries, shall establish common standards of protection, remedies and enforcement for all areas of intellectual property rights by the end of next year. Singapore has, however, committed itself in APEC to bring the time frame for implementation forward to the end of this year, one year ahead of schedule. A Government inter-Ministry committee has been reviewing our legislation on intellectual property rights to give effect to our obligations under TRIPS. Work on patents was completed first and a new Patents Act has been in effect since the beginning of 1996. This amending Bill and the related Medicines (Amendment) Bill are the result of the review of copyright and the protection of test data which was completed at the end of last year and also reflect the desire to further enhance copyright protection. Work on other legislation in trade marks, industrial designs and integrated circuits is also under way. Sir, in this Bill, we have also taken the opportunity to make changes, firstly, to enable us to accede to the 1971 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works; and, secondly, to enhance the enforcement mechanism under the Act.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Before going into the provisions which are fairly complicated and technical in some respects, let me state at the outset that the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, including copyright, will become increasingly important as the Singapore economy matures. With advances in information technology, the global economy is rapidly moving from an industrial-based to a knowledge-based society. Intellectual capital, not merely physical assets or financial capital, will be the key factor. As Singapore responds to this, developing a strong and effective system for protecting intellectual property rights becomes more important. Where a company's value is based less on its factories, plant and equipment but more on ideas and technical innovations, effective protection of its intellectual property will become increasingly central to its strategic plans and operations. To ensure that Singapore stays ahead of the competition for high-value, knowledge-intensive industries, a good system of protection for intellectual property rights is not only desirable but in fact necessary. Knowledge-based industries will be attracted to invest in Singapore if they are confident that their intellectual property will be given sufficient protection here. A good IPR infrastructure is also important to the success of our own home-grown knowledge-based industries. We have to bear in mind that increasingly it will be our inventors who will want patent protection and our artists, writers, etc, who will want copyright protection. According to an independent survey by PERC (Political & Economic Risk Consultancy) in October last year, Singapore has the best intellectual property rights protection in Asia.”
“SBA is prepared to consider giving a licence to a foreign radio station if it can offer services that are of value to Singapore's development as a business and information hub. TAXI STANDS IN HDB ESTATES 6. Mr Shriniwas Rai asked Minister for Communications if he will build taxi stands in Housing and Development Board estates so as to stop queue jumping.”
“Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Information and the Arts whether he will stop the demolishing of the cluster of black and white colonial bungalows in the Sembawang area at Ratus/Kloof Road neighbourhood and declare those houses to be heritage buildings and earmark them for preservation. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Black-and-white bungalows are part of our nation's architectural heritage and some of the better ones should be conserved. The Urban Redevelopment Authority has a programme for the conservation of our nation's built heritage based on certain conservation criteria. URA has already gazetted 19 of the best representatives of the black-and-white bungalows for conservation under the Planning Act administered by the Ministry of National Development. URA is of the view that it is not necessary for the bungalows at Ratus/Kloof Roads to be conserved. For a building to be gazetted for preservation as a national monument under the Preservation of Monuments Act administered by MITA, it must have outstanding national and historical importance based on criteria drawn up by the Preservation of Monuments Board. The bungalows at Ratus and Kloof Roads are not of sufficient merit to qualify for preservation as national monuments. FOREIGN RADIO STATIONS 5. Mr Shriniwas Rai asked the Minister for Information and the Arts if the Government will allow foreign radio stations to broadcast in Singapore. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: The Government already allows BBC World Service radio, a foreign station, to broadcast in Singapore. The Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) is currently looking into the licensing of 2-3 more new radio channels.”
“A Penal Code Review Committee under the auspices of the Attorney-General's Chambers has been working on a major review of the Penal Code. The Penal Code Review Committee is in the process of finalising its recommendations to introduce amendments to the Penal Code to meet the present-day needs of Singapore. CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS 3. Mr Simon S C Tay asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (i) what are the amounts that Singapore grants as voluntary contributions to international organisations, in particular those within the UN structure; and (ii) if such amounts are in keeping with Singapore's economic development and international standing. Prof. S. Jayakumar: Singapore makes voluntary contributions to ten International Organisations (IOs) which are of importance to us. Four of these IOs are in the UN system, and another three are Commonwealth-related organisations. In 1997, Singapore's contributions made by MFA to these organisations amounted to about $600,000. Of this amount, $450,000 was contributed to the IOs within the UN structure. Most of these contributions are annual payments of long-running programmes (seven out of the ten are long-term obligations) as opposed to ad hoc contributions. In addition to our voluntary contributions to the UN, we have various obligations to other international bodies as well. For example, as a member of ASEAN, we will be contributing to the ASEAN Foundation. We have also made contributions to the International Committee of the Red Cross. Singapore is a small country. Our voluntary contributions to IOs are consistent with our stature as a small advanced developing economy and our international standing. DEMOLITION OF COLONIAL BUNGALOWS 4.”
“Since he mentioned it, I want to make it clear in the House that there may well be a need to amend the Official Secrets Act. The other example he mentioned was the recent decision that section 37 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is unconstitutional. And here, as Members will note, I have given a comment to the press that, yes, we will also examine that decision because it has very serious implications. The fact that we are reviewing it does not mean there is a disrespect of the Judiciary's decision. But we have to examine what is it in Singapore's interest in respect of advancing our objectives and high standards of non-corruption and whether, if that decision in any way renders it difficult to advance our national interest in prevention of corruption, we need to amend the law. In so far as the judge has pronounced that the law was unconstitutional because Parliament did not have power to enact extra-territorial legislation, that also has very serious implications because the preliminary advice from the Attorney-General is that it renders it impossible to comply with our international law obligations and our obligations under certain international conventions, including, for example, exercising jurisdiction over hijacking offences committed abroad. Therefore, this is also being studied. I thought I should mention this now so that if I have to come to Parliament later to make amendments to these laws, Mr Simon Tay would not be surprised or allege that I have not mentioned this at all during the sitting.”
“In the ISA case where we had to amend, the reasons for amendment were very clearly stated and, that is, it had always been the intention that the merits of the Government, the Executive's decision, under the ISA ought not to be justiciable. What can be reviewed is compliance with legal procedure. And since I moved those amendments in this House, I can assure him, (and this can be verified by reference to records) I had also expressed concern about the trends in Europe and in England where because of the influence of the European courts, they were moving in a direction which was not in our interest. Therefore when we amended it, it was clearly with a view to ensure that in the area of internal security, the Executive will be able to promote Singapore's national interest. That is not to suggest that there is a disrespect for the Judiciary because precisely we respect the Judiciary's decision, we have to amend the laws and the Constitution to ensure that Government's intention and policy objectives are correctly reflected in the law. If the court had arrived at a different interpretation, then we would have to remedy by amendments to the law. That is not anything sinister or undesirable. That is a part of the function of Government. He mentioned two of many examples where the courts had taken a position of disagreeing with the interpretation and holding against Government. Of those two examples, one was the Official Secrets Act case. Let me say that we have asked the Attorney-General to give us his considered views because his preliminary review was, and is, that if the law is not amended, then it may render it impossible or well-nigh difficult to enforce the provisions of the Official Secrets Act.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, my colleague, the Minister of State, Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee, has given a very comprehensive response to Mr Jeyaretnam and it had not been my intention to take the floor. But I do so after listening to Mr Simon Tay who, I think, made a very lucid and scholarly presentation of the respective roles of the Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary. For the most part of his presentation, I have very little differences of view. But the reason I take the floor is because of his comments on the need to ensure that when the courts have pronounced on interpretation of the laws or the Constitution, the Government or the legislature should not override (the term used is "override") the judgment, except in exceptional circumstances. Let me assure him that when the Government has occasion to amend the law, it is not because of wanting to override the decision. As he has very well put it, the job of Parliament is to enact laws which reflect Government's policy. The role of the Judiciary is to interpret the laws, and he is right. Sometimes the courts may arrive at an interpretation which might not have been the interpretation that had been intended by the legislature or the Government. In that kind of a situation, the Government will have to examine the judgement, because as Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee, the Minister of State, ended up his speech, the job of Government is to govern, and to govern effectively to defend and advance Singapore's national interests in various fields - economics, internal security and a whole area of governmental functions. He referred to the ISA case.”
“Let me assure Mr Charles Chong that our mission in Phnom Penh continues to keep telephone contact with all those who have registered with the mission. And they have been advised to take the usual safety precautions, for example, not to venture out late at night. By maintaining contact with Singaporeans who still remain in Cambodia, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and our embassy in Phnom Penh will be able to assist them should the situation again take a turn for the worse. I should also add that at present, there are commercial flights from Phnom Penh to Bangkok and to Ho Chi Minh City. So it is not a case of complete absence of flights at the moment out of Phnom Penh.”
“Sir, what Mr Charles Chong said about the contingency plans and evacuation is pertinent because that was an example of how different government agencies plus private citizens were able to work closely to bring about the evacuation. It required very close coordination between our embassy in Phnom Penh, Ministry of Defence, SAF and Ministry of Foreign Affairs headquarters. We had anticipated the possibility of political violence as early as April 1997. And, in anticipation, the Ministry and the embassy had worked out contingency plans. But because our embassy has a very small complement of staff, it harnessed the efforts of private individuals under a warden system. And you know the rest - that the evacuation was successful because all sides, the different government agencies and the private citizens who volunteered as wardens, acted in coordination and in cooperation to bring about the successful evacuation. Recently, I had the pleasure of meeting the volunteer wardens and presented them with certificates of appreciation on behalf of the Government. As to his specific question, to the best of our knowledge, there are some 56 Singaporeans still remaining in Phnom Penh. This does not include our mission staff. Until recently, as of 18th July, we have placed advertisements in all the newspapers in Phnom Penh and on the radio to advise Singaporeans still remaining in Cambodia to register with our mission, because our embassy will only know when they have registered with the mission. So it is important that they register with the mission so that if there is difficulty, we will be able to know who is where, and in which part of Cambodia who may need assistance.”
“That tumultuous events there caused ASEAN not only to reflect on the use of force to overthrow the government, it was contrary to the Paris Peace Accord, and we had doubts as to whether they would be able to comply with the obligations expected of them as an ASEAN member. And finally, I think ASEAN members also were troubled as to the spill-over effects that the Cambodian situation would have on regional stability. As far as Myanmar is concerned, ASEAN for some years has had a policy of constructive engagement with Myanmar. We believe that having Myanmar as a member in ASEAN will expand the scope and level of interaction and cooperation with Myanmar. ASEAN did not think that the situations in Myanmar and Cambodia were exactly identical. There has been a government there. Whether you are happy with whatever it is doing, in terms of its internal system of governance, is another matter. But there has been a government there. ASEAN has been dealing with the government in its policy of constructive engagement and I also should add in the recent ASEAN Regional Forum, in the communique, those countries which had been critical about Myanmar and ASEAN, are now more understanding of ASEAN's position with regard to Myanmar. And, in fact, there is a greater understanding of ASEAN's policy of constructive engagement. In other words, it is felt that we should try to integrate Myanmar into the ASEAN fold and let them see ASEAN. Although we are not homogenous, each of us has a different form of government, let them assimilate and also link up with the ASEAN countries and, hopefully, through that process, we can quietly encourage the leadership in Myanmar to foster conditions for positive change which will benefit the people of Myanmar.”
“My Ministry is preparing to review hardship allowances as well as to explore employment opportunities for spouses overseas, and to improve the education assistance for children of our diplomats serving overseas. This is necessary because our diplomats working overseas sometimes have to work under very arduous conditions. We have to make these changes if we are to maintain a resourceful, versatile and vibrant foreign service. As far as roving ambassadors are concerned, we have 14 roving ambassadors accredited to 35 countries. As a small country, we face constraints in expanding our diplomatic representation overseas. We have only 37 resident overseas missions abroad. The roving ambassador scheme enables Singapore to foster good bilateral relations with these countries, even though we do not have an embassy or other resident mission there. Also, if we do not have roving ambassadors, we would have to concurrently accredit some of our full-time ambassadors to various other countries in the region which will not be very satisfactory because they need to concentrate on their duties in the country in which they are based. Our roving ambassadors have done a very good job in promoting Singapore's relations with the countries of their accreditation. They have been unstinting with their time in the performance of their duties. I see Mr Jeyaretnam has still not come back. Part of his question, in fact, has been answered in my reply to Mr Ravindran. I have explained the reasons and considerations which motivated ASEAN when it took the decision on Cambodia. I have pointed out that it was Cambodia who was seeking admission.”
“Let me also add that we have been fortunate that a number of our diplomats in the UN mission have made their mark in various conferences and various other missions. For example, Ambassador Tommy Koh became the President of the UN Law of the Sea Conference and he also chaired the main committee for the UN Conference on Environment and Development. Our previous Ambassador in Geneva, Ambassador K. Kesavapany, was elected as the first Chairman of the General Council of the WTO. Therefore, we do have limited resources, limited manpower to service our United Nations' offices in New York and Geneva. But we have been fortunate that within the constraints of our small staff, we have been able to play in our own humble way a constructive role in these organisations. 3.15 pm Dr Ong Chit Chung asked what we are doing for our career diplomats and our roving ambassadors. The steps we have taken to attract and retain talents, of course, include competitive salaries and remuneration packages in line with the civil service. We have also given recently heavy emphasis on training and personnel development. Training programmes involve both structured training as well as on-the-job training. New Foreign Service Officers undergo an orientation programme when they first join and subsequently go through a five-week foundation course designed to impart core skills and basic knowledge of foreign service. They also receive on-the-job training which includes first-hand exposure through attending regional and international conferences as well as attachments to official delegations and internships in overseas missions. As part of their career development, Foreign Service Officers are also sent to attend management courses. Sir, Dr Ong Chit Chung talked about hardship posts.”
“In May this year, we sent an SAF officer to serve as a military adviser in Afghanistan. Thirdly, Singapore has been contributing to various peace-keeping operations since 1989. We have committed to supporting the UN in peace-keeping efforts because we recognise the important role of the UN in this area. Therefore, whether we get elected to the Security Council or not, we will continue to contribute to UN peace-keeping efforts to the best of our ability and where our contributions will be most effective. Recently, we contributed to the UN's standby arrangements to mark our continued commitment to the UN. As far as the role which Singapore wants to play at the UN is concerned, let me say that for small countries like Singapore, the principles in the UN Charter, the rule of law, non-use of force, respect for sovereignty of states, non-interference in the country's internal affairs, all these are very important. The UN has many criticisms. It has its imperfections. But if there was no UN to promote cooperation and international law among states, small states will be the most to suffer. Therefore, Singapore has consistently sought to play a useful role in the UN to ensure that the UN remains relevant and effective for all countries. I have said just now that we have been a strong supporter of peace-keeping operations. Singapore also plays an active role in the questions on the reform of the UN and the question of revising the financial contribution scheme in the UN. On international environmental diplomacy, the Prime Minister recently led a delegation to the 19th UN General Assembly Special Session and Members will have read that the Prime Minister announced the establishment of a special programme on technical assistance for sustainable development.”
“Recently, the UN Security Council's roles and responsibilities have expanded to cover non-traditional issues such as humanitarian disasters, intra-state conflicts and mass violations of human rights. It would be useful for us to be a member of the Security Council to understand the workings of this body. I was also asked whether our membership of the Security Council will have an impact on peace-keeping operations. I have three comments to make here. Firstly, I should point out to the House that participation in UN peace-keeping is strictly on a voluntary basis. Regular soldiers as well as NSmen are only included in the team if they volunteer to participate in such missions. The UN in consultation with the involved parties to a conflict will also decide which countries to approach to participate in UN peace-keeping operations. Therefore, whether or not Singapore participates at any particular peace-keeping operation will depend on whether we are approached by the UN. If so, we will decide on a case by case basis. Let me also add that all UN peace-keeping missions are inherently risky, some more so than others. Of course, the degree of risk is only one factor of consideration when deciding on participation. An important factor is our ability to contribute effectively to the missions within our manpower constraints. Singapore's approach to participating in peace-keeping depends on whether we think our contribution can be effective. For example, when we provided military observers and medical support, these are areas in which Singapore can make an effective contribution. That is why we have continually sent observers to the UN Iraq-Kuwait mission or UNIKOM. We also sent a 30-man SAF medical team to support the allied forces in Operation Desert Storm during the Gulf War.”
“We have worked hard to lobby with other countries and I am glad to say that we have received many expressions of support for our candidature not only from Asian Group countries, but also from countries in other regions. I also wish to inform Members that our candidature has been endorsed by ASEAN. In other words, ASEAN has solidly backed our candidature. It is still early days because the elections will be held in the year 2000, but we are continuing to lobby hard to ensure that we do not take it for granted and I hope to be able to report nearer the time of the increasing indications of support from the Asian Group and other regional groups. I was asked what would be our hope when we are a member of the Security Council. I would say that if we are elected, our agenda would be twofold. Firstly, as a small state, we hope to bring constructive and useful perspective to the Security Council. It is a perspective that is important, given that the majority of the UN membership are small states. We have always supported the principle that every member state should be given an equal opportunity to serve in the UN Security Council. We have never, since we became a member of the UN in 1965, served in the Security Council. Secondly, I think Singapore should also learn first hand how the UNSC operates because the Security Council, in a sense, is the heart of the UN system. Under the Charter, it is the Security Council which has a primary responsibility for maintenance of international peace and security. It is also the only body in the UN that has the authority to take decisions which bind all members of the UN.”
“We are now liaising with the UNDP to start two new regional programmes, one for African countries and the other for Caribbean countries. MFA is also in the process of considering new technical assistance partners to further expand the scope of our SCP which would further enhance the goodwill and friendship for Singapore. On international disaster relief, in response to Dr Wang Kai Yuen, we must remember that we are a small country with limited resources. Nevertheless, where we can, we do assist other developing countries which are victims of natural disasters, such as earthquakes and floods. Such assistance is provided on a case by case basis, depending on the circumstances. Let me assure the House that we will do what we can within our limits and usually the focus is on countries in the region. Several questions were asked about the United Nations, our role, especially our bid to seek a non-permanent member seat in the Security Council. As regards the bid to become a member of the UN Security Council, we presented our candidature for a vacancy for the period 2001 to 2002. The elections will be held in the year 2000. We presented our candidature fairly early so that all our friends in the UN will have ample notice of our candidature and it will give us time not only to seek support but also to prepare ourselves for the eventual membership of the UN Security Council. How is our candidature going? I would say that at the present stage our chances of being elected are fairly good. We are the only candidate from the Asian Group at this point of time for that vacancy, which is an Asian Group seat.”
“Sir, since Mr Jeyaretnam is not here, and in case he comes back later, I will respond to the other questions first. First, on technical assistance and cooperation. The Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP) was established in 1992 and to-date, we have trained some 4,600 foreign participants from over 80 developing countries, which cover our Southeast Asian neighbours, other Asia-Pacific countries as well as some African, Middle-East and Caribbean countries. The key areas of training are those where we have some expertise to share, such as civil aviation, port management, information technology and environmental management and English language. My Ministry will further expand the technical assistance programme under the SCP over the next five years. A growing number of developing countries have expressed interest in our SCP, including Mongolia, Bhutan, Marshall Islands, Maldives, Lebanon, Jordan and a few other South African countries. But I also wish to inform the House that Singapore also has programmes to offer technical assistance jointly with other countries and international organisations under arrangements known as Third Country Training Programmes (TCTPs). We have TCTPs with nine countries under which we jointly have technical assistance programmes. They are Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Luxembourg, Norway, Thailand and UK. We have TCTPs with international organisations like Asian Development Bank, Colombo Plan, Commonwealth Secretariat, ESCAP, World Bank, WTO, and World Intellectual Property Organisation. These TCTPs, on behalf of the countries and international organisations, I believe, reflect their confidence in our ability to provide technical training programmes.”
“But although we are not a claimant state, we have two interests. One is that the South China Sea should not erupt into tensions or, worse still, armed conflict. Because if that happens, then it will have a very serious destabilising effect on our region. Therefore, Singapore's position has been to call on the claimant countries to show restraint in the pursuit of their claims. And I am glad to say that most of the countries so far have borne this in mind. There have been some incidents here and there. But, fortunately, they have been kept within proportion. The second interest we have is that of ensuring that freedom of navigation under the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea will be observed by all parties, however their claims may be eventually resolved. It is important because the South China Sea and the areas which are claimed include many important routes for international navigation. Obviously, for Singapore, this is important. But it is important not only for Singapore, it is important for the international community. And we have impressed on the claimant states that the international community, including Singapore, would expect them to honour the rules of international law and the provisions of the Convention on the Law of the Sea concerning freedom of navigation.”
“Where we are now is confidence building measures. The recently concluded ARF, as I said in an interview carried in our papers, was noteworthy for several reasons. Firstly, topics were discussed which four years ago would have been said to be so sensitive that nobody would have entertained discussion. We discussed transparency in China's defence policy. We discussed Japan-US defence guidelines and a need for transparency in that. We discussed Cambodia and Myanmar, and mind you, we discussed Cambodia and Myanmar with the Foreign Ministers being present there. So topics were discussed when previously it was thought not possible. This reflects the comfort level of participants. Next, the manner in which it was discussed was free of hostility or acrimony. It was a dignified but frank discussion which, again, shows the usefulness of such forums. Thirdly, we had a good discussion of the way in which the ASEAN Regional Forum should proceed. In case Members feel that the ARF meets once a year and it is only a talk shop, let me say that, in between ARFs, we have very important inter-sessional meetings and inter-sessional groups. For example, Singapore and the United States are co-chairmen of an inter-sessional group on search and rescue measures. Other inter-sessional measures are on peace-keeping, preventive diplomacy, and so on. Sir, to sum up, the fact that 21 countries, including the major powers, meet with South-East Asian countries and Japan, China and Korea, to discuss matters which affect our stability and security is a very important development. I hope that the ARF will evolve further so that we can move on to some aspects of preventive diplomacy. On the question of the South China Sea, we are not a claimant state.”
“So ASEAN felt that there was a very drastic change in the governmental set-up and political structure in Cambodia and a radical change which had been brought about by the use of force. ASEAN also felt that Cambodia was a situation where ASEAN has a special role. Because let us not forget that nearly all the countries in ASEAN were signatories to the Paris Peace Accord which brought about the basic elements for the situation which resulted in the Cambodia that we knew under Mr Ranariddh and Mr Hun Sen. Again, since Cambodia was becoming a member of ASEAN, ASEAN also had to take into account two factors: whether in view of the sudden upheaval in Cambodia, could Cambodia reasonably be expected to fulfill all the obligations expected of membership in ASEAN. We felt that there was a doubt. Next, ASEAN members also felt that it had a locus standi to take a position because the events in Cambodia could affect the stability in the region. As to what would be the position on other different situations, I think ASEAN has to evolve its position. It will have to take its decision depending on the situation and, bearing in mind, all circumstances. As I said, I believe in Cambodia's case. ASEAN had a special role and the fact that we are all parties to the Paris Peace Accord was an important factor. Next, the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). Is it an important instrument? After four ARFs, Singapore is of the view that the ARF has evolved into an important instrument to engage the key players on regional and security matters. Originally, when ARF was conceived, we thought of a three-stage process. The first stage would be confidence building measures and when we are comfortable with that, we will move on to preventive diplomacy. The third stage is, hopefully, conflict resolution stage.”
“I should think that ASEAN will take a decision only when it is fully satisfied that all the obligations under the Paris Peace Accord will be honoured by Cambodia, including holding of free elections, and that Cambodia can fully assume all its rights and obligations as a member of ASEAN. Dr Ong Chit Chung asked whether Myanmar and Laos will impede or aid the progress of ASEAN. I think ASEAN members realise that the admission of new members and expansion to ten will have both challenges ahead for ASEAN as well as advantages because you have 10 countries eventually linked up as one grouping. And in terms of the consumer population and its ability to deal with other countries, especially in economic cooperation, it can have considerable clout. Will it affect decision-making process? One might say yes, because the more members there are, the ability to take quick decisions of course may be affected. But let me say that I am very encouraged because it is not as if the existing ASEAN has never worked with the other countries. They have been observers. We have interacted with them. They have been full members of ARF and they have been imbibed by the ASEAN way, the ASEAN tradition of consensus, give and take, and I am confident that, as new members, they will adjust to ASEAN and not ASEAN has to adjust to them, in terms of maintaining the tradition of decision-making. Mr Ravindran also spoke about Cambodia and Myanmar and whether ASEAN was interfering in Cambodia's internal affairs. The answer to that is ASEAN did not think that it was interfering in Cambodia's internal affairs. We have to remember that, first, it was Cambodia which was seeking admission to ASEAN.”
“Whereupon the three Foreign Ministers, who formed the ASEAN mission, said that they would then cease continuing with the mission because it depends on the cooperation of the three parties. They reported accordingly to the Foreign Ministers last week. 2.30 pm Then, as you have read in the newspapers, we had a whole series of fast moving events. Mr Ung Huot reported that after all, Mr Hun Sen did welcome a role for ASEAN. In which case, we were prepared to reactivate the three Foreign Ministers' mission. The next day, there was a turnaround and Mr Hun Sen said that he would welcome ASEAN's role in finding a political solution but through prevention of foreign interference. So we felt that that was not sufficiently clear and we asked Mr Ung Huot to go back to Cambodia and let us know clearly and unequivocally whether, indeed, Mr Hun Sen welcomed the role for ASEAN. Yesterday, at the closing session of the Foreign Ministers' meeting, a written letter was read out by Foreign Minister Badawi where he said that the Cambodian Second Prime Minister did welcome ASEAN's role and also invited the three Foreign Ministers to go back to Cambodia to discuss. It is difficult, at this stage, to say what will be the outcome of the ASEAN initiative because things are quite fluid and it depends on whether the different elements which ASEAN might put forward to the different parties would be acceptable. But ASEAN was motivated by the desire to offer its good offices to help resolve this problem. But it depends on the other parties, not on ASEAN itself. As to when ASEAN will admit Cambodia, this is not for me to decide. It has to be decided by ASEAN.”
“Mr Ung Huot, Foreign Minister, turned up at Kuala Lumpur. ASEAN Foreign Ministers decided that while admission would be delayed, we would seat him as the representative for the observership, but making it very clear that in doing so, ASEAN considered him as representing the Government of Cambodia which ASEAN had always known, ie, the Government represented by Prime Minister Ranariddh and Hun Sen. The third decision taken was ASEAN offered its good offices to play a role. But, of course, the role that ASEAN can play depends on the cooperation of all parties to the Cambodian problem, principally, His Majesty King Sihanouk, Prince Ranariddh and Mr Hun Sen. I think ASEAN's various decisions have sent the right signals to Phnom Penh and the international community. It had upheld the principle that countries should not bring about a change of government through violence. And I think ASEAN had no choice because this happened on the eve of the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting, otherwise its standing would have been diminished. I agree with Dr Ong Chit Chung that ASEAN did not infringe its policies of non-interference and I will explain why shortly. As far as the ASEAN delegation of three Foreign Ministers (Indonesia, Thailand and Philippines) to hold consultations with the key leaders of the Cambodian government, King Sihanouk, Prince Ranariddh and Hun Sen is concerned, I would say that the reactions and responses from King Sihanouk and Prince Ranariddh were encouraging. They welcomed ASEAN's role. In the first meeting with Mr Hun Sen, Mr Hun Sen gave indications that he would want to have matters solved within Cambodia and that ASEAN should not get involved.”
“Several other such contacts and interactions are also in the pipeline. Our top civil servants from Singapore, who are participants in a course known as "Leaders in Administration Programme" (or LAP), will visit Kuala Lumpur from 13th-15th August, and will get briefings by various Malaysian agencies and private sector organisations. Foreign Minister Badawi and I have kept up our links and continued to have good working relations. Malaysian leaders have said it will take time for bilateral relations to return to normal and Singapore will do its part to improve ties, but we will leave it to the Malaysian leaders to set the pace. Several Members have touched on the question of ASEAN and Cambodia. The developments in Cambodia in the past few weeks, beginning 5th July, have placed ASEAN, of course, in a delicate position. ASEAN has to take several decisions. The first decision which we took at a special meeting on 10th July was to postpone the admission of Cambodia. Let me make it clear that prior to this, the leaders of ASEAN had taken a decision on membership. Cambodia, Myanmar and Laos are to be admitted as members. The only question therefore is one of timing. Before 10th July, at the previous meeting, the Foreign Ministers had decided to admit all three at last week's conference in Kuala Lumpur. But because of the turn of events in Cambodia, at a special meeting on 10th July, the Foreign Ministers decided that the wisest course of action was to delay Cambodia's admission to a later date. Last week, at the meeting, several decisions were taken. The first decision was we reaffirmed the decision to postpone membership. The second was a question of who will represent Cambodia in its seat as observer. Cambodia has for a few years been an observer of ASEAN.”
“We recall that we discussed at length Malaysia-Singapore relations in this House during our sitting on 5th June. I referred then to the stormy weather and the different waves that had buffeted our relations. I believe that the waves appear to be subsiding and things are slowly returning to normal. As I said in this House on 5th June, Singapore-Malaysia relations are too important to be allowed to drift. Singapore is committed to establishing a long-term relationship with Malaysia, based on mutual respect, trust, reciprocity and mutual benefit. Of course, as with all good close neighbours, problems will arise from time to time. So long as both sides continue to communicate and work for mutual benefit, I do not see why Singapore and Malaysia cannot live side by side as good neighbours. Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong has stated in this House also on the same sitting that he is keen to take relations with Malaysia into a new era under his proposed framework of wider cooperation. Central to his idea is to establish a win-win relationship based on equal partnership for mutual benefit. But this will take some time to develop. Since we last met in this House, there have been some encouraging developments. For example, the second crossing's topping-up ceremony on 31st July 1997 will be officiated by Mr Lim Hng Kiang and Datuk Samy Vellu. The official opening is scheduled for 2nd June 1998. Various contacts such as bilateral games between government agencies have resumed. For example, my counterpart, Foreign Minister Badawi, will be leading their Foreign Affairs, or Wisma Putra, to Singapore for the Wisma Putra MFA Games which will take place in August. The Malaysia-Singapore Public Service Games will take place in November.”
“But let me say that the ARF does remain a crucial regional security forum because it engages all the major powers of the Asia-Pacific region in constructive dialogue. It is true that there are a few dark clouds and potential flash points in the horizon. We need to take note of them and hope that they will be managed carefully. Dr Ong Chit Chung has referred to the tensions in the cross-strait relations which we witnessed in early 1996, but these tensions have cooled down since then. The territorial disputes in the South China Sea remain a potential flash point. But so long as the claimant states go about their pursuit of claims in a manner that does not exacerbate tensions or, worse, result in armed conflicts, then I do not see this as posing a major threat to the stability and security of our region. I will come back to the South China Sea disputes in a moment. The other potential flash point is the developments in the Korean Peninsular. We are concerned because of the uncertainties and potential nuclear capabilities of North Korea. There were tensions in 1996 brought about by the submarine incursion and more recently by armed conflicts along the DMZ, between North and South Korean border guards. Nevertheless, it is good that progress has been made in the preparation for the four-party talks. United States, Japan and South Korea are also continuing the food aid to North Korea. Together with the Korean Energy Development Organisation (or KEDO), these mechanisms will help to stabilise conditions in North Korea. As far as Singapore is concerned, we support all these mechanisms because they contribute to peace and stability in the region. A few Members - Mr Charles Chong, Mr Hawazi as well as Dr Ong Chit Chung - asked about Malaysia-Singapore relations.”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to reply at this stage because quite a number of the topics touched on by the speakers are inter-related. I would first start off by responding to Dr Ong Chit Chung. He himself has given quite a succinct account of the strategic situation in this part of the world. He has referred to the triangular relationship. Indeed, for us in Singapore, it is important that the stability of the triangular relationship be maintained, namely, between US, China and Japan. And this triangular relationship has to be stable for peace and security in our part of the world. I think Singapore's interests are best served when all three major powers are constructively engaged and there is a stable and peaceful balance of power in the region. In this regard, I think we can say that there have been some positive signals in the past year. For example, the United States has emphasised that it will remain committed in the region. Its continued presence has also been enhanced by the reaffirmation of the US-Japan Security Alliance. President Clinton's second administration has announced its determination to engage China constructively. Exchanges of visits between the Chinese Foreign Minister and the United States Secretary of State have already taken place. We are told that President Jiang Zemin will visit United States this year while President Clinton may reciprocate next year. Summit level exchanges between Japan and China are also said to be expected to take place soon. Overall, I would say that the situation in the Asian region in 1997 has improved significantly. I have just returned from Kuala Lumpur where we had a very good meeting during the ASEAN Regional Forum. The discussions were robust and candid. I will speak more about the ARF shortly.”
“I would refer, very quickly, to paragraphs 13 onwards, and I will just read a few selected sentences because the entire opinion will be in the records. He has said: "There is no ambiguity in section 82(1)(e). If the legislature had intended to make it an offence for unauthorised persons to wait or loiter inside the polling station, it could have easily provided for it. It did not. The mischief that section 82(1)(e) is intended to address is found in paragraph 99 of the Elias Report. It reads: `In order to prevent voters being made subject to any form of undue influence or harassment at the approaches to polling stations, we recommend that it should be made an offence for any person to establish any desk or table near the entrance to any polling station, or to wait outside any polling station on polling day except for the purpose of gaining entry into the polling station and that it should be an offence for any person to loiter in any street or public place within a radius of 200 yards of any polling station.'" Then he deals later with the situation inside polling stations. This is in paragraph 16. I quote: "Activities inside polling stations were made subject to a different regime under the Act. Section 39(4) provides [and he sets out section 39(4)]." Linked with subsection 39(7), the Attorney-General states: "...any person who misconducts himself in the polling station, or fails to obey the lawful orders of the presiding officer may be removed from the polling station by a police officer... If an unauthorised person refuses to leave the polling station when told to do so by a public officer, he commits an offence... for obstructing a public servant in the discharge of his duty."”
“--- although they were not candidates or polling agents. Under our Constitution, the Attorney-General has the power exercisable at his discretion to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for any offence. I do not think it is proper in this House to go into the details of the merits or demerits of any individual decision taken by the Attorney-General, whether to prosecute or not to prosecute, because he has to take into account the law and a whole set of circumstances. However, since Mr Jeyaretnam has expressed amazement at the legal position and he has said that the law is an ass, I have asked the Attorney-General to give me a written opinion which clearly sets out the legal position. I have distributed this to Members of the House because it will not be possible to read the entire opinion of the Attorney-General. Mr Jeyaretnam has made his own conclusions of the law. He has said that the law is patently clear but, as you will see, Sir, from the Attorney-General's opinion, he has explained the legal scheme under the Parliamentary Elections Act, the interplay between the different provisions and he has supported his opinion by a reference to the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Corrupt, Illegal or Undesirable Practices, a report which eventually led to some of the provisions in our elections law. Mr Jeyaretnam has specifically referred to the activities inside polling stations and he says it is patently clear that if something outside the polling is an offence, then it must be so within. As the Attorney-General has pointed out, different areas were subject to different legal provisions and to different legal regimes.”
“I hope that the setting up of such mediation centres in the population centres right where people live will help in this regard. Such a network of centres will accord with the devolution of greater powers to CDCs. I believe it will also provide effective avenues for conflict resolution outside the formal court system, thus alleviating the workload of the courts. Also, it is one way of fostering a self-help approach in our local communities to resolve day-to-day conflicts. If it succeeds, I think it will strengthen community bonding. Sir, can I move on to Mr Jeyaretnam's comment? In this regard, can I, with your permission, ask the Clerk of Parliament to distribute a written opinion (Cols. 1417 - 1424) from the Attorney-General. And with your permission again, I would request that this be in the records of our proceedings. written opinion - PRESENCE OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS INSIDE POLLING STATIONS, APPENDIX (Cols. 1417 - 1424) Yes, Sir, the Workers' Party, the SDP and Mr Jeyaretnam have criticised the decision taken by the Police, acting on the advice of the Attorney-General, to dismiss the complaints that he referred to. But he forgets to mention that his own party, Mr Low Thia Khiang and Mr Goh Yew Chye, had also entered polling stations while voting was in progress ---”
“Sir, first, on Prof. Chin Tet Yung's comments on mediation. The Committee which was chaired by the Minister of State, my colleague, Prof. Ho Peng Kee, completed its study and I am glad to say that the Committee's recommendations have been accepted by the Government. The main recommendations were to set up community mediation centres in HDB towns to serve as venues where people can go to resolve social and community disputes. The first such centre will be co-located with a regional small claims tribunal so as to share infrastructure and resources. If this model works, then we will replicate them in other regional small claim tribunals to be set up elsewhere. In the longer term, if such centres are successful, we envisage one centre in each Community Development Council locality. I agree with him that it is important to get volunteer mediators to be selected and specially trained. I will take into account his useful suggestions here. A permanent centre for resolving commercial disputes through mediation will also be set up under the Singapore Academy of Law. A pilot project has already been carried out by the Academy and has proven successful. The Ministry of Law will provide overall coordination for alternative dispute resolution activities. We will set up a division within our Ministry to provide guidance on mediation services and to facilitate the training of mediators. To tap non-governmental professional expertise, we will set up an Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Committee. I agree with him that we must move away from the notion that litigation is the only solution to all disputes. Mediation will enable Singaporeans to take on the social responsibility and acquire the capability to manage conflicts in their families, in the neighbourhoods and the community.”
“Sir, it might be better for the Member for Hougang to hear out what Prime Minister Goh has to say, and if he still has questions after that, I am sure both of us will be very happy to respond to his questions.”