Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim
Singapore
“As a society, we need to ensure that no family is trapped by their circumstances, no child is defined by their starting point, no potential goes unrealised and no hope beyond reach. This is not just a social policy; it is a moral responsibility.”
“Will the Ministry set up clear timelines, audit and review mechanisms and public reporting expectations for these enhancements, so that agencies are held to consistent standards across, and families can have this confidence and trust, especially in suspected child abuse cases, so that they are not missed or delayed in reporting?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. And I thank the Minister. I had a supplementary question on humanitarian aid assistance and I am heartened to hear that Singapore will continue to work with the international bodies, and at the same time maintain the safety of our humanitarian workers there.”
“Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister for the Statement. I do agree that identity politics would be disastrous for Singapore, especially minorities. And I thank him for the Statement.”
“Sir, I thank Minister Josephine Teo, Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim and Minister of State Sun Xueling for laying out the clear and comprehensive plans and priorities for MHA.”
“Sir, I thank Minister Edwin Tong and Minister of State Murali Pillai for their clear clarifications and plans for MinLaw and for our fellow Singaporeans. Sir, the law is the tool, but justice is the ideal. I thank the staff and officers of MinLaw for making access to justice the ideal for our Singaporeans.”
The complete record
Every one of 418 lines we hold for Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 9.
“Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Estimates be reduced by $100." Chairman, I am a disputes lawyer in an international arbitration practice. Singapore has firmly established itself as a leading international dispute resolution hub, attracting parties from all over the world seeking a neutral, efficient and trusted venue for resolving their disputes. Our strategic location, strong rule of law and world-class legal institutions make us the preferred choice for businesses and investors navigating complex cross-border disputes. In 2022 alone, the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) handled 357 new cases, with parties from over 65 jurisdictions. SIAC's caseload has grown steadily over the years, reflecting the confidence of the global business community. Similarly, the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) has seen an increase in cases involving international parties, reinforcing our reputation as a trusted forum for commercial dispute resolution. Beyond arbitration and litigation, Singapore is also a leader in mediation. The Singapore Convention on Mediation, signed by more than 55 countries, highlights our commitment to promoting amicable dispute resolution worldwide. With a robust legal framework, top-tier professionals and a commitment to innovation, Singapore will continue to serve as a premier dispute resolution hub, offering certainty and fairness in an increasingly complex global business environment. Singapore has, over the years, succeeded in attracting inter-governmental dispute resolution institutions. The Permanent Court of Arbitration has an office here in Singapore.”
“Sir, I thank Minister Josephine Teo, Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim and Minister of State Sun Xueling for laying out the clear and comprehensive plans and priorities for MHA. On behalf of my fellow Parliamentarians as well, I extend our deepest gratitude to our MHA officers, men and women of the Home Team, and staff and Public Service officers, for their dedication and sacrifice in protecting our nation. With that, Sir, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $8,027,752,000 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $1,247,341,500 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“And what kind of a response have we been getting from external stakeholders when they contribute to this cause? Finally, re-integration is a collective effort. So, together, not just with stakeholders, with prison or the Home Team, but also with the families. So, what efforts are there that we can encourage families to play a more active role in the re-integration process of the desistors?”
“Chairman, I have two sets of clarifications for Minister Josephine Teo and Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim. For the Minister, on our Home Team Manpower Resource, firstly, regarding recruitment and training of locals while Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) expands its Emergency Medical Services (EMS) workforce and aims to maintain a local core, what are the strategies by the Home Team to recruit and train more Singaporeans and work together possibly with our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) or mid-career switches so that SCDF will remain a career of choice in the face of growing competition for talent? Secondly, on the foreign manpower part, what measures are being taken to ensure that the foreign EMS personnel receive the relevant training and qualifications that are needed for their roles in Singapore? Thirdly, on augmenting Home Team workforce with technology, I know we are using smart and autonomous solutions more increasingly. However, I feel that the Home Team also needs to increase public awareness on the deployment of these solutions to instill confidence and assurance in public that, while there is no visible officer, that does not mean that there is no security and vigilance. This is also important for deterrence. So, what steps are being taken to raise this awareness? For Minister of State Faishal Ibrahim, on the Re-integration Hub initiative – full disclosure – I am a member of the Yellow Ribbon Singapore. I love the work of the Re-integration Hub. Can the Minister of State share more about the Re-integration Hubs and their role in supporting desistors before their release? How many hubs are there and where are they located within the towns?”
“Public education on digital risks, real-time information sharing, and international cooperation can enhance our ability to tackle these evolving threats. By combining innovation with strong partnerships, we can build a safer, more resilient society in the face of emerging security challenges. In the face of rapid technological advancements, how is the Home Team leveraging technology like AI, both to facilitate its operations and to deal with tech-enabled crime? Are our legislative frameworks adequate to deal with tech-enabled crime? How is the Home Team helping its officers to develop new skills and capabilities so that they can utilise the new technology and remain ready to address emerging security challenges? Can the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) provide an update on efforts to level up the security industry? With the rise in cybercrime, how is the Home Team enhancing its partnerships with the community and members of the public to promote safety and security in both the digital and physical space? [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Safe AI”
“This is a worrying trend because when people lose trust in institutions, they turn to alternative sources, sometimes unreliable or even harmful ones. Singapore has largely maintained high levels of trust in its institutions, but we must not take this for granted. One lesson we can learn from other countries is the importance of proactive engagement. Defending racial and religious harmony is a shared responsibility. While the Government provides policies and enforcement, community organisations and individuals must actively contribute to a culture of mutual respect and understanding. At the same time, strengthening trust in institutions, especially those responsible for law and order, is vital for a stable and united society. May I ask the hon Minister, how can stakeholders like community organisations and the general public work with the Government to safeguard and defend Singapore’s racial and religious harmony in the coming years? Public institutions globally are suffering from a trust deficit. What has the Ministry done to shore up public trust and confidence in the Home Team? Levelling Up Technology and Partnerships In today’s digital world, technology is a double-edged sword. It drives progress but also enables new forms of crime, from cyberattacks to online scams and misinformation. To stay ahead, we must harness technology and strengthen partnerships across sectors. Governments must invest in artificial intelligence (AI)-driven threat detection, advanced cybersecurity frameworks and digital forensics. But technology alone is not enough. Collaboration between law enforcement, tech companies and the public is crucial.”
“Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head P of the Estimates be reduced by $100". In today’s world, where divisions and distrust are rising, preserving trust and safeguarding racial and religious harmony are more important than ever. Many societies, including ours, are facing challenges such as misinformation, external influences and global conflicts that can strain social cohesion. In such times, it is not just the responsibility of the Government but also of community organisations and the general public to work together to defend our unity. The Government plays a critical role in setting the legal and policy framework, but policies alone are not enough. True harmony comes from the everyday actions of our people. Community organisations can lead the way by creating safe spaces for dialogue, encouraging interfaith understanding and addressing concerns before they escalate into divisions. The public, too, has a powerful role to play. Everyday interactions matter. Simple acts, like respecting different religious practices, learning about other cultures, and standing up against discrimination, help build a more inclusive society. The fight against misinformation is also crucial. In an era where divisive rhetoric spreads easily online, responsible sharing of information is key to ensuring that harmony is not undermined by falsehoods. However, for any society to stay united, trust in public institutions, especially those responsible for law and order, is essential. Yet, across the world, many institutions are suffering from a trust deficit. Concerns about transparency, fairness, and accountability have led to a declining confidence in governments and law enforcement agencies.”
“Indonesia last year doubled its annual contribution to UNRWA to US$1.2 million. With the latest temporary ceasefire agreement, what else is Singapore doing to address the situation in Gaza beyond humanitarian aid assistance and, in particular, on any diplomatic channels? Foreign Interference”
“Sir, Singapore shares strong and longstanding ties with the Gulf countries, built on mutual respect, trade and cooperation. The Gulf region is an important partner for Singapore in energy, finance and investment, with growing collaboration in technology, education and sustainable development. Our warm relations are underpinned by shared interests in stability, economic progress and global peace. Recent developments in the trade and financial sectors underscore the potential for Singapore to engage with Gulf countries in sectors such as agriculture, finance and trade, leveraging existing agreements and market dynamics. What is the state of Singapore's relations with the Gulf States? In this regard, amid the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Singapore stands in solidarity with the Palestinian civilians affected and has actively contributed to humanitarian efforts. We have provided aid through organisations like the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and the Singapore Red Cross to support urgent medical and food supplies. Singapore has consistently called for the immediate cessation of violence, respect for international law, and a just and lasting resolution. Moving forward, with the latest tranche of humanitarian aid, Singapore shows commitment in working with Gulf partners and the international community to contribute to a future of peace and stability for the region. In total, seven tranches totalling over $19 million worth of humanitarian assistance had been delivered to Gaza. We should be proud as Singaporeans because we, collectively as a nation, has contributed comparably or indeed more than that by countries in our region alone. Since October 2023, Malaysia, for instance, has contributed RM45 million as of November 2024.”
“Madam, Singapore and Brunei share a deep and enduring friendship. Our ties go beyond diplomacy. We have close defense, economic and cultural connections that continue to strengthen over the years. From the Currency Interchangeability Agreement, which has linked our economies since 1967, to regular defense collaborations and warm people-to-people ties, our relationship is a model of trust and partnership. As we look to the future, we must continue to support each other, ensuring that our friendship remains as strong and as steadfast as ever. Last year, in 2024, President and then-Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Prime Minister Lawrence Wong each had successful visits to Brunei, which underscored our special relationship with Brunei. How are both sides continuing to deepen our partnership, especially between our younger generations? Singapore's Relations with ASEAN”
“Thank you, Chairman. I also thank the Minister for answering my questions on training safety. I have two clarifications. I welcome the news that SAF and MOH will consider further medical assistance deployments to help civilians affected in Gaza. First of all, exactly last year, I was with Minister Vivian Balakrishnan in the Middle East. We saw the military humanitarian drop in Gaza, but I must say I was quite concerned about the safety of our troops. The Minister mentioned how it is not safe right now to establish medical facilities in Gaza, but they are thinking of deploying in safe areas in the region in the coming months. May I ask what would be the size of the deployment in terms of manpower and medical equipment and possibly, the duration of the deployment as well? Secondly, how do such medical humanitarian assistance deployed in areas of crisis or warzones contribute to our own technological advancement or SAF capability building and overall operational readiness? Of course, the safety of our troops is of utmost importance and mission success critical.”
“Chairman the demands of modern warfare continued to evolve. So, too must be the tools we use to train our servicemen. One of the most exciting areas of innovation in the military today is the integration of advanced technologies aimed at improving training efficacy and ensuring the safety of our troops. Technologies like virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are revolutionising a how we prepare soldiers for the battlefield. They help to develop critical decision-making skills, refine tactics and practice responses in combat situations without physical danger. Data from wearable technologies is also invaluable too in safety aspects, preventing heat strokes and over exertion, allowing commanders to intervene before a situation escalates. AI-driven systems can be used to identify areas for improvement. Can MINDEF share more about how technology has been incorporated to improve training efficacy and safety of our servicemen? By incorporating these cutting-edge technologies, the military is not only improving the quality of training but also ensuring that our servicemen are better prepared, safer and more resilient in the face of increasingly complex and dangerous challenges. Strengthening Mental Health Support for NSFs”
“Chairman, we are witnessing the rapid rise of emerging and disruptive technologies from AI and quantum computing to advanced robotics and cyber warfare. These innovations hold immense potential, but also pose significant challenges, especially when it comes to military security. Emerging technologies are not just reshaping industries, they are changing the ways wars are fought. We now face the reality of adversaries using AI-driven drones, autonomous systems and cyberattacks to disrupt critical infrastructure, communication and defence mechanisms. Take, for example, the use of AI-enabled drones by various state and non-state actors. These drones are becoming an increasingly common weapon on the battlefield. Ultimately, it is clear that staying ahead of disruptive technology will require not only technological innovation but also strategic foresight and adaptability. Given the rapidly changing technological environment, what are MINDEF and SAF doing to guard against these emerging and disruptive technology that can be used on the battlefield? Our ability to manage, control and protect against these technologies will define the future of warfare and how we defend Singapore. Enhancing Realism in SAF Training”
“And those words broke my heart. I realised that in all my busyness, I had neglected the attention to my child. And on that day, I brought her and her young sisters – she was like six years old then – to Casa Raudah, a women and children shelter home at which I was volunteering, to see first-hand what I do away from home and what I do during that time that I am away from her. At the end of the day, she understood. She saw first-hand the other girls in the home and she said to me, "Ayah, help more people then." Just like how children want to be in our lives, we fathers must involve our children actively in our lives. This is the crux of parenting. By addressing cultural workplace and policy barriers, Singapore can lead the way in promoting shared parenting and redefining the roles of fathers, ultimately changing mindsets and empowering fathers to take an active role in parenting, which will strengthen families and contribute to a more equitable society for decades as building blocks. Our families make up Singapore. Hence, let us build a "Singapore Made for Families". I support this Motion. [Applause.]”
“As Malay/Muslims, we also believe that children are not just a sacred trust bestowed upon us, but they are also a divine gift that brings blessings and prosperity for the family. Therefore, I call upon all young couples to cherish every aspect of marriage and raising children. As for the fathers, your sacrifices can never be fully repaid, but the reward will be apparent when the child that you raised and educated becomes a valuable and worthy individual in the eyes of society and the world, which is a testament of the efforts taken and to you who raised the child. A verse of pantun or Malay quatrain: On the mountain, taro grows Tigers and deer, its slopes they climb A father's love forever flows Endlessly through the stream of time (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, fathers' involvement in child-raising is not only beneficial for children and families, but also for society as a whole. However, we fathers suffer sometimes what is called "dad guilt" in our experience in fatherhood. We may be too busy with our careers, balancing between duties and responsibilities. Let me share a story. My work as a disputes lawyer in international arbitration and my pro bono work in the community space meant that I am often travelling and takes me away from home. My eldest daughter, when she was very young, was very often curious what I do. Whenever I leave for my pro bono work, she will ask me, "Ayah, where are you going?" I did not have time to go into the details. So, I would just say, "I am going to help some people." This went on for a few occasions. And then, one day, she stopped me at the door and asked me again, "Ayah, where are you going?", and I replied again, "To help some people." And then, she said something to me which I remember to this day. She said, "Help me".”
“In this respect, the Government's M3 initiative has reached out to many young couples via the Bersamamu programme and through the Matematika classes, which help parents and their preschool children prepare for primary school. In fact, MENDAKI’s tuition classes provide high quality and very affordable tuition for our children. Thus, there are various ways to manage the costs involved in supporting families and educating children, aside from the various Baby Bonus, subsidies, and tax rebates provided by the Government. Apart from Government policies, we need initiatives that involve all parties, not just women, but men as well. Therefore, the involvement of fathers in raising their children is not only beneficial for the child and family, but also for society as a whole. Every year in Keat Hong, we organise various programmes to support fathers in their parenting journey, in collaboration with Government agencies and community partners. For example, at M³@Chua Chu Kang, we have a series of programmes under the "Nakhoda Bahtera", or Ship Captain, initiative, touching on issues related to men and fathers, like leadership, parenting and men's health. We also organise bowling events with fathers through Dads for Life and talent time competitions. Since 2020, we have also been co-organising with MSF and Casa Raudha Women Home, a series of workshops and seminars for fathers and young men, to eradicate patriarchal thinking and end domestic violence. By addressing cultural, workplace and Government policy barriers, Singapore can take the lead in promoting shared parenting and redefining the role of parents.”
“When she first suggested that we move this Motion together, I readily supported it because I believe that parents play a crucial role in their children's education, especially the involvement of fathers in their children's lives. With the Government's family-friendly policies in all aspects of family life, such as education, housing and childcare, we can provide an environment that will better enable and support our young couples to start families and have children. This is crucial in order to build the next generation that can continue to strive for the overall prosperity and progress of our nation. We have a large number of young parents in Keat Hong. Many couples are both working and at the same time, they strive hard to raise children who are still in school. During my house visits and interactions at preschool events in Keat Hong, I heard their concerns about the challenges of raising young children. There are also some young couples without children who are worried about the cost of supporting and raising children in Singapore. In fact, in Keat Hong, I met many multi-generational families, where the elderly parents lamented that their grown-up children have settled down, but are not ready to have children. Thus, they did not yet have the chance to cuddle a grandchild and be called "grandfather" or "grandmother". As for our young couples, they are worried about the challenges of starting a family and educating and raising children. I want to dispel the notion that raising children is only about money. Instead, it involves establishing a comprehensive ecosystem, which includes childcare in nurseries or kindergartens, a home environment that is conducive to family life, a family-friendly workplace and also parenting support and guidance for our families.”
“In this regard, at Keat Hong, we have been organising, for many years, annual talks and workshops for men on Breaking the Patriarchal Mindset in families, supported by MSF and organised by Casa Raudha Women Home. This is to normalise caregiving and help end domestic violence in our communities. Bapa Sepanjang Hayat also organises talent competition shows with Keat Hong Community Centre where fathers take to the stage with their children, and showcase their singing and musical talents together. What I find most touching was how they struggled and ultimately bonded in the journey during the preparation and audition for the competition. Mr Speaker, in summary, my proposals are as follows. Firstly, consider making paternity leave mandatory and reward companies or businesses with tax incentives or increased short term foreign manpower quota for certain sectors. Secondly, expand childcare leave further to raise the age to 12 years to cover almost all primary school children. Thirdly, higher childcare leave entitlement for parents with two or more children. Fourthly, increased legal protection for fathers who take leave or request FWAs against discrimination based on our existing legislative framework. Fifthly, encourage couples to share parental leave equitably. Sixthly, proper planning and communication within families on sharing of duties and responsibilities on parenting. Lastly, increased support through engagement and resources provided in the community for fathers. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I support the Motion moved by the hon Member Hany Soh. It aims to support Singaporeans in starting and raising families.”
“How the couple shares that load or childcare leave, is left to them. However, we can incentivise equitable sharing of such parenting leave by drawing from the lessons learnt in other jurisdictions. We can encourage shared leave by introducing financial incentives, such as tax breaks or childcare subsidies, for families where both parents take equal childcare leave. In Sweden, its "Daddy Month" policy, which reserves a portion of parental leave exclusively for fathers, has been highly effective. That being said, government policies alone will not change mindsets on child caregiving. For parents, there are many other things that we ourselves can do to make the most of our time we spend with our children. Families can create structured plans to divide caregiving responsibilities equitably. For example, fathers can take on specific roles, such as bedtime routines, read your story books before bedtime, school drop-offs in the morning, to build consistent involvement daily with their children. Couples should practise open communication and align their expectations about caregiving roles. A 2020 MSF study found that couples who communicated openly about parenting roles reported stronger relationships and better child outcomes. At the community level, we can launch campaigns to normalise father involvement and challenge stereotypes through the involvement of "Dads for Life" or the vernacular "Bapa Sepanjang Hayat” movement to reach out to more workplaces and increase community engagement. Fathers who participated in community programmes such as these, reported higher levels of confidence and involvement. We can establish "Dad Hubs" in neighbourhoods to provide parenting resources and support.”
“This covers key milestones in our children's lives, like entrance to kindergarten, Primary 1 registration and the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), not to mention, other important events in their lives, like medical appointments and birthdays. These changes, aligned with the 2023 PAP's Women's Wing and Young PAP joint paper, which advocates for expanded leave provisions and employer support for caregiving roles. Additionally, stronger enforcement of anti-discrimination laws is needed to protect fathers taking leave or requesting FWAs as countries with robust protections see a 20% increase in fathers' involvement. Beyond the workplace, Mr Speaker, we also need to change the perspectives of men in caregiving within our society. In many societies, including Singapore, caregiving is still seen as primarily a mother's role. An Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) 2020 study found that 60% of fathers felt societal pressure to prioritise work over family. A 2021 global survey revealed that 63% of men in Asia Pacific countries felt that society views them as less masculine if they take on caregiving roles. Changing societal and workplace mindsets is crucial to encourage greater father involvement. This includes redefining masculinity, in promoting the idea that caregiving is a strength, not a weakness, and that involved fatherhood is a key aspect of our modern world. We also need to normalise shared parenting by encouraging both parents to take equal responsibility for child-raising. In this regard, I welcome the Government's move towards implementing six weeks of shared parenting. This signifies a move towards recognising that the role of caregiving for children does not fall on the shoulders of mothers alone, but it is a shared responsibility of both parents together.”
“We need to change that mindset of child caregiving amongst men, amongst society to encourage more to have children and raise a family. To do so, we need to implement changes both at work and at home. Singapore has made strides in improving paternity leave policies with fathers currently entitled to two weeks of paid leave, increasing to four weeks from April this year. However, the uptake remains low with only 44% of eligible fathers fully utilising their leave in 2020, citing workload, stigma and unsupportive workplace cultures. Globally, as well, paternity leave uptake is similarly low, with only about 34% of countries offering it and even fewer enforcing it as mandatory. Studies show that mandatory paternity leave increases father involvement by 25%, suggesting that Singapore could benefit from extending and mandating such policies as well. Challenges include employers' resistance and operational concerns. To address these, employers can offer FWAs, which has been shown to boost employee retention and satisfaction by 30%. Incentives, like tax breaks or increased foreign manpower quotas, could encourage businesses to adopt family-friendly policies. These measures could also apply to childcare leave, which currently offers six days for children under seven years, and two days extended childcare leave for those aged seven to 12. To better caregiving needs, the Government can streamline and consolidate childcare leave for all children up to the age of 12, consider a uniformed eight days of childcare leave across-the-board for children up to 12 and allow higher leave entitlement for parents with two or more children. For instance, those with two or more children, can be eligible for 10 days of childcare leave.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon Member Ms Hany Soh for moving this Motion. When Ms Hany Soh approached me to sponsor this Motion, I fully and readily supported it. I have four children of my own, ranging from toddlers to teenagers. So, this means, for the past 16 years, I have experienced various stages of their childhood and hence, these eye bags as well. I was blessed with my extended family support in this parenting journey and it helped a lot. So, I strongly believe in strengthening support for our family units in Singapore. I raised this in my maiden Parliamentary speech when I likened our nation building to Lego bricks: creating a myriad of structures from different shapes, sizes and colours and that our nation is strong only when each of our basic building block, the family unit, is strong. In my speech, I am focusing on support for fathers as partners in raising a family. Research consistently highlights the critical role fathers play in child development. In 2020, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) reported that children with actively involved fathers showed better emotional resilience and social skills. Additionally, a 2019 study by the National University of Singapore (NUS) found that fathers who spent more time with their children contributed to higher levels of family satisfaction and lower rates of marital conflict. However, traditional gender roles and workplace cultures often limit fathers' ability to participate fully in child-raising. Globally, fathers face challenges, such as stigma around taking paternity leave, lack of flexible work arrangements (FWAs) and societal expectations that prioritise mothers as primary caregivers.”
“We shall, therefore, bring to the world of the UN, the attitude and approaches of a multiracial nation, aware that independence and interdependence of peoples and nations are not incompatible goals to pursue." Those words, Mr Deputy Speaker, echo true since 1965 until today and on the occasion of this year's SG60 of our nation building, let us work together to build a Singapore that is united in its diversity, resilient in its values and steadfast in its pursuit of racial harmony, a shining united light in the sea of global polarising challenges. Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“Just like the passengers on that bus, we fellow Singaporeans must continue to take care of one another, regardless of how we look, the language we speak or from where our families first originated. The world is increasingly conducive for the divisive. We are all on the same boat, heading in one direction towards the same destination. Racial harmony in our nation is integral to our survival and progress. This Bill is a testament to Singapore's unwavering commitment to racial harmony. However, its success will depend on careful implementation, balancing legal enforcement with education, dialogue and community empowerment. We can create a society where racial harmony is not just a policy goal but a lived reality for all Singaporeans. Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to end with a quote from the seminal speech, given by Singapore's first Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr S Rajaratnam, to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on 21 September 1965 on the occasion of Singapore’s admission to the UN: "The cultural and political development of my country has for decades been based on free intercourse and exchange of ideas drawn from many races, from many continents. The multiracial and multi-cultural character of my country has made us somewhat skeptical of those who preach the superiority and exclusiveness of one culture and one race. In a multiracial society, one soon learns that no one people has a monopoly of wisdom and that one's own culture is not without flaws. This not only breeds tolerance for different viewpoints but also a readiness to learn and borrow from the accumulated wisdom of other people.”
“On the way home, their bus came to a halt when the rioters blocked their bus and began throwing bottles and stones at it. At that moment, everyone on the bus was worried about their safety. However, there was only one thing in their minds regardless of whether they were Malay, Chinese or Indian. They all just want to get home safely. Eventually, a few young men got off the bus to clear a path for their vehicle to drive quickly away from that place. This incident left a profound impact on my mother, who was still very young at the time. My mother advised me: although we were of different races and religions, all of us in Singapore are like passengers in the same bus, heading in one direction towards the same destination. Therefore, we must take care of each other. Since young, she instilled in me the importance of racial harmony in Singapore's multiracial society. Hence, I welcome any legislation that will continue to maintain and safeguard racial harmony in our country. At the same time, Singapore can take a more proactive approach towards racial harmony that goes beyond law enforcement and fosters a society built on mutual understanding, dialogue and integration. (In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in my Malay speech, I shared the account of my late mother whose family was stuck in a bus right in the middle of the 1960s racial riots. The passengers in the bus consisted of families from various races – Malay, Chinese and Indian. At that time, when crowds ran amok and chaos engulfed them, the only thing that the passengers wanted was safety and safe passage home for everyone on the bus. They did not care if the rioters outside were of any particular race.”
“Whether there will be public awareness campaigns to educate the public on the benefits of restorative justice and reconciliation? How will the Minister ensure that proper resources are allocated and provided to the necessary organisations that will be implementing the CRI? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, this Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill aims to further strengthen the legal safeguards for racial harmony. Singapore has long built a harmonious multiracial and multi-religious society and it is our responsibility to work together in preserving our way of life for future generations. Therefore, I support and agree with the safeguards and the establishment of a special Presidential Council for Racial Harmony. As a Malay-Muslim and a minority in Singapore, we benefit from the safeguarding of racial harmony, which is a cornerstone of our country, so that there will be no repeat of the racial riots that our people experienced during our country's early years of independence. Here, I would like to share the story of my late mother during those racial riots, an experience that taught me a valuable lesson. My late mother witnessed the procession to commemorate Prophet Muhammad's birthday in the early 1960s when racial riots broke out in Singapore. At that time, my grandfather, who was a police officer, was part of the police contingent participating in the procession. My mother and her three older sisters, along with my grandparents, boarded a bus to return home. This bus was also carrying several other passengers of various races – there were Chinese, Malays and even a Sikh. The driver was Chinese.”
“By emphasising rehabilitation over punishment, CRI aligns with our broader goal of fostering understanding and harmony. Firstly, may I ask the Minister whether CRI or a similar scheme for maintenance of racial harmony, has been implemented locally or globally before? What are the intended outcomes for CRI for the perpetrators or the individuals or the community affected by the offence. I appreciate that the Minister has stated that CRI will involve creating awareness on the impact on affected community, making amends or amendments or suitable reparations. And thirdly, guided reflections for offenders. I hope that CRI will be tailored to the specific circumstance depending on the racial sensitivities. It could include structured programmes, such as racial sensitivity workshops, where offenders can engage in facilitated discussions to understand the impact of their actions, the hurt and learn about different cultures; secondly, community service through inter-racial community projects, in order to foster deeper empathy and understanding; and thirdly, dialogue sessions between the offenders and members of the affected community to promote reconciliation. And thirdly, for such CRI, would the close or immediate family members of the offender be involved or be a participant as well? Because this may help the rehabilitation of the offender on a long-term basis if his close family or home environment is also taken into consideration. Fourthly, to build public trust in CRI, we must ensure transparency and rigor in its implementation. What are the measures that the Ministry will take in this regard? Would there be clear published guidelines on the detailed criteria for eligibility and programme requirements for CRI?”
“Why are similar provisions required in two separate legislations and whether given the possible overlap, how will the Ministry appropriately ensure that the powers in both legislations will be exercised judiciously? Secondly, to date, there have been no public reported prosecutions under FICA. However, its provisions remain a critical safeguard against foreign interference. Has FICA been enforced since its implementation? Thirdly, I note the automatic inclusion in this Bill for clan and business associations linked to the Chinese, Malay and Indian races. What about individual businesses that do not belong to such associations but have deep links to foreign organisations? Fourthly, I understand that MHA has stated that at this juncture it is not necessary nor desirable for the safeguards in this Bill to apply to all race-based organisations because they are a much larger and more diverse group. However, can the Minister assure the House that MHA will continually review the list by monitoring race-based organisations and their activities? In this regard, will there be an avenue for reporting by members of the public or whistle-blowers for MHA to follow up on investigation or further assessment? My next set of clarifications relate to CRI as envisaged under clause 41 of the Bill. This provision allows offenders to participate in reparative programmes, such as community service or educational workshops, as an alternative to custodial sentences or fines. Similar restorative justice programmes exist globally, such as in New Zealand's family group and conferences and Canada’s indigenous sentencing circles. Locally, we have seen success with community-based sentencing in other areas, such as youth rehabilitation programmes.”
“Next, policies like EIP go beyond housing but right to the heart of our integration as a society. It is not just about putting different people from different races together in the same block or in the same precinct. It is more than that. It shapes generations and how we mould ourselves together. Once people of different races live together, they become neighbours and they become friends, their children grow up together, they help one another and learn to live together. Regardless of whether we speak less of our mother tongues or erase race from our identity cards, our race and identity stays with us wherever we go. We can have various legislations or campaigns but, ultimately, racial harmony depends on each and every one of us. That is why, while this Bill grants significant powers to intervene in racial disputes, a community-led approach will be more effective in supplementing and fostering long-term racial harmony. No amount of laws can change the heart of a community. With that I move to my clarifications, Mr Deputy Speaker. My first set of clarifications relate to the provisions that protect our racial organisations against foreign influence trying to exploit racial lines or undermine our racial harmony. This Bill draws parallels with FICA in respect of Restraining Orders. Under FICA, such interference includes actions that incite or are likely to incite feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different groups in Singapore, endangering public peace and order. Just like hon Member Mr Yip Hon Weng, I join him in his clarifications on the overlap between FICA and this Bill.”
“The work needed to maintain racial harmony cannot be left to the enforcement mechanism in this Bill or any other piece of legislation. It must begin in our schools, our workplaces and our homes. For instance, we can introduce stronger education initiatives, like compulsory racial sensitivity training in schools and workplaces, to counter unconscious biases. At workplaces, we can encourage positive interracial interactions by fostering a culture of understanding and empathy. Businesses can also establish concrete anti-discrimination policies that evolve with and reflect current societal attitudes. When every individual, regardless of race, language or religion, feels respected and valued, then racial harmony is not just enforced, but deeply ingrained in our society. With more mixed-race marriages, naturalised Singaporeans and younger Singaporeans identifying with a shared identity rather than along ethnic distinctions, some have called for the revisiting of race-based policies or integration policies, like the CMIO classification, the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) EIP and our Self-Help Groups as well. However, while we aspire to be colour blind, we cannot close our eyes to the realities on the ground nor abandon the foundations that have been built by generations before us. Our policies remain crucial to maintaining racial harmony in Singapore. For instance, our self-help groups, continue to mobilise resources and deliver targeted interventions along communal lines. Having volunteered in this space for many years before I became a Member of Parliament, I have seen how self-help groups provide an additional avenue for assistance and navigate through cultural or religious sensitivities that had risen.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Singapore has come a long way since the racial riots of 1964, we have progressed together as a nation regardless of race, language or religion. However, racial harmony, just like our peace and stability, is not something that we can take for granted. A recent study revealed that 56% of respondents are of the view that racism is an important problem in Singapore, up from 46% in 2016. This trend underscores the need for proactive measures to address the underlying causes of racial tensions. Fortunately, a significant majority, about 70%, acknowledges that legislative tools are still useful in safeguarding racial and religious harmony in our society. This Bill, thus, presents an opportunity to strengthen our commitment in fostering a cohesive and inclusive society. Before I seek specific clarifications in this Bill, I would like to highlight the importance of: firstly, the roles that we all play to maintain racial harmony; and secondly, the continued importance of our existing race-based integration policies and organisations which complements the objectives set out in this Bill. While I applaud that the Bill introduces legal tools, such as ROs and community remedial measures, I believe that we must also tackle the root causes of racial tensions and, at the heart of it, racism. This Bill is not a panacea. We as a society must do our part to safeguard against prejudices and discrimination through indirect means, like casual racism. Now, it remains a pervasive issue, often dismissed as unintentional or harmless. Yet, research shows that such behaviors perpetuate discrimination and exclusion. Whether in a family setting or workplace, this must be addressed with both clarity and conviction.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for answering my question. Besides the good work and the fundraising of our people to assist the civilians in Gaza, in the midst of all these fundraising, can there be greater involvement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to, possibly, help Singaporeans understand the complexities or what the Minister mentioned, the deep historical entanglements, during the process of our fundraising? So that besides doing what we can for others, we can remind ourselves what we have here in Singapore and what we can hope to achieve in the future for Palestinians when we host them in Singapore.”
“Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for answering and clarifying section 9 of the MDA. In June last year, there was a report in the United Kingdom (UK): one in six vapes confiscated in English schools contained illicit drugs. So, I share the concern of Members who raise Parliamentary Questions of vapes being used as a gateway for drug abuse. Has CNB seen an increase in trend of vapes containing illicit drugs? I understand in the Minister of State's clarification and answer just now, that it forms a small proportion of vapes that have been confiscated, but what is the sense of proportion? Secondly, what kind of drugs are being used? Because in that UK report, street drugs were found, ketamine were found. What kind of drugs are commonly being used or found in vapes? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. For types of drugs, we have found cannabis and synthetic drugs. These are the main common drugs used in vapes. With regard to the numbers, like what I shared earlier, at this moment, it is small. We do not want to be complacent. We continue to work with agencies and our partners and counterparts overseas so that we can not only address this issue, but keep Singapore safe.”
“" When we enhance our legal system by deterring abusive practices, we must still preserve the principles of fearless yet responsible advocacy, as lawyers are not mere agents of clients’ desires but officers of the Court who must advocate responsibly and ethically. Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Courts and our Judiciary are not just providers of public service but a key Organ of State and essential branch of the Westminster System. In this regard, I quote from the president of the supreme court of the UK, the Right Hon Lord Reed, on the key role of the Courts: “At the heart of the concept of the rule of law is the idea that society is governed by law. Parliament exists primarily in order to make laws for society... Courts exist in order to ensure that the laws made by Parliament, and the common law created by the courts themselves, are applied and enforced… In order for the courts to perform that role, people must in principle have unimpeded access to them. Without such access, laws are liable to become a dead letter, the work done by Parliament may be rendered nugatory, and the democratic election of Members of Parliament may become a meaningless charade. That is why the courts do not merely provide a public service like any other.” In conclusion, Sir, it is essential to protect our justice system from exploitation by vexatious litigants, whose actions deplete valuable judicial resources and erode public confidence in our legal system. However, this Bill must not deter legitimate advocacy or prevent lawyers from fearlessly defending their clients within the bounds of the law. A lawyer’s duty is to balance loyalty to the client with an unwavering commitment to justice and fairness. Quoting from Robert Kennedy: "Courage is the most important attribute of a lawyer. It is more important than competence or vision. It can never be an elective in any law school. It can never be delimited, dated or outworn. And it should pervade the heart, the halls of justice and the chambers of the mind.”
“Can the hon Minister of State also clarify if this provision would also apply to crowdfunding sources and, if so, whether a member of the public who participates in crowdfunding activity to fund a baseless or frivolous claim will also be held in contempt of court? Thirdly, on the definition of abuse of process for multiple filings of claims. This Bill reinforces the four categories of abuse of process already established in case law. The Minister of State mentioned this as the Chee Siok Chin case. In that case, the hon Justice of Appeal VK Rajah classified abuse of process into four categories involving deception, ulterior motives, baseless claims or vexatious multiple filings. However, the new section 3(1)(db) departs from prior case law by not requiring that multiple proceedings cause “improper vexation or oppression” to qualify as abuse. I would appreciate if the hon Minister of State can clarify whether this omission was intentional or if successive meritless filings alone per se are deemed inherently vexatious. Fourthly and finally, I have some suggestions on public awareness. The prevention of frivolous or repeated claims serves a dual purpose: first, safeguarding judicial resources; and second, protecting the public. Frivolous litigants sometimes seek public donations under misleading pretenses, potentially duping well-meaning supporters. It may be beneficial for the judiciary to establish a publicly accessible database of debarred litigants, enabling members of the public to verify claimants before contributing financially. I also suggest that the judiciary provide transparent data on the resources expended on frivolous cases, allowing the public to appreciate and understand the importance of safeguarding judicial resources.”
“Firstly, on the knowledge of the lawyer. The phrasing used in this Bill, particularly the terms "ought to know" and "manifestly groundless or without foundation." These terms are somewhat subjective. When the Bill states that a lawyer who “ought to know” his or her client’s claim is groundless will be sanctioned, it places lawyers in a precarious position, especially when clients insist on pursuing claims that may be weak or challenging. While a lawyer may suspect that a claim is weak, they may still present it for the Court's consideration if it contains legitimate legal questions. To address this, may I suggest a possible carve-out for lawyers who have already advised clients of the poor merits of their case but are instructed to proceed nonetheless. In such cases, personal sanctions should not apply, as the cost regime already functions as a penalty mechanism. This approach would allow lawyers to uphold their duty to both their clients and the Court without fear of sanctions for attempting legitimate, albeit difficult, claims. Secondly, on the new provisions of the Bill addressing third parties who abet or cause contemptuous actions. Under existing common law, third parties can already be held liable for aiding and abetting contempt of court if their actions threaten to prejudice justice. My question is: why is there a need for this to be explicitly legislated? Is the Bill seeking to modify the existing common law position and, if so, in what ways? Furthermore, does this extend to those who are funding frivolous cases with malicious intent, whether based locally or from outside of Singapore, particularly those who are engaging in "lawfare" to create discord within our legal system?”
“Firstly, on legal professional conduct, these amendments reinforce the standards already enshrined in the Singapore Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules which state that a lawyer's paramount duty is to the Court, meaning justice, truth and fairness must come first, above the client’s interest. As a lawyer, our role is not to win at all costs but to uphold the integrity of the judicial process. Specifically, the new sections 3(1)(da)(i) and (ii) require that lawyers refrain from initiating cases that they know are baseless, deceptive or meant to deceive the Court. These standards are consistent with expectations from current case laws. Already, lawyers are prohibited from knowingly misleading the Court and cannot simply accept clients’ instructions at face value without reasonable scrutiny and are already liable for costs if they advance frivolous or ill-conceived applications. Ultimately, lawyers also have the opportunity to respond to allegations of misconduct before facing any personal cost orders. Secondly, in respect of multiple or successive groundless claims, section 3(1)(db), targets litigants who engage in successive or repeated meritless claims. Currently, such behaviour is already recognised as an abuse of process, with Courts authorised to issue civil restraint orders or general restraint orders, preventing cases from proceeding without the Court’s permission. Since 2019, the Supreme Court of Judicature Act have been amended to formalise these powers, even though Courts have historically exercised such powers through its inherent jurisdiction. The Attorney-General also has the authority under section 74 of the SCJA to bar vexatious litigants from filing further claims without prior permission. I do, however, have four sets of clarifications.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise today in support of this amendment Bill. These amendments clarify that severe cases of abuse of court process, where proceedings are knowingly initiated with deceit, as shams or based on baseless claims, these will be treated as contempt of court. I welcome the hon Minister of State's assurance that this Bill does not lower the threshold for contempt, but it is meant to deter abuse of our Courts, and thus preserving the Courts' integrity for those with genuine claims. These amendments are welcome in light of the observations from the High Court in the recent case that the Minister of State mentioned, where an applicant filed for judicial review with the ulterior aim of delaying his punishment of caning. This Bill addresses situations where litigants or their advocates knowingly file abusive applications. It reinforces that the Court is a place for genuine grievances, not tactical delays or gamesmanship. [Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair] This sends a strong message that our Courts will not tolerate misuse of judicial process for ulterior motives. Importantly, less severe abuses will continue to be handled through existing measures, such as cost orders, dismissal and disciplinary action, as these remain the appropriate responses for less serious infractions. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, at the outset, I believe that the Bill is not imposing anything new in terms of professional conduct standards in dealing with abuse of process through multiple baseless claims and in the abetment of contempt of court.”
“After World War II, the Straits Settlements were disbanded and Singapore was established as a separate Crown Colony in 1946, with a Supreme Court consisting of a High Court and a Court of Appeal. Over the years, we developed our own judicial system, eventually achieving full autonomy from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1994. The Privy Council in England, until that point in time, was the highest Appellate Court. Our own Court of Appeal is the highest Court of our land. This independence marked the end of our colonial ties and set us on a path to becoming one of the most respected judicial systems in the world. Today, 30 years after breaking free from the last remnants of colonial judicial control, Singapore has emerged as a beacon of legal excellence. Our Courts are recognised for their efficiency, integrity and adherence to the rule of law. The world is now looking to Singapore not only for judicial guidance but also as a model of an effective dispute resolution system. With the establishment of the International Committee, we are taking yet another step forward in ensuring that Singapore remains at the forefront of global legal innovation. I believe Singapore, as we celebrate SG60 next year, will continue to develop our legal talent and cultivate judicial luminaries who will lead the way in upholding the rule of law in an increasingly complex world. Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in full support of this Bill.”
“This partnership also was discussed at the sixth Singapore-China Legal and Judicial Roundtable in February 2023, co-chaired by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and His Excellency Zhou Qiang. The Strategic Roadmap for Judicial Cooperation that emerged from these talks provides a framework for Singapore-China collaboration in this arena. Similarly, Singapore has been building stronger legal ties with India, including hosting a successful SICC roadshow in New Delhi in December last year. This engagement with two of the world’s largest economies demonstrates Singapore’s commitment to expanding its role as a global dispute resolution hub. If we can encourage more disputes and more cases from China and India to be heard on appeal by the International Committee and the SICC, it would significantly enhance Singapore’s standing in the international legal community. I would appreciate any updates from the Minister on ongoing efforts to establish similar collaborative frameworks with China and India, as well as any challenges that may have been encountered. In closing, Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe this Bill is a landmark step forward for Singapore. The establishment of the International Committee represents a remarkable opportunity to solidify Singapore’s role as a key player in international disputes resolution. But we must not limit ourselves to just Bahrain and a few other jurisdictions. To truly succeed, we need to attract more appeals and cases from ASEAN, China, India and the Gulf Cooperation Council, creating a robust and diverse docket for the International Committee. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is testament as to how far Singapore has come since its early days as part of the Straits Settlements.”
“This structure significantly simplifies the enforcement process and removes the need for a separate enforcement or reciprocal enforcement mechanism. Singapore’s legal framework for enforcing foreign judgments was recently streamlined with the repeal of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act, or RECJA, in March 2023. Judgments that were once registrable under the RECJA are now registrable under the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, or REFJA, which covers not only money judgments but also non-monetary judgments. This is a progressive development that aligns with Singapore’s goal to make cross-border dispute resolution more efficient. I would also like to commend Singapore’s recent Memorandum of Understanding with Bahrain’s judiciary in May 2023, which established an appeal mechanism between the Bahrain International Commercial Court and the SICC. However, I suggest that for countries entering into such agreements with Singapore, we should also consider extending the benefits of REFJA to include lower court decisions as well. This would allow for mutual, reciprocal enforcement of judgments from both lower courts and the International Committee, streamlining enforcement for judgments across jurisdictions. Finally, I would like to discuss the future potential for international collaboration, particularly with China and India. Singapore’s recent partnership with China is an exciting example. On 1 April 2023, Singapore’s Supreme Court signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Supreme People’s Court of China, focusing on cooperation in managing international commercial disputes, particularly in relation to the Belt and Road Initiative.”
“Next, in terms of operational support, I would appreciate clarification on how the International Committee will be resourced. While users pay filing fees and court fees, these may not fully cover the costs of running the Committee. For cases arising from jurisdictions with whom we have, or will have, bilateral agreements, will there be any agreement on the sharing of costs or funding? This could help to ensure that the Committee is well-resourced to handle a high volume of complex cases. Thirdly, I would like to inquire about the composition of the International Committee. The Bill proposes that this body will be an independent committee hearing appeals from designated foreign jurisdictions. To uphold the credibility and global appeal of the International Committee, will the judges on the Committee be drawn from both the civil law and common law traditions? Given that many jurisdictions with which Singapore engages are civil law systems, ensuring a balanced representation of both legal traditions would enhance the Committee’s legitimacy and broaden its appeal. Furthermore, I hope the Singapore judiciary will feature prominently in the International Committee. This will help develop our judiciary’s experience and ensure that Singapore’s interests are well-represented. By allowing more Singaporean judges to preside over cases with significant international dimensions, we also strengthen their expertise and contribute to the growth of our judiciary’s global standing. Fourth, I commend the Bill’s provisions on enforcement, which treat a judgment or order of the International Committee as equivalent to a judgment or order of the court of the foreign jurisdiction from which the appeal originated.”
“Will cases need to have any specific nexus or connection to Singapore, or would they involve purely foreign entities and issues? Additionally, will the International Committee be empowered to hear cases involving non-monetary relief, such as declarations or specific performance, or will it be restricted to monetary judgments? Understanding the scope of appeals will be critical for those considering the International Committee as a venue for resolving disputes. Secondly, I seek clarity on the jurisprudential implications of the International Committee’s decisions. Specifically, will the decisions of the International Committee be binding on lower courts in the foreign jurisdiction from which the appeal originated? Moreover, will these decisions carry any binding effect on Singapore’s domestic Courts? Establishing binding authority would strengthen Singapore’s influence in international jurisprudence, signalling that our Courts are trusted and authoritative on complex international legal issues. Additionally, given that the International Committee will impact the development of jurisprudence in foreign jurisdictions, how will it handle issues of public policy or interest that are specific to that foreign jurisdiction? For instance, if a case before the Committee raises matters of public interest in that foreign country, will the Committee evaluate these issues from Singapore’s perspective or will it consider the public policies of that foreign jurisdiction? This is an important question as the Committee’s decisions will be final and non-appealable, meaning that such judgments will have lasting impacts on the legal landscape of the jurisdiction concerned.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. The Bill represents an important milestone in our journey to position Singapore as a pre-eminent international dispute resolution hub. It seeks to establish a new body, the International Committee of the SICC, which will be empowered to hear prescribed civil appeals and related proceedings from foreign jurisdictions. By creating this International Committee, we not only strengthen Singapore’s reputation as a leader in international legal standards, but we also open new doors for Singapore-trained lawyers to appear before a court with a truly global mandate. As an international disputes lawyer, I appeared before dispute resolution fora such as the London Court of International Arbitration in London and the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris. I experienced the first-hand value of exposure to complex and cross-border legal issues. I have also had the privilege of appearing before the SICC, where I was able to experience the legal cut and thrust amongst foreign counsel and international judges. Such experiences are invaluable and I look forward to the establishment of the International Committee, which will offer more Singaporean lawyers with these opportunities and develop Singapore’s legal talent and exposure to international work. However, there are five key areas where I seek clarifications. Firstly, I would like to understand more about the types of cases that can be brought before the International Committee. Under this Bill, the Minister for Law will have the power to prescribe the types of cases that may be appealed from a foreign jurisdiction to the International Committee. Can the hon Minister of State provide more information on this? Will these cases primarily be commercial in nature?”
“Quite apart from the political arena, we must remember that candidates have their own lives, their own families, their own children, career, organisations and loved ones, all of whom will be impacted by such false information long after the dust of election has settled and long after the heat of hustings have cooled down. As Victor Hugo wisely wrote in Les Miserables, "Whether true or false, what is said about men often has as much influence on their lives and particularly on their destinies as what they do". Let us ensure that, in Singapore, what is said about our elections and our candidates is rooted in truth, integrity and respect for our democratic process, ensuring that truth, not deception, guides our democratic processes. Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Given the rapid advances in technology, it has become increasingly difficult to detect deepfake. While early signs, such as unsynchronised lips or unnatural lighting, could previously indicate a deepfake, generative AI technology has now reached a level that is beyond where these signs are no longer reliable. This underscores the need for the Government to allocate sufficient resources to keep pace with these advancements. Another critical issue is the potential misuse of deepfake technology to create false endorsements from non-candidates, such as influencers or public figures. Currently, the Bill does not cover such instances. For instance, in the heat of campaigning for the US presidential elections, global superstar Taylor Swift was recently the target of fake images implying her endorsement of a particular political candidate. This prompted her to publicly endorse another candidate to prevent future falsehoods from happening again. Such instances highlight the need to extend protections not only to candidates but also to individuals whose likeness or identity may be misused to manipulate the electorate. What are the safeguards for non-candidates who may be the subject of such deepfake content within the election period? The fall-out from such a deepfake incident may similarly influence, sway or confuse the electorate, no more than if it were done onto political candidates. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill represents a significant step forward in safeguarding the integrity of our electoral process. Deepfakes, if left unchecked, can be weaponised to undermine our democracy, distort the truth and damage the reputation of our elections. It is crucial that we act now to put in place the necessary legal safeguards to protect our democratic values.”
“Hence, if the content is premised on an untruth or deepfake, then they should be caught by this offence even if there is a clear disclaimer because the cost of social media clicks and comedy cannot come at the price of our politics and democracy. Given the sensitive nature of election periods, content creators should be mindful of their responsibilities to ensure that their work is not based on untruths or deepfake. This would encourage more responsibility content creation and dissemination. My third and last set of clarifications is on the due process and procedure. An important aspect of this Bill is the due process afforded to individuals or entities accused of distributing deepfake content. The Returning Officer has the power to issue corrective directions and candidates can request such directions under the new section 61MA. However, we must ensure that the process is not open to abuse. I welcome the hon Minister's clarification that there will be a requisite form for such reporting and penalties for abuse of the same. Given the seriousness and severity of the consequences, perhaps it is important that any such request for a corrective direction be accompanied by a statutory declaration and, if necessary, a Police report, to demonstrate the seriousness of the claim. There must also be safeguards to prevent the law from being abused as a political tool to take down legitimate election content. This also provides a basis for recourse for a business or someone who is not a candidate but was nevertheless adversely impacted or affected by such false content to possibly seek consequential damages after the election period. We must also ensure that the content in question is truly a deepfake before any corrective action is taken.”
“A case in point is the Australian case involving the deepfake video of a Queensland premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, in 2020. The post depicted the premier as hosting a press conference claiming that the state was "in massive debt" and had "huge unemployment". The deepfake video then had her as saying "I would like your vote on 31 October, but if you want to get rid of us, I completely understand." She obviously did not say any of this and this is entirely not true. The video, though clearly marked as fake, was widely viewed and caused significant damage before it was taken down. This demonstrates that even when deepfakes are labelled as fake or satire, they can still cause harm, particularly in the short timeframe of an election period. In California, the law on deepfakes makes an exception for satire or parody, provided that such content is labelled as such. For instance, election communications that contain materially deceptive content which constitutes satire or parody and containing such disclosure that the content has been manipulated for the purposes of satire or parody would be allowed. However, in Singapore, we do not have a full defence for satire and parody. The defamation laws only provide full defences for fair comment, justification and privilege. In Singapore, there are clear elements to establish the tort of defamation. Firstly, the statement or content must bear a defamatory meaning. Secondly, there must be a publication to a third party. And lastly, there must be a reference to the complainant. The Singapore Court of Appeal has held that defamation also includes inferences or implications that the ordinary, reasonable person may draw from those words in the light of general knowledge, commonsense and experience.”
“Under clause 2 of the explanatory statement of the Bill, it is a defence for an individual to prove that they did not know and had no reason to believe the representation of a candidate was, in fact, untrue and that the offence does not apply to private and domestic communications, the publication of news by authorised news agencies and other prescribed circumstances. This means that a person forwarding a link by an authorised news agency to his family members in a WhatsApp group chat might not be considered an offence, if that person did not know or had no reason to believe that the representation of the election candidate was false. I thank the hon Minister who clarified that the offence will not cover all private and domestic communications like WhatsApp and closed group chats. Nevertheless, we should still emphasise for the need for the public to be responsible and, as far as possible, ascertain the truth and veracity of the source of the information before spreading such information. This will be in line with our vision of building a nation of discerning digital natives who are vigilant to guard against online falsehoods and disinformation. Next, we must also consider content that is obviously labelled as generated by AI or created for satire purposes. Would such labelling be sufficient to avoid any liability on the part of the content creator, even if such content was done by AI or deepfake, and is clearly meant not to be relied upon for the truth of its contents? The downside is that, due to the brief but intense period of election, the harm that such contents would do may outweigh the considerations for artistic licences, as not many people may have the time or context to understand that the content is satire.”