As Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong continues his whistle stop tour Down Under I thought it would be interesting to revisit what Wikipedia has to say about public debate on capital punishment in Singapore.
"Public debate in the Singaporean news media on the death penalty is almost non-existent, although the topic does occasionally get discussed in the midst of major, well-known criminal cases. Efforts to garner public opinion on the issue are rare, although it is generally assumed that most Singaporeans support it and believe it plays a part in keeping the crime rate in Singapore low.
Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, the first ever opposition Member of Parliament in Singapore, was only given a few minutes to speak in parliament on the issue before his comments were rebutted by the Minister of State for Law and Home Affairs. Few other opposition members in parliament would bring up the issue, which may be reflective of a population generally indifferent to the matter.
The government states that the death penalty is only used in the most serious of crimes, sending, they say, a strong message to would-be offenders. They make no apology for their tough stance on law and order in the country. They point out that in 1994 and 1999 the United Nations General Assembly has failed to adopt resolutions calling for a moratorium on the death penalty worldwide, as a majority of countries opposed such a move.
The Permanent Representative of the Republic of Singapore to the United Nations wrote a letter to the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in 2001 which stated:
"…the death penalty is primarily a criminal justice issue, and therefore is a question for the sovereign jurisdiction of each country […] the right to life is not the only right, and […] it is the duty of societies and governments to decide how to balance competing rights against each other."
Before the hanging of Shanmugam Murugesu, a three-hour vigil was held on May 6, 2005. The organisers of the event at the Furama Hotel said it was the first such public gathering organised solely by members of the public against the death penalty in Singapore. Murugesu had been arrested after being caught in possession of six packets containing just over 1 kg of cannabis after returning from Malaysia. He admitted knowledge of one of the packets, which contained 300 g, but not the other five. The event went unreported on the partially state-owned media and the police shut down an open microphone session before the first person could speak.
After the hanging of Van Tuong Nguyen, a Vietnamese Australian man from Melbourne, Australia, on December 2, 2005, Sister Susan Chia the province leader of the Good Shepherd Sisters in Singapore took the opportunity to declare that "The death penalty is cruel, inhumane and it violates the right to life." Chia and several other nuns took it upon themselves to comfort Nguyen's mother two weeks before his execution for heroin trafficking.
Singapore's death penalty laws have drawn comments in the media. For example, the science fiction author William Gibson, while a journalist, wrote a travel piece on Singapore in which he sarcastically referred to it as "Disneyland with the death penalty." "
Prime Minister Lee may like to think the mandatory death penalty does not affect bilateral relations in this part of the world, but he is deluding himself. The anger among human rights defenders will simmer for a long time and will translate into hostility toward his government and its economic interests. The mandatory death penalty is a blight on the human rights landscape and Singaporeans need to be reminded of this on a regular basis.
2 comments:
I'm S'porean and I must say that with regard to the death penalty, I'm of the view that if people in Singapore (including foreigners visiting here) knowingly risk their lives, then they deserve their punishment (even if death as a punishment is a little bit too finite).
Aust may be opposed to the death penalty on principle, but I don't really see many Aussies opposing the death sentence handed to Amrozi, one of the Bali bombers.
I think the moral-of-the-story is that death penalty is inherently cruel, unless that criminal has commited the crime against someone you love or know.
Yes, but Singapore applies a mandatory death penalty determined by politicians, which affords the judicial process no discretion. That is a political dictate that has no place in a civilised criminal justice system. Your failure to understand the significant difference between the barbarity of a mandatory penalty and a sentence arrived at by the due process of a court with discretionary powers is revealing in itself. You have got so used to living under the dictates of a powerful political oligarchy you believe it is right that they decide courts should have no discretion as to whether a guilty party is hanged - whether you do agree with this or not you have no say in it and that is not democracy. A political system that enables politicians to make laws that violate human rights under the guise of a judicial process is oppressive and to be condemned.
Post a Comment