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 7 of 9.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is with a tinge of sadness and regret that I am standing here before the House speaking on this Motion. I am sad because one of the Members of Parliament (MPs) has admitted to lying before this House and the people of Singapore. I am sad because this whole incident has been protracted as the allegation and lies were left uncorrected for many months before the truth was finally revealed. I regret the manner in which the young activists who boldly came forward to give evidence at the COP proceedings have now been alleged by their own party leader that they may have lied out of loyalty to the former Member, disregarding the many years of service and activism. Now, this is not the way young people, who only came forward to serve the nation, not just the party, should be treated. I regret the manner in which the former MP has been characterised both by her own party's leadership and some members of the public, the same ones who had lifted her and backed her to the hilt before aspersions were cast about her mental health and the nature of the trauma that she suffered. This is not the way that survivors of sexual violence and people suffering from mental health issues should be treated. In discussing this incident, whether during the COP proceedings, this Motion or elsewhere, let us all have some regard and consideration for common decency. Let us all also have regard to the feelings of survivors of sexual violence, people who suffer from mental health issues and young people who are watching us today. In Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our responsibility to the people and in protecting the trust in the democracy of Singapore is a heavy one and should not be taken lightly. This responsibility falls upon all of us.”
“I would also like to repeat my previous suggestion my past speeches, that perhaps the issue of Muslim inheritance and succession, including inheritance certificates, should be dealt with by the Syariah Court instead of the Civil Courts, because it involves Muslim law evidence and public interest that is guided by Islamic teachings. (In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“Before being allowed to do so, the party has to provide reasons and, in certain cases, be called before a Registrar to provide sufficient explanation before being given permission to inspect and obtain copies or documents from the Court. Here, perhaps the ROMM Registrar can exercise the same standard for requests, whether it is for the Register of Marriages or the Register of Divorces. Finally, the Mufti's role in giving evidence. Section 139 of AMLA makes it a criminal offence to conduct deviant teachings or anything relating to Islam in a manner contrary to Muslim law. It also provides for the Court to presume that a doctrine, ceremony or any act is, indeed, contrary to Muslim law if the MUIS President submits evidence that it is so. The current amendment, which replaces the MUIS President with the Mufti, so that the Mufti can provide evidence directly to Court on matters that are contrary to Muslim law, is a welcomed one. I support this because the Mufti is the highest Islamic religious authority in Singapore and chairs our Fatwa Committee. Therefore, the Mufti is better placed to give evidence in Court on Muslim law and the Court will follow the Mufti's evidence. Here, I would like to ask why the same could not be applied to section 114 of AMLA in relation to questions of succession and inheritance in Muslim law. Presently, section 114 of AMLA makes reference to fixed list of religious books. I understand that this is being considered for the future. However, may I suggest that, just as how section 139 was amended, section 114 of AMLA can also refer to the Mufti if there are questions on Muslim law for inheritance and succession matters. This will help make Court rulings more conclusive and consistent.”
“Third, restriction of access to the Register of Muslim Marriages. Section 143 previously provides that any party may apply to the Registrar to inspect and obtain copies or extracts from ROMM and Register of Revocation of Divorces. The current amendment aims to restrict access to the Register of Muslim Marriages only. The rationale stated by MCCY in the Bill Consultation Outcome dated 12 October 2021 is that such restriction of access is "consistent with the broader policies on the protection of personal information". I agree with protecting personal data and limiting access to classes of persons as prescribed. Here, I would like to ask: what are the "classes of persons" allowed access to the Register of Marriages? This is important because it involves an element of public interest for Muslim marriages here and overseas. For example, the bride-to-be or her family from overseas may need proof or access to the marital status of a groom who is Singaporean or who is domiciled in Singapore. On the other hand, there are no restrictions to apply for a copy from the Register of Divorces. Would that entry in the Register of Divorces not also contain personal data? Why is access to the Register of Marriages limited to certain classes of party? Perhaps access to the Register of Divorces should also be similarly limited. I propose that perhaps the Civil Court procedure for the Request and Order of Inspection of Court documents can be applied. In the civil process, the requesting party has to file a request to inspect and obtain copies of Court documents.”
“This is because arbitration bears a different technical meaning compared to hakam. I also agree with the amendments to allow the Syariah Court to give authorisation to the first set of hakam to pronounce a divorce, should the husband refuse to authorise the hakam to pronounce the divorce. This is because, in certain cases, some wilfully refuse to authorise the hakam or refuse to make payment of the hakam fees and this would further delay proceedings. There appears to be divergent views by scholars on whether the husband must expressly agree to delegate his "powers" or right to divorce his wife, to the hakam during divorce proceedings. The MUIS Appeal Board case of Azman bin Abdul Rani v Rahmah bte Ramli (1998) 1 SSAR 93 seems to suggest that this delegation is critical. I, therefore, welcome the proposed amendment which states that the hakam may pronounce a divorce in the absence of full authority from their respective principals. Hence, even if the husband refuses to sign the form or delegate his power, the hakam may pronounce a divorce in certain cases. Nevertheless, I think that it would still be useful to clarify the scope of the hakam's role. I propose that the definition of "hakam" be included in the amendments, with a clear explanation of the hakam's scope and role – perhaps in the subsidiary legislation – so that the community can understand the hakam's role and accept the decision of the hakam later. Moving on to the issue of payment to the hakam. In some cases, there are those who refuse to pay for the hakam's costs. In order to avoid further delays to divorce proceedings, can the Syariah Court order that payment be deducted from the relevant party's share of matrimonial assets or claims? This will allow the divorce proceedings to continue smoothly.”
“These amendments also allow the MUIS Appeal Board to decide that oral arguments are not required even if written submissions have been filed. However, I am concerned that a party or parties may feel aggrieved as they did not see the "process" of the appeal or hearing and may not understand why their appeal was dismissed, if all the trial process was held without oral arguments and done through the exchange of documents. While I am cognisant that in other forums or civil courts, there is a practice of not requiring the attendance of parties at a hearing, however, it is common for MUIS Appeal Board hearings at the moment for the parties to attend and observe the proceedings in full, even though the Court's final verdict will only be published or given a few weeks later. This is the process that lawyers, Courts and parties have been accustomed to when going through the divorce process in Singapore all this while. Therefore, I am worried whether this will impact the perception of parties and society on the adage that it is not just for justice to be done but to be seen to be done because they are unable to observe the proceedings. We should not pursue efficiency and effectiveness in the administration of Court processes, at the expense of losing what we already have. I suggest that the Syariah Court and the Appeal Board openly publish the reasons and grounds of decisions for every case on the MUIS or Syariah Court's website. This will help litigants to understand that although there are no oral hearings or arguments, their full cases have been canvassed carefully in the written form. Second, the status of the hakam's appointment. I agree with the replacement of the terms "arbitration" and "arbitrators" with "hakam" only.”
“In my speech on the recent Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill, I highlighted the Syariah Court's experience in successfully incorporating counselling and children-centric programmes to help the divorce process in Court. With these amendments to AMLA, what other alignments can be made between AMLA and the recently amended Women's Charter in order to better support families and children who are going through divorce? Here, I will focus on four areas within the amendments to this Act. First, hearings without oral arguments. Second, clarifications on the status of the hakam. Third, restriction of access to the Register of Muslim Marriages. Fourth, the Mufti's role in submitting evidence to Court. First, the amendment to section 35B allows the Syariah Court or the Appeal Board to proceed without hearing oral arguments. This is consistent with other changes in civil jurisdiction which allow for determination using documents only in certain cases. This will not only save costs, but also reduce the time needed for a divorce case. I would like to highlight section 35B(2) which does not allow the Court to proceed with the trial without oral arguments, if part of the proceedings already has oral evidence presented. My question is, what about a situation where the plaintiff has already given oral evidence but the Defendant subsequently fails or refuses to participate in further proceedings? Typically, in that scenario, the Court hears the case in absentia of the Defendant and makes the necessary orders, but this means that the plaintiff has to be present, and has to spend time and money to go through an oral hearing. I would like to suggest that the Courts be allowed to decide to proceed with the hearings without oral arguments as well.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill. I declare that I am a practising lawyer. Allow me to speak in the National Language. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I welcome the amendments to the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). In particular, the amendment allows the Syariah Court and the Registry of Muslim Marriages (ROMM) to use digital processes for Court administration and solemnisations. The amendments update the administration of Muslim marriages and divorces. It also increases the support given to families who undergo the divorce process, especially children. This is in line with the broader development in family law under the Women's Charter which was recently updated. Digital processes also allows the Syariah Court and ROMM to leverage on technology, coordinate services and facilitate access to the community. This is important to help us prepare for challenges ahead, including any new pandemic in the future. For example, the Syariah Court previously did not have an electronic document filing system like the High Court or Family Court. For roughly a few weeks during the circuit breaker period, no hearings could be conducted because there was no provision for video or online hearings. Now, the Syariah Court is able to conduct Court hearings and proceedings via video. Hence, these amendments actually reflect what is being practised in Court, which is the use of video links through WebEx and so on. These preparations will build greater resilience in the delivery of services by the Syariah Court and thus empower the Syariah Court to deal with new situations in the future.”
“I thank the Minister for the clarification and the answer. I am heartened to see that we are putting our officers at the heart, front and centre of the things that we do, even during investigations. Our officers are all human beings. They face pressures of family, professionally and personally as well. I am heartened that there is some form of review on the workload distribution and the manpower challenges. In this regard, may I ask if there are any avenues for our officers to escalate the pressures of the workload or the stressors that they are facing, both at work and elsewhere, within the institution of the Police organisation and the investigation body? So, whether or not there could be a bit more support in terms of counselling, mentorship, perhaps? I note that the supervisor in this case has been found to have lapsed in his supervision, but could there have been other channels of oversight or avenues for the officer to escalate those stressors and the pressures that he may face?”
“To what extent should such CFAs be disclosed by way of statutory or regulatory obligations, for example, through SGX announcements or audited yearly financial statements? This is because in an ongoing litigation or arbitration proceeding, such disclosures may cause a certain perception of pressure to succeed on the part of both the client and the party to that CFA. This may impact the dynamics between the two competing parties or conflicting parties in the dispute, for instance. My last clarification is centered on the protection for the client. I understand from MinLaw's press release that safeguards will be implemented in the subsidiary legislation. What are these safeguards to protect a client entering into CFAs and how long, perhaps, would be the cooling-off period for a client in the CFAs? After a CFA has been entered into and, for instance, a client changes lawyers, or the lawyer withdraws from the case, what are the safeguards or guidelines to prevent a client being left in the lurch after having already entered into the CFA. Perhaps the Ministry can consider a public awareness campaign to assist potential clients on the pitfalls of a CFA and what can be done in the event of a withdrawal or termination of the same. Sir, CFAs may inadvertently evoke a diverse set of views and responses among lawyers and users of our legal system. Some view such arrangements as the salvation for the impecunious. Others fear that they open the floodgates of litigation of frivolous claims. However, one thing for certain, the calibrated approach towards CFAs as taken by the Ministry in this Bill will help cement Singapore as a leading dispute resolution hub in the world. Notwithstanding my clarifications and comments, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“A cap may also help offer the best balance to prevent legal costs from spiraling upwards and, at the same time, attract the optimal amount of disputes to Singapore. My second clarification is in relation to the resolution of disputes in CFAs. The new section 115C states that the uplift fees will not be recoverable from the losing party in respect of party-and-party costs. Thus, the uplift fees will have to be paid from the pocket of the client to the lawyer. I welcome this amendment as it means that there is a lesser risk that CFAs may impact party-and-party costs and costs of litigation all around. The Bill also allows that such uplift in CFAs can also be based on reduced hourly rates, instead of a lump sum uplift. This is very progressive and much welcomed. In the UK, the permissibility of such "hybrid" arrangements was not clear within its legislation and was the subject of an English Court of Appeal case which only recently clarified the position. Given the possibility of disputes arising out of the CFAs, can I confirm if lawyers and clients can still refer their solicitor-and-client fees in the CFAs for taxation in the case of a dispute? This will be more straightforward and cost-effective than filing a separate claim in Court or arbitration for a dispute under the CFA. My third clarification is in relation to protection of lawyers entering into CFAs. May I ask and confirm that lawyers agreeing to CFAs would not be held personally liable for adverse party-and-party costs when acting under such CFAs unless, of course, if there are circumstances of personal or professional misconduct in which case that attracts personal liability for costs. My fourth clarification is on the duty of disclosure.”
“Firstly, with parties left on their own to decide on the uplift or finer details of the CFA, will there be some practice guidelines on the quantum of the uplift within the CFA? The Bill itself seeks to address this by placing a restriction that the uplift or contingent fee cannot be a percentage of the claim or damages to be recovered. However, should there perhaps be a mandated cap on the uplift in certain circumstances? This is to prevent the uplift from being too disproportionate to what would have been reasonable standard of costs? I appreciate and welcome the fact that lawyers may still be held liable for overcharging under the CFAs, pursuant to amendments under the Legal Professional Conduct Rules. However, as alluded to by Members Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Lim Biow Chuan, guidance as to how much of an uplift can also provide helpful guidance as to what is excessive or overcharging in a CFA. In the UK, contingency fees, or damages-based agreements (DBAs), have been permitted for contentious work in litigation or arbitration proceedings in England and Wales. This means that lawyers can conduct litigation and arbitration in this jurisdiction in return for a share of any damages. Depending on the type of cases, there are differences in the limit of cap for such a contingency fee. In this regard, would the Ministry also consider in the future to finetune the cap in the principles of proportionality, for example, a 50% maximum cap of uplift from the agreed fee. If the CFAs are extended to other categories of disputes, then this cap can be adjusted downwards to reflect the greater consumer or client protection required or vulnerability of certain groups of clients in the future.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this amendment Bill. At the outset, I declare my interest as an international commercial disputes lawyer. Singapore is a leading international dispute resolution hub because our legal profession, judiciary and laws are not only leading the cutting edge on the forefront of legal development, but they have also adapted to keep us ahead of the curve to meet the ever-changing needs of global legal demands. I welcome this Bill which seeks to continue to firmly strengthen Singapore’s position as an international legal and dispute resolution hub. I will be focusing my speech on CFAs. CFAs will increase access to justice for litigants. Since 2017, the law has already provided availability of Third Party Funding as an option in limited circumstances, for example, in international and, subsequently, domestic arbitrations. There is already a growing trend of alternative funding methods for litigation and arbitration globally. This is especially important given the economic downturn and conservative outlook faced by many corporate clients all over the world. On contingency fees, Prof Patricia Danzon, an American economist stated: "The common allegation that the contingent fees induces attorneys to bring claims with little legal merit has no basis in logic. The fact that the fee depends on winning provides an incentive to screen out issues with little legal merit. An incentive that is lacking with an hourly fee." Further, various studies have shown that CFAs or similar arrangements discourage lawyers to take on unmeritorious cases. The CFAs provide a financial disincentive not to commence frivolous suits or claims. However, I do have five clarifications for the Minister.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank both the Ministers for the clarifications. I think any words or images that are offensive to any religion is hurtful and the hurt remains. I have two supplementary questions for Minister Masagos. Given that the content in such publications can be replicated or duplicated and made viral in today's context, what can any members of the public – whether Muslim or otherwise – do to report or express their concerns to MUIS, especially if they feel that certain publications or images would be offensive to any particular group. My second question is on the Undesirable Publications Act. The definition of a publication as "objectionable" is within the context of enmity or hatred between different races or difference religions. The question is, what about publications that may create hostility within the Muslim community itself? Would MUIS play a role in the determination of such publications being offensive? I would be grateful for such clarifications.”
“Notwithstanding the clarifications and proposals, Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“For example, where access orders have been breached on numerous occasions or where, despite the wishes of the child, the parent refused to give access to the other parent. For young children, the experience of being taken, whether forcibly or otherwise, from the physical custody of one person to another, can be very traumatic. In this regard, I have a few questions. What are the guidelines and safeguards to ensure the safety and prevention of trauma on the child during the exercise of such powers? Would the relevant officers and agencies also be trained to be more trauma-informed and sensitive to such situations? Next, under the new section 126B, the Court has powers to enforce a child access order, including ordering make-up access and imprisonment. If I may ask the Minister, in respect of make-up access orders, would this be determined with the best interest of the child in mind, before such orders are made? I ask this because there may be other limitations, such as the child's other commitments and her or his own rest periods. Would there be an objective assessment before determination, for example, that a social welfare report be commissioned? And in respect of the punitive punishment aspect, as stated, the parent in breach can be fined up to $20,000 or jailed up to 12 months or both. In this regard, usually, such breaching parent is the one with the care and control of the child. Hence, would not a jail term be effectively disruptive to the care of the child? In such an instance, who would take care of the child and who would effectively have care and control then? Would it be better to empower the Courts to order a variation of the care and control order, that is, a reversal of the care and control, instead of a jail term?”
“In this regard, I also make two separate proposals. Given the utility of such programmes and the need to develop human capital with the necessary expertise, perhaps a national professional body can be tasked to oversee training and provide such programmes across the board. This facilitates harmonisation and uniform standards of counselling and the building up of cross-training, sharing of expertise and experiences for cases between both FJC and SYC. This is useful, especially in cases of inter-faith or inter-ethnic marriages, where, apart from the parties, that is, the parents or the children, the prescribed persons like the grandparents or other caregivers may also come from different backgrounds, faiths or cultures. A second proposal perhaps is for greater collaboration and cooperation within the law schools, Law Society of Singapore and lawyers to inculcate, within the Bar, the importance of therapeutic justice and a child-centric approach towards divorces in our family justice system. In respect of access orders, I welcome the amendments to help expand the Court's enforcement powers in relation to custody orders and child access orders. The COVID-19 pandemic has, inevitably, impacted custodial rights over children. We have seen how the parent with care and control decided to unilaterally suspend, halt or restrict the other parent's visitation rights during this pandemic. I have some concerns, however, on the amendments. Under the new section 126A, the Court is empowered to direct the bailiff to restore a child to the physical custody of a parent or other person. Such order or direction, I think, should be used sparingly and reserved for the most egregious of cases.”
“I ask this because it is already mandatory under section 50(3A) of the Women's Charter that divorcing parents with any child below 21 have to attend counselling or mediation sessions at the FJCs. The 2020 data also shows that couples who were married for five to nine years accounted for the largest share, 29.4%, of all divorces. This is the same for both civil and Muslim divorces. There is, thus, a great likelihood that this segment of couples would have younger children as well. As such, these children may benefit from attending such programmes. I heard from the Minister of State just now at the Second Reading opening speech that around 200 children undergo such programmes. That is less than 5% of the 6,000 or so affected children whose parents are undergoing divorce proceedings. I, thus, make two proposals in this regard which are akin to the Syariah Court experience that I have shared earlier. First, perhaps counselling and attendance of programme for children should be made mandatory either before the commencement of FJC proceedings or before the final judgment or divorce certificate can be issued or collected. This may nip in the bud any acrimonious or protracted divorce litigation which may be detrimental to the children. Second, for couples with at least one child aged between six and 14, perhaps counselling and such programmes should be made mandatory for the same reasons as earlier stated. In relation to the programmes for children, the proposed new section 132A defines "programmes for children" as any programme carried out to help a child handle the impact of a divorce or judicial separation. May I ask what are the types of programme for children are envisaged? Can the Minister perhaps provide examples, with reference to already existing programmes?”
“It also equips them with healthy co-parenting and self-care strategies and provide information on available support resources. These are the mandatory programmes within the divorce process before the Syariah Court. Additionally, if parties have a child aged between six and 14, they are encouraged to attend the Children-in-Between programme with their child. This programme is free and conducted by the Divorce Support Specialist Agencies which are appointed by MSF. It aims to equip parents with co-parenting skills to promote parental cooperation so as to reduce harmful parental conflicts that are likely to have adverse effects on their child. The programme is also aimed at helping their child to be equipped with self-coping skills to help him or her cope with any stress and deal with the impact of the divorce. Although the Children-in-Between programme is voluntary, where necessary, the Syariah Court may order parties and their child to attend the programme during or after the divorce proceedings. In summary, while the current amendments that we are debating today do not impact the divorce proceedings in the Syariah Court, from the Syariah Court's lessons and experience and from past amendments, it is a good step to make children-centric programmes and counselling part and parcel of our family justice process. As such, I welcome the amendments to the Women’s Charter presently. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, with this, I have some clarifications In relation to divorces under the Family Justice Courts (FJCs), what is the rationale for not making the child's completion of a programme for children mandatory?”
“The AMLA amendments at that time, among other things, firstly, enshrined a more “child-centric” approach during proceedings and allowed the Courts to refer parties for counselling or a family support programme. Secondly, it requires divorcing parties to attend counselling or any other specified activity before commencement of divorce proceedings. In divorce proceedings before the Syariah Court, parties are required to attend the Marriage Counselling Programme before they can file an application for divorce. The Registration for the Marriage Counselling Programme must be submitted at the Syariah Court. Pursuant to section 46A of AMLA, couples who are contemplating divorce are required to attend and complete the Marriage Counselling Programme. The objective of the Marriage Counselling Programme is to assist the couples to explore reconciliation and, if the marriage cannot be saved, the counsellors will facilitate an amicable divorce instead. The Marriage Counselling Programme will be conducted by an agency appointed by the Syariah Court. In addition, if parties have a child below 21 years old, they must also complete a Parenting Programme during the Marriage Counselling Programme to discuss post-divorce co-parenting plans at the Marriage Counselling Programme. This is to make the divorce process less adversarial and help parties to consider the children’s interests and welfare when making decisions that will inevitably affect their children. After the divorce, before parties are allowed to collect the Divorce Certificate, if they have at least one child below 21 years old, they must undergo a family support programme known as “Parenting PACT” to help them better understand the impact of parental divorce on children.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare that I am a practising lawyer, though my practice is not primarily within the matrimonial arena. I do stand in support of this Bill and welcome the amendments to better support our children and families undergoing divorce proceedings in our family justice system. My speech will be focused on two areas: first, on children and family support programmes; and second, on child access orders. I welcome the changes which focus on the best interests of the child of the marriage and place importance on therapeutic justice and counselling as steps in the right direction to prevent acrimonious and protracted litigation which may cause greater divisions and rifts in relationships between parents and child. The children and family support programmes, including counselling, that are envisaged in these amendments would assist with the emotional aspects of dealing with the outcome of orders, particularly in cases involving the relocation of a child. However, this is something that is not unfamiliar or new within the Family Justice System and I draw the experience and lessons from the Administration of Muslim Law Act amendments back in 2017 and the practice of the Syariah Court in this regard. In Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In early 2017, MCCY sought public feedback on the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) amendment Bill. Various community groups provided their views and recommendations, including AMP, which, through RIMA, conducted a focus group discussion (FGD) to collate feedback among various stakeholders and interested individuals. I was involved in the discussions.”
“Civil courts, when faced with questions of Islamic law, are not obliged to seek an opinion from MUIS. Therefore, I think it is timely for the Government to set up the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). It not only provides the necessary specialization, but also can balance the approach that needs to be taken in dealing with specific cases. My recommendation is for suitable JSC members to be seconded or take turns handling Syariah Court or Syariah Appeal Board cases to build their understanding and knowledge. I understand that this is already happening, but perhaps the career path and development of the seconded JSC officers can be further clarified so that this rotation can attract more JSC officers. I also recommend that cross-sharing and learning be established between courts, including Syariah Court and civil court officers and all training perhaps can be conducted under the auspices of the Singapore Judicial College. Finally, I welcome the establishment of this Commission which can meet the needs of the community and address the challenges of more complex cases in the future for our country. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“] To attract international funds or high net worth individuals to establish endowments or invest in Singapore, we must further strengthen Singapore's status as a leading dispute resolution hub. In addition, the Islamic financial sector has seen an increase in cases filed in courts and arbitration processes around the world, including institutions in Malaysia and the Middle East. These cases require in-depth expertise and a comprehensive legal framework for handling Islamic financial dispute cases. It also requires a prudent and sensitive approach tailored to each specific region. Apart from commercial or civil cases, our courts also deal with cases involving sensitive issues that affect all walks of life in our Muslim community. These include the interpretation of Syariah law issues, such as the interpretation of the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA), wakaf or Islamic inheritance law (faraidh), as well as marriage or inheritance law for Muslims which are sometimes heard before the High Court. In my maiden speech in Parliament, I have suggested how a more comprehensive arbitration process or legal framework can be studied to deal with cases of wakaf or estate disputes in our community. This can be done by broadening the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court or deepening the specialisation of our civil courts to handle such cases. All these issues affect our Muslim community. Furthermore, our constitution recognises the special position of the Malays and outlines the Government's commitment to protect the interests of our Malay-Muslim community and our Malay language. In terms of law, Muslim law forms part of the law of the land. Thus, our civil courts have the power to interpret Muslim law itself.”
“Ultimately, a strong Bench would help to attract more disputes and bolster our dispute resolution hub status as a nation. We thus need judges who understand practice and commercial realities. Thus, without the risk of thinning of the Bar, perhaps the Ministry could look into the secondment of Judicial Service officers in specific private practice areas or international postings in the early parts of their career. Of course, this is subject to issues of conflict of interest in the future and disclosure of associations in the future, once that officer leaves private practice to rejoin the Judiciary. However, such declarations are already the norm now when judges declare any potential conflict of interest prior to being docketed as a judge for a case. Already, we have seen in the courts how a docket system of specialist judges with the relevant practice experience and managing the case from the outset would improve the case management and our cases in litigation have now progressed efficiently and effectively. Perhaps also to complement the skillset, we can have more invited International Judges (IJs) to be part of our Judiciary and not just for cases before the Singapore International Commercial Courts (SICC), but perhaps the IJs, or International Judges, can also sit in specific High Court cases or appeals whenever necessary. We not only have to broaden our talent pool to meet future challenges, we would also have to deepen our expertise in certain niche areas where perhaps there would be some religious or cultural sensitivities. In this regard, Mr Speaker, I will move on to the last part of my speech which I will deliver in Malay, on community, cultural and religious sensitivities. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“As much as I am glad that we have very talented and esteemed appointments to the judiciary bench, the thinning of the talent at the Bar is a very real risk to our legal profession. We need to ensure that the deep bench in our Courts does not come at the expense of the Bar and deplete our talent pool at the Singapore Bar which is detrimental to our status of our dispute resolution hub. Hence, the talent for our judiciary and the Bench must be built up internally as well. I would propose that despite the separate arms being set up with the Legal Service Commission (LSC) and the JSC, that there should still be some flexibility or a fixed rotation between JSC and LSC officers in the early years of their career. This is so that they can get sufficient experience; and also be exposed to experience in the other courts. Hence, I would like to ask whether there would be flexibility to allow for transfers between both commissions to better prepare ourselves for the future needs of the Bench. Speaking about the future needs of the Bench, this flows into the second part of my speech on challenges in the future. The future challenges of greater cross-border litigation which not only involve complex legal or factual issues but also inevitably involves issues of conflict of laws and interface between common law and civil law systems in the various legal systems in other countries. New and specialised areas of law, for example, those involving smart contracts and cryptocurrency, would also require our judges to be equipped with the necessary commercial and perhaps, private practice experience and practical know-how. These would greatly complement the technical and legal skills already on the Bench.”
“In preparation to meet future challenges caused by these changes, we need to build a strong and deep bench, towards specialisation of emerging areas of law and expertise required in the future. However, we also need to ensure good range of exposure, especially for our younger officers. In this regard, younger does not mean in terms of age but for those less experienced. I do have some clarifications that I would like to cover in three parts: (a) firstly, the career in the Courts; (b) secondly, the challenges in the future; and (c) and the last part is the expertise in community-niche and culturally sensitive areas, which I will deliver in Malay. The first part, career in the Courts. In relation to clause 26 of the Bill, which is the transitional provision, existing officers in the legal service will be allocated or re-deployed according to the posts that they are holding. For example, existing office holders in the Supreme Courts or other subordinate Courts, like the Family Justice Courts, shall come under the newly-formed Judicial Service Commission (JSC). A "judicial branch officer" is defined as an existing officer who is holding a post in the Supreme Court or a Subordinate Court. My question is: what would be the definition of a "Subordinate Court", besides the Family Justice Courts and the State courts, what others can be taken into consideration? For example, such as Tribunals? We are also facing the challenge of a limited talent pool. Recently, three judiciary commissioners have been appointed judges in the Supreme Court. They are either Senior Counsel or senior practitioners taken from the Bar, one of whom I have appeared before, he was my arbitrator, another was an opposing counsel, the third I have worked with.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare my interest as a practising lawyer. I stand in support of the Bills and the restructuring of our Legal Service into the separate Judicial Service Commission and Legal Service Commission. In July, my fellow members from the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Law, Mr Murali Pillai, Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Christopher de Souza had spoken about the need to consider whether it would be feasible to set up a separate Judicial Service Commission that would be in a better position to nurture specialist judicial officers. The Government, in response, has stated that it will consider and study the proposals and, so, I am glad that these Bills have now come to be tabled before this House. The integrated model of our Legal Service, where officers are deployed to both judicial and legal branches, has previously met our manpower needs and helped us to build up our dispute resolution hub and status as a well-respected judiciary in the world. This is no mean feat, particularly given our small population and limited talent pool. We have heard from the Minister about the great work that our Legal Service Officers have done, especially to meet our COVID-19 pandemic challenges as well. But as Singapore adds to its repertoire of being the preferred international dispute hub, we need to ensure that our Judiciary and Legal Service are also well-equipped to meet any new challenges ahead. In the midst of fast-paced disruptions to our legal environment and profession, we are also facing a real competition with other emerging and lucrative sectors to train and retain the talent pool both in our Singapore Bar, the legal service and our Bench.”
“As part of the core skills training for new CNB officers, they learn the protocols to handle young suspects and persons with mental disabilities, such as the Appropriate Adult schemes. And all officers, in fact, undergo refresher training on how to manage such suspects and offenders. They are also required to pass an annual proficiency test to ensure that they are proficient in handling young suspects and persons with mental disabilities. So, in some parts of the training, where they learn about conducting video-recorded interviews, trainers will also revise the Appropriate Adult schemes and provide relevant case studies so that they are able to relate to and be familiar with the situations which warrant the activation of the scheme. So, essentially, they are trained and they get refreshed and they share case studies together because every case is different. I hope I have answered the Member's question.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I also thank the Minister of State for the clarifications and explanations. Just recently, we heard about six officers who were injured in the line of duty – and those are only the reported cases. In the fight against drug abuse, I think CNB officers face similar and more serious perils as well. I have one supplementary question. How are our CNB officers trained to handle young suspects and persons with mental disabilities and, at the same time, balance that training so that it would not compromise the operational effectiveness and also their safety? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, CNB officers have to deal with various situations. The profile of the people that they deal with also vary. As such, it is important for them to be well-equipped not only from the socio-emotional perspective but also to have the skills to go on the operation as well as to engage the public with regard to preventive drug education. And I am appreciative of the Member recognising that their job requires the skills and training and, as such, it is something that they place their emphasis on, not only as part of the job scope but also about protecting Singapore. I interact regularly with CNB officers and one thing I am proud of them for is that they are very clear about their commitment and passion in protecting Singapore, to ensure that the harms of drugs do not penetrate or affect the lives of Singaporeans. This is something that I feel very proud of our CNB officers for. And CNB equips its officers with the skills to handle their jobs through various structured and customised training programmes.”
“In fact, the Court still has the power to establish a judicial review in certain cases according to the existing Court's inherent jurisdiction. Singapore also has an excellent reputation and high degree of trust in the Police and Government, a robust legislative system and an independent judiciary. If an individual is truly not involved, it is very easy for him to refute the accusation with strong evidence. But in my experience, for serious criminal cases especially against the country and our entire society, the Ministry will not simply accuse a person without any reasonable cause or proof. There is no smoke without fire. We have gone through decades of independence. However, the battle to colonise the minds of our people still exists. Let us unite and strengthen the trust between us and within our institutions. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, the law and our public officers operate in the light to protect us, while sinister, clandestine actors operate in the shadows against our collective interest and our country. Hence, we should even the odds in this fight. Let us put our trust in the men and women of our Public Service and grant them the tools that they need to uphold their sworn duty to protect our lives and our Singaporean way of living. Notwithstanding the clarifications, I stand in support of this Bill. [Applause.]”
“In my role as Vice Chairperson of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Home Affairs and Law, I have also been involved in various discussions and consultations on the issue of foreign interference as reflected in this Bill. Therefore, the discussion on the threat of clandestine foreign interference has been going on for more than three years and not just recently, as portrayed by the hon Leader of the Opposition, Mr Pritam Singh. In fact, Mr Singh was also a panel member of the Select Committee in 2018 and he was present during my testimony on 27 March 2018. Mr Speaker, this Act will allow the Ministry to take strategic measures against the mastermind or proxy, who is like a snake in the grass within our country. Their activities or plans are difficult to detect and sometimes we should take immediate action before it is too late. This is not new. As a lawyer in international cases in Court and arbitration, I had to often accept urgent orders to preserve certain evidence or assets temporarily before the case goes to Court for trial. As for this Bill, in order to balance the rights of an individual with our public and national interests, the Bill provides the space and opportunity for the accused to submit appeals and provide evidence to the Reviewing Tribunal that reviews MHA's orders. I feel that the proposed process in this Act is reasonable. This is in view of the pressing situation to prevent interference by foreign parties and the adverse consequences to our country and citizens if such interference is implemented successfully. In this way, no clandestine enemy can divide our plural society. The Ministry must also meet the prescribed conditions before it can issue an order through this Bill. This is based on the definition grounded in previous case laws.”
“(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Every country takes part in activities to influence, shape perceptions and make decisions in other countries. This is the nature of international diplomacy. However, these activities reach the level of interference when it is deliberately done in an irresponsible manner to damage the sovereignty of other nations. In a study by the Strategic Research Institute at the French Military College, or IRSEM, which was published just last week, Singapore was found to be highly exposed to foreign interference. First, our country’s high level of digital literacy means that online intervention campaigns can be carried out very easily. Secondly, because we are a plural society, those with nefarious intentions can attempt to divide us. Therefore, it is right that we, as one country, seek to further strengthen our solidarity and our mutual trust with the Government by reviewing the legal framework to combat elements that want to divide us. The Bill seeks to achieve this goal. In my English speech, I recounted my experience as a community leader and lawyer when I was providing evidence at the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods in 2018. I stated my concern that social media and online news websites should be transparent in their sources of funding or political links. What was inherent in my evidence was my worry that any foreign actor can easily interfere in our country’s politics and disrupt the stability of our social and political institutions. In fact, many other observers and individuals have voiced similar concerns to the Select Committee, as what was listed by the Minister earlier.”
“These are widely available and are platforms commonly used. Do we consider the varying degrees of concealment? On the flip side, if there was no attempt at all to hide the prejudicial interference, then I think the perpetrators should still not be allowed to get away with it. Fourth, on the Reviewing Tribunal and judicial proceedings, clause 112 makes every offence in Part 3 arrestable and non-bailable and the rest of the offences arrestable. In this regard, what are the measures that will be in the subsidiary legislation or otherwise to ensure that the Reviewing Tribunal proceedings can be concluded expeditiously? Also, given that such proceedings will touch on matters of national security and interests, what are the safeguards in place to ensure the confidentiality and secrecy of the information or any evidence produced in those proceedings, whether under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) or other applicable legislation? Fifth, I feel that it would be useful for the public to know on a periodic basis the types of threats and attempts of foreign interference made. I can understand that full disclosure would be extremely sensitive to the mission success of any intelligence operations. However, perhaps MHA can consider, from time to time, giving a report on the FICA offences or directions without the need to go into the specific details or naming the individuals or foreign principals involved. In this way, Singaporeans and the public can appreciate the good work done behind the scenes by the men and women of in our Public Service to protect our national interests and, at the same time, maintain and increase public confidence in the Public Service and the Government. Mr Speaker, Sir, for the final part of my speech, in Malay, please.”
“This is based on Court of Appeal cases that have construed the meaning of reasonable suspicion test. This is not Hollywood. This is based on case law with a judiciary that carries out its duty with no fear or favour. I now move on to my second part on the clarifications to further safeguard our national interest and Singaporeans. I have five clarifications in this regard. First, in relation to clauses 17 and 18 of the Bill, is it a requirement for the perpetrator or accused to actually know that the proxy was indeed acting on behalf of a foreign principal? What if he or she does not even know that the proxy was acting for a foreign principal? Alternatively, he or she may not know that the proxy was acting on behalf of an undisclosed principal. What would the approach be then? I ask these questions because it should not be made easy for perpetrators to disclaim actual knowledge in situations when they could or ought to have made reasonable enquiries with the proxy regarding the principal. This is not an ordinary crime or offence we are talking about here. The stakes are too high given the harm and prejudice that can be caused to our country. Second, with regard to clause 16 on determining the purpose of an activity or conduct having regard to the intention or belief of the persons involved, what is the threshold of determining such intention or belief? Does such belief need to be objectively ascertained on a reasonable basis? Also, what is the approach, assuming there is more than one or competing beliefs or intentions? Third, on what is to be determined as covert or clandestine, may I ask the Minister what about communications over WhatsApp or other end-to-end encrypted messaging platforms or communications through VPNs?”
“Such knowledge or belief must be pegged, I think, to an objective standard of likelihood which any reasonable person ought to have in the circumstances, which is what the current wording in the Bill suggests. Specifically, on the proposal to remove clause 17(2)(a) and clause 18(2)(a), this effectively means that a perpetrator must have in mind a particular foreign country or principal during the activity. However, in reality, foreign state or principals are likely to disavow any links to Hostile Information Campaigns (HICs). I think it matters less who that foreign principal is, so long as we know that the perpetrator is acting on behalf of a foreign principal. The fact that one is a puppet on a string is enough; without needing to know or prove who the puppet master is. In relation to the powers of the Minister to issue anticipatory directions, I can understand that given the urgency and covert nature of foreign interference, the authorities may require action to be taken on the basis of reasonable suspicion, which is a standard well established in law. This means that the Reviewing Tribunal or the Courts can be guided by past case law and decisions to assess if, indeed, the Minister has fulfilled the legal threshold to issue such anticipatory directions. On the contrary, there is no established standard for an “evidence or actionable intelligence” test in the common law or Commonwealth jurisdiction. Ultimately, I think the Member and all of us here want the same thing – which is, greater certainty and clarity before the issuance of such directions. In practice, the test on reasonable suspicion is objectively met if there is a reasonable suspicion or belief and that it is in the public interest to do so.”
“The foreign interference threat that Singapore faces can take various forms and employ different tactics. These tactics evolve over time and are difficult to track. In New Zealand, the ministry of justice in a statement on mitigating foreign interference stated that: "… due to its covert nature, direct evidence of foreign interference on our democratic system, and its impacts, can be difficult to obtain, and often emerges post-facto." The situation in Singapore is no different. By the very nature of foreign interference, direct evidence of the same is very difficult to find, much less to prove. Often times, if we wait for such direct evidence, it would be too late. Against this backdrop, I am concerned about the amendments proposed by Member Assoc Prof Jamus Lim as I fear that in actual reality and practice, these amendments may potentially blunt the protection under the Act and weaken the steps that our civil servants can take to protect Singapore and Singaporeans from covert foreign interference. There are two main categories of amendments which I am concerned with. First, the amendments relating to the mental state of mind of the perpetrators in clauses 17, 18, 20, 40 and 75 of the Bill; second, the proposal to introduce a new threshold of proof in clause 21. On the proposal to amend the mental state of mind in the offences to require actual knowledge, it would be difficult to prove that a person actually knows that his action is prejudicial to Singapore’s national interests. It will be too easy for perpetrators to just disclaim knowledge that something is, for example, prejudicial to the security of Singapore. This may have the unintended effect of weakening the protection of our national interests under the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare my interest as a practising lawyer. In 2018, I submitted written and oral representations to the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods. I raised the need for us to be mindful of the power of lobbyists with political or commercial objectives, who may fund the spread of falsehoods online and cause divisions in our society. I expressed that social media and online news websites should be transparent on their funding and/or political affiliations. I was concerned about sinister campaigners meant to spread disinformation, evoke emotions and provoke reactions to advance a certain agenda. Intrinsic in what I said, was how easy it was for any foreign principal to interfere in our social compact and political institutions if there are no checks on transparency or accountability. This Bill seeks to address that. There have been many discussions on this Bill outside this Chamber. However, I think, as Singaporeans, all of us can agree on the following two fundamental principles: first, that Singaporean politics must be determined and decided by Singaporeans alone; second, Singaporeans all want open and transparent discourse in politics, one that is accountable to Singaporeans and not motivated or interfered in a covert or deceptive manner. In this speech, I will focus on foreign interference by electronic communications activity. My speech will be in three parts: first, my thoughts on the threshold proof required to best protect our national interests; second, my clarifications in relation to the mechanism to safeguard our collective interests; and third, the importance of maintaining trust and defending the institutions of our country, which I will deliver in Malay.”
“All in all, I stand in support of the Bill and I welcome the Rental Waiver Framework. 1.50 pm”
“Sir, I declare my interest as a practising lawyer and same declaration as to the previous Bill, when I spoke earlier. I thank the Minister for the explanation. I rise in support of this Bill as it sets out the rental relief framework for tenants so that an Assessor can cost effectively and efficiently determine rental waiver allocations between the landlords and tenants, and those down the tenancy chain. The framework also ensures fair co-sharing of the rental obligations between the Government, landlord and tenant. I just have two quick clarifications. One, basically, on those tenants who are having difficulties in terms of claiming the rental waiver. They may be the elderly tenants, they are not IT-savvy and may not understand their obligations under the Rental Waiver Framework, like having to serve the Notice of Rental Waiver within a specified time in order to claim for the rental waiver. Or they may not know what are the requisite financial documents because they do not keep proper profit and loss statements, for example. In this regard, may I ask the Minister, whether MinLaw will be able to provide some guidance or assistance to this group of tenants should they face any difficulties in the process and, if so, how can they go about getting the necessary assistance? My second clarification is that in respect of the assessment and determination which now includes the entire PTO chain, I think it makes an efficient and holistic determination by the Assessor of all stakeholders in the chain. But may I get some clarifications on the approach to be taken if not all parties in the PTO chain had been joined to the proceedings or disclosed to be part of the PTO chain at the material time of the determination? Those are my two quick clarifications, Minister.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to participate in this debate. I thank Minister Shanmugam for answering the queries that I have made previously and directly with you. I just have one clarification in respect of the documents-only hearing. I agree that it depends on the case and, especially given our current context of a docket system, whether there would be an internal tendency to decide on documents only hearing at the earliest possible opportunity, so that we can save much time and cost for the cases.”
“I think there needs to be greater protection for not only children under 14 years of age but all minors under 16 years old. Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Secondly, in relation to the offences of obstructing a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, while I agree with the enhanced punishment to six months’ imprisonment, I would like to ask whether there would be a harsher sentence when aggravating factors are present, for example, if the said obstruction has caused damage to public property or loss of life, compromised the safety of the officers, or even jeopardised the operational effectiveness of the mission success or exercise. Perhaps a harsher sentence or appropriate restitution or compensation order should be made in that respect. Thirdly, I welcome the enhanced penalties under the amendment to section 354(1) of the Penal Code, which increases the penalty for the outrage of modesty cases. Anyone who assaults or uses criminal force with intent to outrage modesty would be attracting an enhanced punishment from two years to three years. This sends a strong signal that such sexual violence cannot be condoned. However, under section 354(2), where the offence is perpetrated upon children under the age of 14, the penalty has not been increased. What is the rationale for not increasing the penalty under section 354(2), if I may ask? Previously, the offence, if committed against children, attracts more than double the punishment, if not committed against children. Separately, what is the rationale to limit section 354(2) to victims under 14 years of age and children as defined under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA)? Why not cover all minors under 16 years old? This will be consistent with the offences of sexual grooming or exploitation in sections 376A to 376EE. In summary, Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the amendments to enhance the punishment for sexual offences and violence.”
“Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill. I welcome these amendments to provide greater protection to the most vulnerable groups of our society – children and foreign domestic workers, or FDWs, included. At the same time, these amendments also enhance the punishment for sexual offences and violence against such groups. I agree with the strong signal that abuse of vulnerable persons, children and FDWs cannot be condoned. The current amendments also expand the jurisdiction of the District Court and Magistrates' Court to hear and mete out enhanced punishments for racially or religiously aggravated offences. This is a welcomed move, especially given the recent discussions on race and racism issues. I hope that these amendments, together with the introduction of the Maintenance of Racial Harmony Act in the future, shall help promote and preserve our racial and religious harmony which is precious to all of us. I do have three clarifications. Firstly, with regard to the amendments to the Penal Code relating to the mistake of law or fact under sections 79, 79A and 80: with the burden of proof on the Prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt, the fault element of the offence, what are the safeguards to prevent abuse of such defences of mistake, especially when someone claims mistake without needing to provide the reasonableness of the same?”
“In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I hope that we can come up with concrete ideas and approaches, and it takes all of us in this House – men, women, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, sons and daughters – to stand up for women's development as a society, and speak up against misogynistic and patriarchal mindset and stereotypes in order for us to progress as a family unit, as a nation; and quoting from a social activist, Desmond Tutu: "It is by standing up for the rights of girls and women that we truly measure up as men". [Applause.]”
“I am heartened to hear from Minister of State Sun Xueling about the theme on strengthening support on caregiving. In addition to sharing of parental leave that is being recommended in the joint Paper by PAP Women's Wing, I have other suggestions as well. Firstly, to increase the spouse tax relief to better reflect the significant and valuable contribution of a stay-at-home mom or dad. Currently, the spouse tax relief is lower than an active NSman relief, Parent relief, or the Grandparent Caregiver Relief. Second, encourage working spouses to utilise the Retirement Sum Topping-Up Scheme to top up their non-working spouses' CPF accounts by extending tax reliefs to not only cash top-ups, but also CPF fund transfers as well. And, perhaps, to introduce a tiered basic childcare subsidy for non-working mothers, in increasing amounts in accordance with the number of children that they have, instead of a flat rate right now. For mothers who are still looking for a job or training for one, perhaps we can have an interim childcare subsidy for a fixed period of time for them. Currently, they need to seek special approval for childcare subsidies on a case-by-case basis. Lastly, to implement a network of temporary childcare services that can be provided by pre-approved childcare centres. In this age of flexible working arrangements and working from home, such service can provide urgent and temporary respite care so that stay-at-home moms or dads can attend to urgent work or business. I will elaborate on these suggestions and more in the full debate of the White Paper when presented.”
“Groups of girls of varying age were placed in front of a camera and asked the same set of questions, "Show me how you run like a girl, how you throw like a girl, how you fight like a girl?" In the older age girls, they seem to show a weakened state, like running slowly, throwing gently or fighting softly, if there is such a term. But in the younger girls, there was not any difference between what they demonstrated and what the other boys demonstrated; they ran just as fast, threw just as far and fought just as hard, if not faster, further or even better. How did this phrase "like a girl" become a derogatory term? Our children should not believe this. Our boys cannot think of themselves to be superior. Our girls should not feel inferior because of who they are. We can dispel this notion and support our children in our homes. We must take action. As fathers, how we treat, speak and respect women in our lives would be how our daughters would expect to be treated and what is expected of our sons, as the measure of a man. We have made great progress as a nation in terms of women's development for several decades and we shall continue to do so. We have to act and build upon the good work and past contributions of the Government, community and social activists. I am happy that the mover of this Motion and all Members who have spoken join in these collective efforts, and I welcome more to come forward to do so. I also look forward to the action plan and consolidated views in the White Paper to be presented. I hope we can see further promotion of an environment that is both conducive to child caregiving and welcoming for caregivers. We can do this by implementing policies that signal child caregiving as a shared responsibility between parents.”
“Here I would also like to laud the efforts of the men in the Malay/Muslim community who have worked together to strengthen our family institution and portray positive values and attitudes as fathers, for example, the Dads For Life movement, which has set up Dads@School to provide opportunities and space to empower fathers and learn best practices to carry out their responsibilities. Another initiative is the M3 BersamaMu program, led by our Assistant Kadis. It provides strong support to couples in their married life. Recognition by society can also inspire others, such as the Exemplary Father Award, organised by the Ain Society. It highlights examples of fathers in our community who are responsible and possess positive values and attitudes. Our community figures such as Ustaz Mohamad Irwan Shah and Mr Sujimy Mohamed also often participate in online platforms and seminars to provide advice and lessons about family to our community. These efforts demonstrate the important role that men play to portray a positive attitude in the upbringing of our children, and how women are highly regarded in our community and our faith. Let us not disparage or belittle these noble efforts. Our society, especially men, are not only key partners to women, but they are also advocates and companions who defend the rights of women in our country. (In English): Beyond caregiving, we must also look at how to provide the best mindset and environment at home for our family members, including our children and partners to flourish and realise their fullest potential. Our children look at us and model our behaviours and learn from our thinking and words. To me, patriarchal mindset and stereotypes are learned, not inherited. I recall watching an advertisement that sets out a social experiment.”
“] During this pandemic, we see more family conflicts that may lead to an increase in cases of domestic violence. Learning and working from home have become the norm today. Increased interactions at home and limited physical space can trigger more misunderstandings and household discord. This may be due to couples having different perceptions about caregiving and spousal roles at home. This perception may stem from patriarchal thinking or preconceptions about the role of wives, mothers or daughters in the home. One of the proposals in the paper by the PAP Women’s Wing is about ensuring equal sharing of caregiving responsibilities between men and women. This is done by sharing of parental leave. Fathers now want to be more involved in the upbringing and the lives of their children. The pandemic situation and working from home have made society become more aware about how we can balance caregiving commitments with our jobs. We also need employers’ cooperation to encourage men to use their parental leave and help to take care of their children at home. Allowing flexibility in sharing parental leave will help families that have their own needs when facing very distinct challenges. This is because not everyone can work from home. With a deeper involvement of fathers, this can potentially change our children’s thinking and at the same the future of our society. All this is set against the backdrop of our increasingly family-friendly society and national landscape. This cannot be achieved without constant planning and Government policies that have always sought progress for everyone including our women and our daughters.”
“During the collation of ground feedback leading up to these set of recommendations, it is heartening to see men lending their voices and joining in our collective efforts to effect positive change. Past and present PAP Members in this House have also stood up and spoken up for causes that are close to the hearts of women in Singapore. Mr Alex Yam spoke on the equality of value and treatment of both working mothers and stay-at-home mothers. Mr Louis Ng championed the causes of women including breastfeeding mothers, single mothers and foreign spouses. Mr Melvin Yong encouraged men to shoulder the burden that women carry at home to strengthen marriages in Singapore. Dr Lam Pin Min sought for more flexibility for fathers to take their parental leave entitlement. Dr Ahmad Mohd Magad more than 10 years ago championed steps to empower single mothers and encourage employers to consider flexible work arrangements. There are many others from past and present Parliament in our nation's history who have done so as well. These are not just a "Few Good Men"; they represent the goodness in men and there are many more out there. They have not only championed the cause, but they have also taken actionable steps with the Government to help shape policies and laws that benefit the women and daughters of our nation. But laws and policies are not the be-all and end-all. We have to shape mindsets and shift attitudes. Recently, we have seen various cases involving the objectification of women and misogynistic views being spread online. We need to address this. Patriarchal and stereotype mindsets alienate and demean the potential of our daughters, wives and women in our lives. In Malay, please, Madam. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the spirit of this Motion and the proposed amendment by hon Member from Sembawang Group Representation Constituency (GRC), Mr Vikram Nair. Given all that has been said by both sides of this House, it is clear that we are all in agreement that this Motion needs to make reference to the action plans that are required. I think beyond an affirmation, there needs to be an acknowledgement of past contributions; beyond a declaration, there needs to be concrete steps; and beyond a statement of intent, there needs to be a call to action. I am sure that the Members of this House, like me, are looking forward to the action plans in the upcoming White Paper arising out of the Conversations on Singapore Women's Development. This year being the Year of Celebrating Singapore Women, it is important for us to remember how far we have come in terms of society and as a nation. Conversations on women's advancement in Singapore have been championed by the PAP Women's Wing since their inception and even before that in 1956 when the PAP Women's League was formed by Mdm Chan Choy Siong, one of the first women to be elected into Parliament in Singapore. However, it is not to be championed by women alone. In my years of advocating to end domestic violence and championing women empowerment, I strongly believe that men are integral to any conversation regarding women development. I am thus glad that we have seen an overwhelming support from men who also share these same views. The PAP Women's Wing and Young PAP have consulted diverse groups in our society, including men, and put together a set of recommendations that we hope the Government will consider to help our women and daughters achieve their fullest potential and aspirations.”