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 5 of 9.
“Imagine how many families and children will be affected by one case alone. We must always be vigilant and determined in eradicating drugs in our society. (In English): Sir, I welcome this Bill's proposed increased punishments, including caning, for the possession of selected controlled drugs above certain weight thresholds. This toughens our stance against drug abuse and makes clear the already tough sentencing guidelines laid down by our courts since the case of Lai Teck Guan by Chief Justice Menon. The sentencing must be commensurate to the harm that large quantities of drugs pose. Some may argue that weight of a drug alone is not an accurate factor to determine the level of harm posed, and one should refer to the potency of addiction instead. However, until and unless there is a reliable technology to determine such potency accurately and independently, weight remains a useful barometer. This tough stance against drugs is needed to protect the vulnerable groups in our society. Recently, last month, it was reported that CNB arrested a 32-year-old woman for drug offences. She was with her two-month-old infant. In June last year, a nine-month-old baby was found with his drug abuser mother in dire living conditions. CNB officers provided childcare necessities and milk powder for the baby. These are sad and tragic cases and I am glad that Singapore adopts a strong stance to protect our vulnerable groups and, hopefully, prevent such cases in future. The new section 11N sends such a signal. It makes it an offence for exposing a child to any psychoactive substance or paraphernalia. I agree with this.”
“A person who has control or custody of anything containing psychoactive substances or keys to a place where such psychoactive substances are found under the new section 18A, will be presumed to have had those psychoactive substances in his or her possession. This then triggers separate presumptions of knowledge in the new section 18A(2), read with the new section 22B, namely two separate presumptions: firstly, that person is presumed to have known that the substance has the capacity to have a psychoactive effect on an individual if consumed; and secondly, the person is presumed as not believing nor having any reason to believe that the psychoactive substance is an excluded substance. These are two separate presumptions of knowledge based on an initial presumption of possession. Hence, may I ask what are the safeguards in place to protect innocent landlords or organisations running shelters from being prosecuted under these presumptions of these sections? What due diligence is one expected to do and conduct in such circumstances? Sir, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] NPS have become widespread all over the world and they mimic the effects of drugs, such as marijuana, opium and heroin. NPS poses new challenges for us. Due to its variable chemical structure, detecting NPS becomes increasingly difficult. In Singapore, the number of NPS drug users has increased. This legislative framework updates the list of NPS and how new NPS can be detected in the future. Apart from NPS, drugs, such as marijuana and methamphetamine, are dangerous and threaten the peace and security of our society. Fifteen grammes of diamorphine alone, is enough to satisfy the addiction of 180 people for a week.”
“This means that during the interim period when the NPS is unlisted, enforcement and prosecutorial actions cannot be taken against those who deal in those substances. Moreover, the lag time allows NPS manufacturers time to develop alternative substances or deliberately alter the chemical structures to circumvent our drug control legislation. We, thus, need our legislation to be flexible enough to adapt to NPS in a timely manner. Hence, I welcome the proposed framework which will regulate such substances based on their capacity to produce a psychoactive effect rather than its chemical structure. I do have two clarifications: one, on the defence for legitimate use; second, the other on the presumptions of possession and knowledge of NPS. The Bill provides a defence if the psychoactive substance is intended to be used for a legitimate purpose other than for human consumption. Under the new sections 11F to 11P, the person must have the intention or reasons to believe such a legitimate purpose, in various scenarios, including where an accused believed that the other party had intended to manufacture the psychoactive substance for a legitimate purpose. May I ask, what are the current or future plans of the Ministry and CNB working in concert with other agencies, to regulate the use or manufacture of psychoactive substances for research, teaching or other legitimate use, with reference to accepted standards and expectations? For instance, a person who breaches such regulations or falls short of certain standards should not be allowed to avail himself of this defence of legitimate purpose. Next, on presumptions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of these amendment Bills. Sir, I will be focusing my speech on two areas, maintaining vigilance by keeping up to date with NPS, taking a tougher stance for large amounts of drugs in possession and to protect vulnerable groups. NPS have become a global phenomenon with 139 countries affected, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). As at December 2022, more than 1,182 substances have been reported. NPS are just as addictive and mimic the effects of controlled substances, such as cannabis, cocaine and heroin. NPS is proliferating at an unprecedented rate and poses a challenge for law enforcement worldwide. According to the UNODC Commission on Narcotic Drugs, "[T]he largest number of [NPS] are spread across three regions: Asia, Europe and North America." In Singapore, there has been an increase in the number of NPS abusers arrested, from an average of three per year in the 2014 to 2017 period to 235 per year in the 2018 to 2022 period. NPS are one of the three most abused types of drugs since 2018; and NPS overtook cannabis in 2019 as the second-most commonly abused type of drugs among new abusers. Listing NPS as controlled drugs is a challenge in all jurisdictions because we need to keep up with the fast pace of development of NPS. In order for the substances to be listed in the First Schedule of the MDA, the relevant scientific analysis on the chemical structure and necessary industry consultations have to be done to determine whether or not there is a legitimate use for such substances and if there is no such legitimate use, the NPS will be listed.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I recounted the incident of an 11-year-old girl who passed away at the hands of the stepfather. It affected me because she was of the same age as my daughter. I appreciate the good work of CPS on the ground. Having been volunteering with one of the crisis shelters dealing with domestic violence, I know the workload of CPS. But in this particular instance, the intervention by CPS could have been earlier, had the October interview been in person, at home, or in a Police station. The fatal incident happened just the next month in November. I understand that investigations are still ongoing, but would MSF review what could have been done better – perhaps borrowing or learning lessons from other jurisdictions by using same-age peer befrienders, or even protection of liability for anonymous reporting by educators, in a suspected abuse case? Perhaps this would prevent and avert such a tragic incident from happening again.”
“Question No 13. The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, we have not observed such common sociological factors. A common factor, however, is the youths' exposure to online extremist content. Terrorist groups have capitalised on the developmental issues experienced by youths in their adolescence, such as their search for a sense of belonging and identity, and their proclivity for sensation-seeking and risk-taking. The Internal Security Department (ISD) has been working with other Government agencies and community partners on upstream counter-radicalisation outreach efforts. For example, ISD has collaborated with the Ministry of Education (MOE), schools and Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) on various outreach activities, such as talks, workshops, seminars and webinars. In 2022, ISD organised close to 70 outreach events, both online and in person, for more than 2,300 participants including student leaders, educators and other school staff. These included workshops for over 350 student counsellors and student welfare officers to educate them on the radicalisation process and factors pertinent to youths, and to help them identify tell-tale signs of radicalisation. These efforts were complemented by other outreach events such as talks and youth forums organised by community partners including the Religious Rehabilitation Group and the Inter-Agency Aftercare Group.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Sir, I am a former member of Sport Singapore (SportSG) board in the last term, and I welcome the efforts that SportSG has done to support our sustainability effort. I hope this episode would not deter our Sport Singapore from doing such efforts. I understand that investigations are still ongoing, and this is a question for Minister Edwin Tong. The Minister mentioned about tweaking, fine-tuning and tightening the process downstream with the subcontractors. Are there any contractual mechanisms that Sport Singapore can impose on its partners to similarly have such monitoring mechanisms or tightening of that process downstream on the subcontractors?”
“Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Minister. I have two questions. One, on the International Conference on Communities of Success (ICCOS). Moving forward, we also need to look at the online spaces, be it social media or online gaming platforms, which are the new frontier in the jostle for influence and ideologies. So, perhaps MUIS and its foreign counterparts can consider strategies to occupy this space and perhaps have a permanent ICCOS online platform for this. Second, on strengthening the foundation of families, I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. Lately, we read about a family violence case against a young child. Family units are complex. There are blended families – single parents, unwed mothers, grandparents or elder siblings – playing the parenting role. Are there any focus areas, perhaps consolidated focus areas, on this group of our community so that we do not forget them, perhaps focusing on parenting skills and working together with organisations like PPIS, AMP or BAPA?”
“(In Malay) [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] History has taught us how many Muslim minority communities all over the world are not only able to adapt in non-Muslim countries but also enjoy success that makes their country proud and benefits its plural society in general. In fact, there is a specific jurisprudence in Islam to deal with the contemporary realities experienced by Muslim minority communities. Muslim minority communities in countries like Singapore face many unique challenges that differ from the Muslim majority communities. Now with many ideologies that are more divisive, the challenges we face are becoming more critical and it is important that we address these issues together with all Muslim minority communities globally. Thus, the International Conference on Communities of Success (ICCOS) held last year aims to enable sharing within a scientific framework for Muslim minority communities when facing the challenges of today. We need to continue this effort to learn from the experiences of other Muslim minority communities to drive and support the development of the Muslim Community of Success in Singapore. Therefore, can the Minister provide an update on how MUIS plans to develop a body of religious knowledge in Singapore following the ICCOS Conference last year?”
“(In Malay) [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr. Chairman, a strong and resilient family is a cornerstone in the development of highly confident individuals and children, and a successful society. Apart from the efforts and initiatives at the national level to help various groups in our community, including strengthening families and marriages, programs carried out by M3 also complement the efforts within the Malay/Muslim community. Presently, more than 100,000 individuals have participated in more than 250 programs organized by M3 in 11 neighborhoods, involving around 700 volunteers. As the former chairman of M3@Towns, I have witnessed the development and approaches of M3 which are now more extensive and has a greater impact on the families within our community who participated in M3 programs and initiatives. Presently, each M3@ Town has its own characteristic and creates programs customized to the town's demographics. This was evident during the exhibition and sharing session at the recent M3 Forum. For example the initiatives at M3@Chua Chu Kang, are based on a strategy to build current and future leaders of families. This strategy is called Nakhoda Bahtera (Captain of the Ship), in which family leaders steers the future of their families in navigating the ocean of life containing waves of challenges. However, in order to build strong family leaders and resilient families, we need all hands on deck. Can the Minister share the initiatives that can enable our partners and community organisations to better support married couples in building strong marriages and families?”
“Thank you, Sir. I thank Senior Minister of State Tan for the answer. Sir, my Keat Hong resident, an elderly couple came to see me during a Meet-the-People Sessions. Their 31-year-old intellectually disabled son was tricked to sign up for different telco lines and mobile phone contracts. Within the span of one week, he signed up for four lines and various phone contracts. The scammers made off with the phones, the family saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of bills, but thanks to IMDA's swift intervention – I thank the colleagues at IMDA – they intervened and the bills were waived. My question is given the vulnerability of individuals, like elderly or intellectually disabled adults, can MCI work with telcos to train or raise awareness amongst the frontline staff to have a checklist of red flags when it comes to contracting, perhaps similar to tellers at frontline banks, so that we can prevent our vulnerable individuals and adults and elderly residents from falling prey to such scams.”
“Mr Chairman, in my Budget debate speech, I talked about the sentiments of young first-timer applicants and how we can tweak the HDB balloting process to achieve equitable outcomes. We need to provide affordable and accessible housing to all segments of society. How is HDB going to help first-timers starting their families and first-timers with children to achieve a better chance at securing a BTO flat? On public housing rental, can MND give an update on the Joint Singles Scheme-Operator Run (JSS-OR) pilot that was rolled out in end 2021 as an alternative option to the Joint Singles Scheme (JSS) for singles in public rental, and whether there are plans to expand the pilot to more sites? On seniors, how many seniors have successfully taken up the Silver Housing Bonus (SHB) and how is MND going to continue supporting seniors looking to right-size and monetise their flats? Open Market Rental Affordability”
“Madam, earlier this year, the SLA announced the appointment of a vendor to develop the Digital Conveyancing Portal (DCP) platform over three phases. The DCP was announced during COS in 2021. May I seek an update on the progress of the DCP? How would the DCP be fully integrated with all agencies and stakeholders in the conveyancing process? What role would be for conveyancing lawyers to play in this regard? What are the steps that MinLaw have in mind to raise public awareness of the use and benefits of the DCP when fully implemented?”
“Madam, during last year's COS, I asked about how MinLaw is supporting firms to harness technology and digitalisation for their legal practice. Having invested heavily on technology and digital solutions, my firm is one of those that have utilised technology during the period of pandemic to handle clients, commercial transactions and international arbitration cases all over the world, across time zones, adding to my eyebags. This meant that our clients' needs are being met and the experience, training and exposure of lawyers, especially younger ones, continue despite the disruption of the pandemic. However, digitalisation is not without its challenges. Recently, the Courts in Singapore, like the State Courts and Syariah Court, faced technical issues in Court document filing. Further, some firms lack the resources to keep pace with the ever-changing legal landscape, which gives a clear advantage of terrain to those who employ technological means. The digital divide also gives an advantage to those who have the means to use technology – and those who have not. How is MinLaw supporting lawyers especially younger lawyers and those in small firms, to better meet the evolving needs of our society and economy? How can digitalisation be harnessed in the legal sector, to ensure that justice remains accessible to all, regardless of social economic standing? And what are the steps and infrastructure that MinLaw is looking to set up to ensure that the Court electronic filing system and other processes can cope with the increasing caseload and future challenges? Supporting Manpower with Technology”
“Sir, in Malay. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech on Pg 243.] The number of new Malay drug abusers arrested has decreased by 21% in 2022, compared to the previous year. In 2021, the number of Malay drug offenders arrested dropped by 15%; compared to other communities who declined by 7%. This statistic shows that efforts by CNB and our community, through the close cooperation of the Dadah Is Haram Campaign, M3 and other Malay/Muslim bodies, have yielded results. Our Malay/Muslim community has also greatly supported the Dadah Is Haram Campaign through a network of more than 70 mosques throughout Singapore and volunteers. Apart from that, the FITRAH program by M3 and our Malay/Muslim Organisations Rehabilitation Network have also helped to combat the scourge of drugs and its impact on our community. Chairman, therefore, I would like to ask what is MHA's plan to continue working with our Malay/Muslim community to help offenders and ex-offenders within our community? Regularising Security Officer Work Hours”
“Sir, Singapore's two-year recidivism rates are not only the lowest in the world, but also our lowest in 30 years. As a Board Member of YRSG, I am proud of all the efforts made by the entire ecosystem of support from the SPS, MHA, community partners and employers to assist us in the reintegration effort. As mentioned in my COS speech last year, we need "offenders" to become "overcomers" – overcoming the challenges in life in a whole-of-society approach. I welcome that SPS now use the term "desistors", which helps to remove the stigma of incarceration. While the numbers are good, we cannot rest on our laurels. We should tackle long-term recidivism rates on a five-year period horizon. How does MHA intend to further reduce the long-term recidivism rates of ex-offenders?”
“In Malay, Sir. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech on Pg 242.] We have seen more cases of youth radicalisation recently and they are getting younger. Just a few weeks ago, we were shocked with reports of two Singaporean teenagers being issued orders under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for terrorism-related activities. One of them, a 15-year-old teenager, is the youngest person to be dealt with under the ISA. The teenagers were contacts of another self-radicalised 18-year-old, who was also detained by ISD last December. Although they were self-radicalised separately, they subsequently became acquainted online. The teenagers joined multiple extremist-themed servers on the online gaming platform Roblox. Such online gaming platforms are being used by extremist groups to disseminate their ideological beliefs. They use video games and gaming culture to attract and influence our youths. We need to keep abreast of the technological developments and current societal trends, to prevent terrorists from abusing such online platforms to spread extremist ideologies that prey on the minds of our youths. Can MHA provide an update on how it intends to tackle this trend?”
“Sir, the Middle East/Gulf countries are an important region for Singapore – not only in terms of trade but also because they are Islamic countries. So, what happens there is also important to us. In September 2022, the Minister for Foreign Affairs made an official visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as both countries commemorate the 45th anniversary of diplomatic relations. During the visit, Minister has also met the Secretary-General of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC), His Excellency Dr Nayef Al-Hajraf. Both sides noted the strong foundation for cooperation set in place by the GCC-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force in 2013 and encouraged greater exchanges between the GCC and Singapore, as well as with ASEAN in areas of mutual interest, like food security and education. How is Singapore looking to build on our growing ties with the Gulf countries? Recently, the Middle East has seen a positive spotlight with Qatar hosting a successful Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup finals. There is, thus, opportunity to bring closer people-to-people ties. In this regard, besides such close cooperation with the Gulf countries, what other role can Singapore play in assisting to alleviate the Palestinian-Israeli tensions in the Middle East, whether on our own or together with other Gulf countries? Globalisation and Multilateralism”
“Chairman, Singapore and Brunei have long maintained strong relations and, importantly, support for each other. During the pandemic, Singapore and Brunei had issued a joint Ministerial Statement together with Australia, Canada, Chile, Myanmar and New Zealand affirming commitment to ensuring supply chain connectivity and launched Reciprocal Green Lanes, as well as our first Vaccinated Travel Lanes. As both countries emerged from the pandemic, our high-level and people-to-people exchanges have steadily resumed. Last year, Prime Minister Lee and Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong had both visited Brunei, while the Sultan of Brunei and Crown Prince of Brunei have made separate visits to Singapore in August 2022, where they discussed a broad range of areas to further bilateral cooperation in areas, such as in energy and green economy and in youth exchanges. How have we built on the special Singapore-Brunei bilateral relationship last year, Sultan of Brunei's state visit? Cooperation with Indonesia”
“Sir, it has been one year since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war. In the war's early days, the world watched with bated breath as the machinery of Russian warfare rolled into Ukraine. Would the Ukrainians be able to hold, and if so, for how long, how many days? Many feared that Ukraine faced overwhelming odds. One year on, however, the Ukrainians have defied the strong odds against them. Soldiers have fought bravely and valiantly on the battlefield to preserve the sovereignty and territorial integrity of their homeland. But we have to look beyond the traditional battlefield too. Indeed, the total attack nature of modern warfare today has expanded the realm of the traditional battlefield. Wars are no longer just conflicts between armies, but between nations and their peoples, and how to break their spirit and psychological unity. On this count, the Ukrainian people have, too, fought bravely against the chaos, destruction and horrors of war. Instead of buckling under pressure, the Ukrainians came together and rose to the occasion. Tales of Ukrainians from all walks of life banding together have hit the headlines time and again, displaying inspiring acts of heroism, resourcefulness and ingenuity. From engineers building portable stoves out of old refrigerator parts to fend off the cold amid power outages, to housewives fashioning makeshift but effective tourniquets and weaving camouflage nets as covers for military vehicles and soldiers. In light of these developments in Ukraine, could MINDEF share the key Total Defence takeaways from the Russia-Ukraine conflict for Singapore? Singaporean actor Ix Shen, who was living in Ukraine, recounted how Ukrainians who lined up in a supermarket to stock up on necessities made way for soldiers and gave them words of encouragement.”
“As we begin to step out from COVID-19, we are seeing the slow return of things to their normal pre-pandemic state. However, we have not been fortunate to witness a similar turning point in the regional security environment. Instead, we see a hardening of tensions and an increasingly charged geopolitical environment, overlaid by deepening UNited States (US)-China strategic rivalry. Recently, the spy balloon saga has caused the rift between them, to further widen and divide the global community. In last year's Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD), there was a comment by a representative of China's People's Liberation Army of his perception that the forum is dominated by the US and its allies. Could the Minister for Defence provide an update on MINDEF's efforts to foster security dialogue in the region? How can Singapore position itself as the neutral platform for open and honest dialogue on regional security? Training Safety”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Budget Statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance. Last year, amidst the challenge of COVID-19 and unprecedented economic conditions, my Budget Debate speech focused on maintaining fiscal discipline so that we can continue to build up our reserves for future generations. This year’s Budget seeks to strengthen our social compact including the needs of our Singaporean families and at the same time, ensure that our businesses and economy have the best springboard to progress, after COVID-19.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for the clarifications. I had asked about the vernacular languages and I am quite concerned about the hard work that our local journalists have put in. So, I am quite comforted by the fact that we are sticking by the decision because the principle and reason have not changed despite the issues. What I would like to ask is this: in the event that the further audit or investigation findings reveal any exposure to whether be it criminal sanctions or civil liabilities to other third parties, what are the steps that the Ministry would take to ring-fence our future funding to SMT in order to make sure or ensure that the funding will be committed to the purposes that it has been given?”
“Borrowing the words used by the President of our Law Society, Mr Adrian Tan, this morning and I may paraphrase a bit, "Justice is not the privilege of a few but a promise made to everyone". This is our calling for those of us in the legal profession. I want to thank MinLaw for pushing forward this Bill. This Bill will help us to achieve more efficient outcomes and effect justice not just for creditors, not just for members of the public, but also for debtors and bankrupts alike. Notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“What if there is a series of transactions with multiple persons with an aggregate amounting to at least $10,000? If the undischarged bankrupt takes in several deposits from various people totalling more than $10,000, then for the protection of the greater public, it would make sense for the entire series of transactions to be taken into consideration for the issue of non-disclosure and not just base on the quantum of one single transaction alone. Next, on the new section 433(1), which enhances the amount of publicly searchable information about undischarged bankrupts. This is most welcomed as it enhances the due diligence when transacting with persons who are undischarged bankrupts. I would like to humbly suggest including within the current database searchable information for persons who are not only undischarged bankrupts, but also those who are presently undergoing or facing bankruptcy proceedings. This will help with due diligence. Currently, to do so would require a Court litigation search and this would involve costs, which may be prohibitive for some. The process itself may be too tedious or unknown to laypersons. Further, if I may humbly suggest a one-stop searchable database which would include pending bankruptcy applications and details of an undischarged bankrupt's PTIB, so as to allow the public member to conduct further due diligence on not only that person, but the PTIB in question. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, today, at the Opening of the Legal Year in the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice, the Attorney-General and the President of Law Society addressed various issues impacting our legal landscape and profession – none more so important than the access to justice and upholding the rule of law in Singapore.”
“For instance, would there be continuous training or mandatory courses for PTIBs? Separately, here, there is no solicitor-client privilege between a trustee and a debtor currently. However, in Canada, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals rules prohibit a trustee from disclosing confidential information to the public unless required by law or with the debtor's permission. If I may ask the hon Minister, would there be a similar rule of confidentiality here? What are the obligations owed by the PTIB and the debtor, perhaps with the overriding obligation or duty owed by PTIBs to the Court and the OA. With regard to PTIBs' remuneration, I agree with the additional means of determining such remuneration. For instance, there is a deemed consent for remuneration if no objection is received from creditors within a stipulated period of time. However, what are the safeguards to ensure that such notice is appropriately given, especially for individual or layperson creditors? I echo the hon Member Murali Pillai's suggestion to include emails as a mode of transmission for such notice. Separately, there can be more regulation or transparency in terms of remuneration. In Canada, LITs do not typically charge for their first consultation and the remuneration is regulated by the federal government. The last part of my speech is on the protection of public members. The new section 412(1)(d) makes it an offence for an undischarged bankrupt to receive a deposit of at least $10,000 from any person if he or she does not disclose his or her bankruptcy status to that person. I thank the Minister for the useful illustration just now given in his speech. However, what is the rationale behind the quantum of $10,000?”
“I hope that this will allay concerns of individual creditors or laypersons who may not have the means to hire PTIBs, from not proceeding with a petition for bankruptcy. Given the expanded appointment of PTIBs now for all bankruptcy cases, would this overlap with the work done by debt recovery firms or credit counselling firms in the market? Would more creditors or debtors now go directly to these firms instead of undergoing the bankruptcy regime in the Courts? I appreciate that the Ministry has consulted stakeholders and I appreciate that the Ministry will continue to consult along the way. In this regard, we can still learn from some of the lessons and experience from other jurisdictions abroad. My second part. In the United States (US), given the high volume of bankruptcy cases and increasing quantum of debt in total, the US General Accounting Office warned that there is a high risk of private trustee fraud if there is no rigorous review of trustee candidates, no proper conflict-of-interest declaration, no enhanced reporting requirements and no sufficient funding for oversight by the Department of Justice (DOJ). In Canada, their Licensed Insolvency Trustee (LIT) must have the requisite knowledge, experience and skills to be granted a licence from the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB). LITs are subject to ongoing oversight by the OSB and must adhere to federal standards of practice, including the Code of Ethics for Trustees. Hence, with the expanded regime proposed in this Bill, would similar standards or codes for PTIBs be implemented or updated in Singapore? Besides overseeing and regulating PTIBs, what are the plans by MinLaw or the OA to ensure the standards and quality of our PTIBs in Singapore?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill. I am a dispute lawyer in a law firm with an insolvency practice. The proposed amendments in this Bill will help save public resources and make better use of the OA's involvement in bankruptcy proceedings. I also welcome the Ministry's calibrated approach by proposing these amendments after the learning experiences drawn from the earlier initiatives introduced in 2016, which required institutional creditors to appoint PTIBs. However, I have some clarifications and suggestions. My speech will cover three parts. First, on the recourse or redress against errant PTIBs. Second, learning lessons from jurisdictions abroad. Third, protection of members of the public from certain transactions with undischarged bankrupts. The first. I understand that to date, the administration of bankruptcy cases filed by ICs have been smooth and that there has been no action taken against PTIBs by the Court or the OA. However, while there are no actions taken, may I ask if there has been any complaints or investigations against PTIBs during this period? And if so, how many cases have there been since 2017? May I ask the Minister what are the avenues of recourse for redress by aggrieved creditors or those who may have complaints against PTIBs? The role and oversight of PTIBs will be more important now. Currently, PTIBs handle almost 50% of the administration of bankruptcy cases. With this Bill, they will likely cover almost 100% of those cases except for cases involving public interest. I thank the hon Minister for clarifying the types of public interest cases and that the OA still retains the discretion on involvement.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Minister, just to add on to Member Yip Hon Weng's suggestion on enforcement. May I ask two supplementary questions in respect of the breaches. There were 21 cases, for which compulsory acquisition of the flats were meted out. May I ask what are the types of – or the extent of the breaches egregious enough to warrant such compulsory acquisition? Second, I would echo Member Yip Hon Weng's suggestion, but I would suggest possibly to add on to the options available to HDB – whether HDB would consider profit disgorgement, especially for owners or errant owners or agents who have profited from the flouting of such MOP breaches.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the clarifications. I do appreciate and understand that losses are part and parcel of the investment landscape. I do not think anyone questions when Temasek makes money. And it is not an easy job. But there are two fallouts to this particular collapse of FTX. One is on the retail investors. There are scammers, opportunists taking advantage of the situation, setting up websites for people to come forward to make claims. Would MAS be looking into how to protect our Singaporean retail investors in this regard? Secondly, the Deputy Prime Minister talked about reputational damage to Temasek, especially given the fraud allegations in the particular collapse, even with the write-off. Would Temasek be looking to reserve its rights to make any particular claim, should the need arise?”
“In this regard, I also note the United Nations Human Rights Office of the Commissioner issued a statement in 1984 on the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty. In particular, paragraph 6 of the safeguards stated that steps should be taken to ensure that appeals from a death sentence shall become mandatory. Paragraph 8 states: "Capital punishment shall not be carried out pending any appeal or other recourse procedure or other proceeding relating to pardon or commutation of the sentence". In my view, this PACC Bill which further clarifies the due process beyond the appellate process is consistent with not only international law standards but also the safeguards aforesaid. However, we can do more to raise awareness of the approach towards capital offences in our jurisdiction. For foreign PACPs, what are the measures that can be done to engage foreign embassies and governments on our approach towards PACPs who are foreign citizens? On a people-to-people level, what more can be done to raise such awareness? One suggestion, perhaps, would be for our law schools or even the Judiciary to host foreign law students on exchange and expose them to the inner workings of criminal justice system. I hope that the foreign students or delegation will, having seen us up close, can better understand Singapore's context and criminal justice system on such capital offences. Notwithstanding the clarifications, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“The imposition of personal cost orders against counsel comes under the Criminal Procedure Code whereby lawyers who file applications that are frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the Court may have cost sanctions imposed on them. However, the Court of Appeal in the recent case of Iskandar bin Rahmat has recently held that a high threshold must be met before adverse cost orders may be imposed. In the future perhaps the Ministry can consider codifying the narrow situations in which costs penalty may be considered against any counsel for clarity. Another scenario is where new solicitors have just taken over conduct of the matter. Some PACPs are known to discharge solicitors and engage new ones at the last moment. In such cases, costs liability should be on the PACP. This is because counsel would be place in the most difficult position at the cost submissions or hearing because he or she cannot divulge or breach solicitor-client privilege. Where the PACCs are not conducted on a pro bono basis or on LASCO, a suggestion perhaps is to require the PACP to furnish security or undertaking for costs if certain requirements are met. This is nothing new in the civil appellate practice. I hope these suggestions will encourage more defence counsel and pro bono LASCO lawyers who will step forward to contribute. I now turn to raising awareness internationally. Under International law, the death penalty is not prohibited, whether by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) or any other international treaty. In Singapore, capital punishment is only applied to the most serious crimes that cause grave harm to others and to society.”
“Perhaps it can also be clarified that for PACC of a certain degree of complexity, there can be more than one judge. To ensure efficiency, guillotine time or specific time limits for oral submissions and page limits for written submissions can be set prior to PACCs. To borrow from the practice of international arbitration, the Courts can also set a memorandum of important issues to be address at the hearing so as to focus the judicial time on pertinent issues of relevance and materiality to the outcome of the PACC. Separately, given the time-sensitive nature of the PACC, I hope that there will be assurance that such applications shall be heard urgently and that the AGC and its prosecutors will do their utmost best to achieve this as well. Next, on the liability of solicitors representing the PACPs. Many defence counsel in these cases are doing it pro bono or on LASCO scheme. They are playing an important part in our criminal justice system. We owe a debt of gratitude to them appreciate their key role and contributions. Inevitably, the role of counsel comes under the spotlight in PACC applications where there tend be an abuse of process of delay in making such applications. However, not all blame lies on the solicitor. Take for example, in cases where counsel has already advised the PACP that the chance of success is low, but the PACP insists on making such an application. In such a case, I hope that it will be made clear that any costs liability will be borne by the PACP and not counsel, except in egregious abuse of process cases caused by the solicitors.”
“However, recently there have been many post-appeal applications in capital cases, also known as PACCs, which take up many years and judicial resources. Some of these PACCs were still being filed seven to 13 years after the first conviction. These PACCs take up not only judicial time and resources but in actual fact they have robbed the convicted inmates, and most importantly, their families, of what is left in their lifetime, and victims' families of a time for closure and peace. This Bill ensures that in respect of PACC applications, there is a balance between due process and rights of PACP and also preventing the resources of the state from being unduly wasted by frivolous PACC applications. It is against this backdrop that I stand to speak today. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I will touch on three points in my speech. First, on due process – how the Bill can ensure that the accused or PACP can be assured of due process in PACCs. Second, on liability of solicitors who are representing PACPs. Third, on what we can do together beyond this Bill to ensure that more awareness can be raised in relation to our criminal justice system. First, on due process. The new process for a single judge hearing a PACC will save a significant amount of judicial time. This also means that it will be easier for the scheduling of court hearing on an urgent basis. However, a single judge hearing may give the impression that these PACCs are of lesser importance. Since these PACCs are the PACP's last resort, perhaps we should require more safeguards than just one judge presiding over the PACC hearing. This is a point made by hon Member Ms Hany Soh too. With the use of virtual hearing and technology, it is not difficult to convene a hearing with coram of two or three judges online.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, if I may quote from the Court of Appeal judgment in the case of Datchinamurthy earlier this year: "When a prisoner has been sentenced to the death penalty and is to be deprived of his life, he does not necessarily lose his other legal rights. Among other things, the exercise of discretion by the State in scheduling his execution is subject to legal limits, including the usual principles of judicial review and the fundamental liberties protected by the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore". Those where the words of Justice of Appeal Andrew Phang, a luminary legal giant who was honoured by members of the Judiciary, legal professionals and our greater community in his valedictory reference at the Supreme Court yesterday, which I attended. When I was just a young law student, I observed a capital case hearing in the old Supreme Court Building – just next door. It was my first time attending any Court hearing. I was surprised when just before the sentencing, all of us in the courtroom was ordered to stand. I understood it as a mark of respect before the death penalty was handed down. The entire hearing also showed me how the system upholds the sanctity of life and the important role played by everyone – judges, prosecutors, and defence counsel – before anyone is deprived of his or her life. It was a moment that I remember till today. It is thus not unsurprising that in capital offence cases, there is not only a thorough trial and appellate process where the Courts are careful and meticulous in sifting through the evidence and arguments, but there is also comprehensive support such as pro bono legal assistance through LASCO.”
“In this regard, may I ask what are the plans of the Government to achieve this stated objective to "promote and safeguard the institution of marriage" and in particular, whether there are any plans to provide families, especially parents, with counselling or parenting support? In this regard, such parenting support or counselling should also provide for a faith- or value-based support, if such is available, so that the individuals would choose what suits them best. Also, it is important to preserve the freedom of conscience in our schools, businesses and religious institutions so that our fellow Singaporeans are free to practise their belief, their faith or otherwise, without any fear of cancellation or reprisals against them. I welcome the announcement by Minister Shanmugam and also by Minister of State Sun Xueling just now that the Ministries and agencies are looking into this. May I ask whether there is an update on this and whether a consultation feedback process will be undertaken? In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, we need to continue to stand united together as fellow Singaporeans despite our differences in faith, values or belief. Let us not let this issue divide us but instead unite us.”
“With this protection, no case can be brought to Court to challenge the constitutionality of the law that defines marriage between a man and a woman as well as Government policies that are based on the definition of marriage, including public housing, education and media policies. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill sends a signal that everyone must be equally protected under the law. At the same time, the amendment to the Constitution clarifies the Parliament's role to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote the institution of marriage. The new Article 156(3) protects from a constitutional challenge the laws defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman and also laws and policies based on a heterosexual definition of marriage. Notwithstanding this, I have met many residents in Keat Hong and Chua Chu Kang and members from various organisations and charities, including Malay/Muslim organisations, who are uncertain as to what future changes these amendments will bring. I think it is important to actively engage families and parents on this issue and provide them with various avenues of counselling or parenting support. The same goes for our teachers and educators too. For the Muslim community, the common feedback from mosque or organisation leaders is that there is a need for clearer guidelines or capability training. The new Article 156(2) states that the Government and public authorities may, in the exercise of their executive authority, promote the institution of marriage through public housing, education and media policies that promote and safeguard the institution of marriage.”
“However, based on the assurance given by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in 2007 and the Attorney-General in 2018 that this section will not be enforced, the Court of Appeal is of the opinion that it does not need to make a decision on the constitutionality of section 377A this time and the appellant has no locus standi or right to bring it to Court. This is due to the doctrine of legitimate expectations. However, the Court of Appeal recognises that the Attorney-General presently, or in the future, is able to change the policy at any time. This means that the Court's opinion on the issue of locus standi or the doctrine of legitimate expectations can also change at any time. Hence, it is not a question of "if" but "when" section 377A will be struck down by the Courts when other cases are brought to Court. Hence, I agree with the Government's approach to debate this issue in Parliament and not allow the Court to make a decision in the future. Although our Singaporean society remains conservative when it comes to marriage and family, most of us do not want a person to be jailed simply because of his conduct under the section. Although we still differ in terms of religion, race, values or way of life, we are all human beings. And each of us has the same right to be protected under the auspices of fair and equitable laws for all citizens. The amendment to the Constitution proposed today is important because it aims to protect the laws and policies of the Government based on the definition of family and marriage between men and women.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will focus my speech on two main areas: the legal context behind the necessity for the repeal of 377A, which I will deliver in Malay; and the need to support families and, especially, parents and educators in navigating the post-repeal of section 377A. In Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I will touch on the need for the repeal of section 377A in the Penal Code, given the recent development of our Court of Appeal decisions. By way of explanation, our Constitution is the supreme law of the land. If there is any Bill that contradicts the Constitution, then it is invalid and will expire. In recent years, there have been many Court challenges and appeals about the constitutional status of section 377A. The argument is that this section violates the country's Constitution. Following the latest ruling this year, the Minister for Law and Home Affairs, Mr Shanmugam, and our Attorney-General have advised that there is a high possibility that section 377A will be struck down if it continues to be challenged in future Court cases. The Court of Appeal in the case of Tan Seng Kee held that the section may not be consistent with Article 12 of the Constitution, which is the right to guarantee equal protection of the law for all Singaporeans. This is because section 377A only criminalises homosexual conduct between men and not in general. This may breach the Reasonable Classification Test in the interpretation of Article 12 in our Constitution in the case of Syed Suhail.”
“Perhaps, can Minister provide an example for this? Finally, Mdm Deputy Speaker, in relation to the Code of Practice, I welcome such Code of Practice. I understand that the a Code of Practice can be revised or amended pursuant to a process to be followed, which allows for future flexibility and adaptability. My question is, given the fluidity and dynamic nature of our digital ecosystem, would the Code be able to keep up with the changes brought upon by the rapid changes in technology? I note that there is a process before a change in Code can be made, as envisaged at clause 45L. However, how long would that take? Perhaps, if I may suggest the formation of a council to formulate and update the Code regularly to keep up with technology trends? Such Council can comprise of service providers, regulators, important law enforcement or community stakeholders. In conclusion and most importantly, digital safety is the responsibility of everyone. Notwithstanding the above clarifications, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Nevertheless, I would welcome Minister's clarifications in this regard. Next, in relation to the immunity given to service providers against criminal or civil liability when complying with the orders – under clause 45J. Would this apply to civil liability brought by parties from outside the jurisdiction as well? I understand and fully appreciate that our laws may not have extraterritorial effect in this respect. I am fully aware that the current Bill, as proposed, was done after extensive consultation with service providers and platforms and that they are supportive of such proposals. Other jurisdictions have also passed similar legislation to safeguard against online harms. Perhaps the Ministry can also explore reciprocal immunity provisions with other like-minded jurisdictions in the future. This would help harmonise and set an international standard for compliance of cross-border directions in the future. My next clarification is in relation to clause 45H(1)(d) on the period of takedown notice. Can we consider a fixed period? For example, Germany's similar law provides for a 24-hour requirement for takedown. This reflects the imminent risk of such online harms. If there is a standard fixed period by legislation, it will lead to a reasonable expectation or standard within the industry for compliance and sufficient company internal compliance processes can be put in place to meet with such expectations. Alternatively, perhaps, Minister can clarify what is the estimated period that is envisaged for a typical direction or order? Lastly, may I clarify what is meant by clause 45H(2)(b), that a requirement "must not require the doing of anything with respect to the provision of an online communication service to the whole or part of any area in Singapore"?”
“For example, in Australia, the Department of Home Affairs has a dedicated team to find content on social media sites that promote hate, incite violence, or points to terrorist propaganda. The team has a budget of around AUD$3 million. It is a resource-intensive endeavour, and if we rely on self-reporting by individuals or self-regulation by providers, there may be many instances of online harms that fall through the crack. Thirdly, I note that certain categories of harms are expressly stated in the Bill. May I ask what about issues relating to drug abuse or any other activities that are illegal or against our social norms – would these be considered harmful content as well? May I suggest that certain discretion be given to include any future definition of harmful content. My next clarifications are on the mechanism. I welcome the takedown or disabling order under clause 45H and the blocking order under clause 45I. In particular, the new clause 45E makes it an offence of not stopping egregious content on an OCS. There is also a defence available to service providers in not complying with the order, if it was not reasonably practicable to do more than what was in fact done, or if there was no better practicable means than what was in fact used. However, may I ask what is meant by "reasonably practicable"? Would the costs or expenses involved in complying with such order be a relevant factor? Likewise, what about actual or consequential loss that the party may suffer when complying with such duty? I would suggest that such costs, expenses and losses are not relevant factors. This is because economic losses or ramifications should not be placed on equal importance footing with online harms that have debilitating and irreversible effects on our society and individuals.”
“I have several clarifications: firstly, I would like to clarify on the definitions used in the Bill; the second set of clarifications relate to the mechanism of the takedown and defence available; and lastly, I have some clarifications and suggestions in relation to the Code of Practice proposed. First, on the definitions. In determining whether a broadcasting service is private or domestic, the new section 2(3) of the Broadcasting Act gave regard to certain factors, and I will touch on two of them. Firstly, on the number of individuals in Singapore who are able to access the content. The clause itself does not state, for guidance, the actual number as a threshold. In this regard, may I ask what would the threshold be? Should it be a percentage of entire users of the service who are in Singapore? Some clarity in this regard would be helpful. Secondly, on the restrictions on who may access the content. Would content on accounts which are accessible through friends or restricted followers, be considered "private or domestic nature"? Next, in respect of the new clause 45D which sets out the definition of "egregious content", I have a few questions. First, what is meant by content that "advocates or instructs"? Would the Ministry consider content to be harmful by looking objectively at its impact on our society, even though the content itself may not provide a clear set of instructions or advocate a certain position? Second, on resources, may I ask who will be the enforcement agency for this? And would there be a dedicated team to regulate such behaviour? And if so, how are we sufficiently resourced for this?”
“In this regard, I have three suggestions: first, to provide legal pro bono advice under the Legal Aid Bureau for individuals facing online harms, much like what Defence Guild SG is doing for victims currently; second, to standardise the ease of reporting of online harms across all platforms; third, to seek platform and broadcasting service providers to be included in public awareness campaigns on eradicating online harms. In Malay please, Mdm Deputy Speaker. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In June 2021, I started an initiative called Defence Guild SG. This was in the wake of a harassment incident towards 17 local religious teachers, who became victims of a lewd online survey. This issue raised awareness among many within our community about the threat of online harms. Over 20 lawyers from different races and religions, comprising of veteran and young lawyers from the Lawyers@M³ network, joined forces to provide legal advice to victims of online harassment. Most of the cases they dealt with are sensitive in nature and many within our community are unaware of the type of help available as well as their own rights. However, this protection could not have come about without the partnership of those from the Government, individuals and technology companies or online service providers. Therefore, this Bill places responsibility in the hands of service providers, to block online content that may cause harm, such as extremist content, violence and those that negatively impact our multiracial and multi-religious society. I, therefore, support this Bill. (In English): I now move away from the individual and on to the service providers, the focus of this Bill.”
“Although Bill is focused on platform and service providers, there is also a need to focus on the users, particularly, the victims of online harms. In June 2021, I started an initiative called Defence Guild SG, a collaborative group of lawyers providing pro bono assistance to victims of online abuse or harms. We now have over 20 lawyers who volunteer pro bono to assist or advise victims who face sexual harassment or online harms. The bulk of the cases they face are time-sensitive given the viral nature of the harmful online content, but most importantly, they are emotionally draining and usually, it is time- and cost-consuming for victims to seek redress. Following this initiative, together with other People's Action Party (PAP) Members of Parliament, like Ms Hany Soh and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, we spearheaded the formation of resource toolkit to combat online harms at the PAP Women's Wing International Women's Day celebration in March this year. And in September this year, with the help of pro bono lawyers, social workers and counsellors, we ran a workshop for close to 70 activists across various PAP branches on the practical walkthrough of the resource toolkit. This is to support residents during Meet-the-People sessions or any of our other activities. Notwithstanding all of the efforts, according to a recent survey, almost 57% do not know what are the legal redress or help that they can get when faced with online harms personally. Hence, raising awareness and empowerment is a continuing endeavour.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill. Digital technology has permeated our lives. It has a deep impact on how we learn, how we do business and how we interact with one another. However, because of the cloak of anonymity, the online world rears its ugly head through online harms. Maintaining safety online is not just the responsibility of the individual or the Government but all stakeholders involved. In this regard, many felt that stricter enforcement of relevant laws can be effective to combat or reduce online harms. Many also felt that technology companies and platforms must lead the way in tackling this issue, alongside the Government and us fellow Singaporeans. It is, thus, timely that we have this Bill to further help us safeguard Singaporeans against online harms. Last week, my firm organised its annual thought leadership platform, the Dentons Rodyk Dialogue 2022, themed "Building a Safe and Inclusive Digital World Together: Vision and Transformation". During the keynote speech, Minister Josephine Teo explained Singapore's approach in regulation towards digital safety and inclusion by ensuring what she described as the "3As". Firstly, accretive – building each step or measure one after the other in a calibrated approach. Second, agglomerate – pulling in partners and groups in our collective endeavour. Third, agile – being able to adapt through different emerging technology or disruptions. To borrow from bonds credit rating parlance, that to me, is a triple-A rated approach – sound and sensible. In dealing with online harms, it is important to take a calibrated and multi-stakeholder approach while keeping a close eye on emerging technologies, such as Web 3.0 and the metaverse.”
“Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister of State for her answer. It is an important issue, given the recent tragic case. In a Washington Post article last year, in the US, law enforcement officers are 54% more likely to die by suicide than the average American and they are likely to die by suicide than in the line of duty. We do not want to be faced with a similar situation here in Singapore. Can the Ministry look into undertaking research and, maybe, coming up with a toolkit, together with other partners or agencies, to address this mental health issue among frontline first responders? It can cover various topics and the culture that the Minister of State mentioned as well. It will also be useful for APOs or other frontline or first responders who may not be familiar with current available help right now.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister of State. My supplementary question is in relation to continuing cost-benefit analysis for this scheme. In 2001, Israel introduced a deposit refund law for glass and plastic containers smaller than 1.5 litres. A cost-benefit analysis in 2010 was done and it concluded that the law had a positive impact, with total benefits exceeding total cost by around 35%. In the same vein, can the Senior Minister of State and the Ministry also consider a similar cost-benefit analysis, and a regular reporting can be done on the effectiveness of the scheme, including possible recommendations of expansion of the scheme, if that is beneficial?”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bills.”
“The US Army Cyber Command's mission is to "integrate and conduct cyberspace operations, electromagnetic warfare and information operations, ensuring decision dominance and freedom of action for friendly forces in and through the cyber domain and the information dimension, while denying the same to their adversaries". Both the stated missions of the UK NCF and US Army Cyber Command can be read to include not just defence, but strike capabilities. It is vital that that MINDEF and SAF develop strong capabilities to detect and defend against similar threats. It is also critical not just to prevent such threats, but also, to build up offensive or strike capability and intelligence network, as a deterrence to those who want to do us harm. Such has been our Defence philosophy. There is, hence, an important need to ensure that sufficient budget and resources are allocated for our DIS of SAF in this regard. In our history, we have not been immune to such disinformation attacks during peace or war time. During the Japanese invasion of Malaya and Singapore in World War II, propaganda leaflets were airdropped onto the population. They contained messages of demoralisation, encouraging surrender. These leaflets were frequently dropped towards the end of the war and they were varied, depending on the target audiences, and in different languages. In conclusion, we need to treat the defence of information and intelligence as a key part of the defence of our nation. This Bill sends a message to potential attackers and provocateurs that they cannot break our body nor our spirit without a fight. It is apt that in the month of celebrating our nation's 57th year of independence, we table this Bill to further enhance the protection and defence of our nation.”