TR EMERITUS

Two convicted Singaporean drug traffickers were hanged yesterday morning (18 July) despite an appeal to President Tony Tan to hold off on the execution pending the outcome of a constitutional challenge to the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA). The Singapore Working Group on the Death Penalty (SWGDP) had written to the President to get him to hold off on the executions as there was a pending court case which could save the men's lives. SWGDP had submitted that the outcome of an ongoing constitutional challenge to sections of the Misuse of Drugs Act could save the men's lives as any slight changes to the law may result in the two men escaping the death penalty. However, despite the concerns raised by SWGDP, the two men were promptly executed at Changi Prison Complex. SWGDP is a group of non-government organisations which are against the death penalty and was appealing for 36-year-old Tang Hai Liang and 48-year-old Foong Chee Peng, who were convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to death. Following the execution, SWGDP issued a statement calling the execution "deeply unjust" as the outcome of the constitutional challenge is still pending. The Singapore Working Group on the Death Penalty deeply regrets, and is gravely disappointed at the executions of two individuals that took place today, 18th of July 2014. Inmates Foong Chee Peng, 48, and Tang Hai Liang, 36, were hanged at dawn this morning. Both men were convicted of drug trafficking. These two executions bring to an end the moratorium that has been in place since July 2011, when the government commenced an internal review of the mandatory death penalty laws. This review took place without any public consultation nor has it been made available for public scrutiny. Subsequently, the changes were passed by Parliament in the exact form proposed by the government in July 2012, despite various warnings about their potential problems. We also wish to highlight that there is an ongoing application filed by another drug offender before the Supreme Court, challenging the validity of section 33B of the Misuse of Drugs Act because it violates Article 12 of our Constitution. The hearing is fixed before the Court of Appeal on the 18th of August later this year. Given the fact that the constitutional challenge to the amendments could have a potential bearing on the lawfulness of Foong and Tang’s executions, it was deeply unjust to have executed them before the constitutional challenge was decided. The injustice is compounded by the fact that we had written to the President and the Minister of Home Affairs yesterday to highlight this situation and urged for an urgent stay of execution until our courts have decided on this constitutional challenge at the very least. Finally, the executions are a regrettable step backwards for Singapore. The death penalty has not been proven to be a more useful deterrent against crime than alternative forms of punishment. Moreover, once carried out, miscarriages of justice cannot be remedied. We therefore reiterate our calls for the government to impose a moratorium on all executions and move towards the abolition of capital punishment in Singapore. We believe in Second Chances Singapore Anti Death Penalty Campaign Think Center Singapore However, according to the Central Narcotics Bureau, both men were accorded the due process of law and they had chosen not to excercise their rights and were fully aware of the consequences of their respective decisions. Both Tang Hai Liang and Foong Chee Peng were convicted of trafficking in a controlled drug and sentenced to death. Tang Hai Liang was found to have trafficked 89.55g of diamorphine and Foong Chee Peng was found to have trafficked 40.23g of diamorphine. The Misuse of Drugs Act provides for the death penalty if the amount of diamorphine (or pure heroin) trafficked is 15g or more. 15g of diamorphine is equivalent to 1,250 straws[1], which is sufficient to feed the addiction of about 180 abusers for a week. A thorough review of the mandatory death penalty in our laws was conducted from July 2011. A moratorium on executions was placed while the law was being reviewed. The changes to the mandatory death penalty regime were passed by Parliament in November 2012 after a full debate, and came into force in January 2013. All persons already sentenced to death under the Misuse of Drugs Act by the time the new legislation came into force were given the opportunity to elect to be considered for re-sentencing under the new regime. Tang Hai Liang and Foong Chee Peng had been accorded full due process, including the opportunity to appeal to the Court of Appeal and to elect to be considered for re-sentencing under the new regime. Tang Hai Liang and Foong Chee Peng both appeared in person before an Assistant Registrar in the High Court to confirm that they did not wish to be part of the re-sentencing process, and that they understood the consequences of their respective decisions. Both of them were represented by counsel throughout the legal process, and were also given the opportunity to petition the President for Clemency. Tang Hai Liang and Foong Chee Peng both elected not to petition the President for Clemency. An unsigned petition for Clemency was subsequently submitted on Tang Hai Liang’s behalf. Tang Hai Liang indicated that he did not wish to appeal for Clemency and that the petition had been submitted by his family without his prior knowledge. This petition for Clemency was turned down and his family was informed of the decision. CENTRAL NARCOTICS BUREAU 18 JULY 2014 .      Read More →

Minister for Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim (Photo CNA) Minister for Communications and Information Yaacob Ibrahim has instructed NLB not to remove or pulp 2 of the 3 controversial children titles: And Tango Makes Three The White Swan They will be moved to the adult section instead. Dr Yaacob posted the following on his Facebook page this morning (18 Jul): Over the past week, there has been a vigorous debate on the National Library Board’s (NLB) decision to withdraw the three children’s books ‘And Tango Makes Three’, ‘The White Swan Express’, and ‘Who's In My Family?’. We stand by NLB’s decision to remove the three books from the children’s section. As I said earlier, NLB has to decide what books should be made readily available to children, who are usually unsupervised, in the children’s section of our public libraries. NLB will continue to ensure that books in the children’s section are age-appropriate. We have a much wider range of books in the adult section of public libraries. Many objected to the idea that the books would be pulped after being withdrawn from circulation. I understand these reactions, which reflect a deep-seated respect in our culture for the written word. ‘Who’s in My Family’ had already been disposed of as the title had been reviewed earlier. But I have instructed NLB not to pulp the two other titles, but instead to place them in the adult section of the public libraries. I have also asked NLB to review the process by which they deal with such books. The decision on what books children can or cannot read remains with their parents. Parents who wish to borrow these books to read with their children will have the option to do so. It appears that Dr Yaacob is rescinding his earlier decision in supporting NLB to withdraw and destroy the 3 said books. Last Friday (11 Jul), he wrote on his Facebook page explaining the Government’s position on the matter and why he supported NLB’s decision: I wish to explain the Government’s approach, in the hope that this will help all sides understand what the withdrawal is about – and what it is not about. Firstly, the withdrawal was not based on a single complaint, without an attempt to assess the merits of the complaint. NLB has a process where its officers carefully consider such feedback, before making a decision. Secondly, this is a decision only with respect to the children’s section in the public libraries. NLB is not deciding what books children can or cannot read. That decision remains with the parents, as it always has been. People can buy these titles for their children if they wish. Rather, NLB has to decide what books should be made readily available to children, who are sometimes unsupervised, in the children’s section of our public libraries. For the adult sections of the library, the guidelines for what is suitable are much wider, and a much wider range of titles are on the shelves. Thirdly, NLB’s decision was guided by community norms. Public libraries serve the community and it is right that they give consideration to community norms. The prevailing norms, which the overwhelming majority of Singaporeans accept, support teaching children about conventional families, but not about alternative, non-traditional families, which is what the books in question are about. This approach is shared between all public agencies dealing with the education and care of young Singaporeans. He ended his Facebook posting last Friday by saying that NLB’s approach is to "reflect existing social norms, and not to challenge or seek to change them". Following Dr Yaacob's latest decision to reinstate 2 of the 3 children books but move them to the adult section, NLB CEO Elaine Ng held a media briefing today (18 Jul) to further "clarify" NLB's position on the controversial matter. Ms Ng said, "Young children are our biggest visitors, and they tend to browse unsupervised. Hence the NLB takes the stance of having age-appropriate guidelines. We have made certain decisions on what books should not be in the children's section and that still stands. Going forward, we have found a means and method to put controversial children's books in the adult section of the library." "Parents are the one who decide what books children can or cannot read. This could be achieved in the adult section or a PG section, as mooted by some members of the public," she added. "Is NLB subject to pressure by religious groups? The NLB is not in a position to discern people's motivation. We treated the requests at a service level," she further explained. On the pulping of books, she said, "Many objected to the idea that books will be pulped. As book lovers ourselves, we understand the reaction. We do not want to be viewed as destroying books." Ms Ng also promised that NLB will be more transparent. "We will look at other organisations, create more transparent review processes. We're still looking around, and will need time to look at what works best for us. We ask for the public's patience," she said. "We will seek more voices, include external parties on the feedback of some of our books... We want to build bridges with stakeholders, and take time to reach out to those who have partnered NLB in the past and have different views. We want to spend a lot of effort engaging them, and find ways to work with them in the future." Ms Ng also said they need to think through the mission of the library as they think through the processes. "Please remember the good work that the NLB has done in the past. I hope we showed that we are a learning organisation," she said. News of the removal last week drew sharp criticism from many people including netizens, writers, MP Hri Kumar and even civil servants ('Even civil servants find NLB’s decision offensive').  Read More →

Politicians on the Analyst’s Couch. In a departure from his usual mumblings, the writer tries his hand at psycho-analysing the political class as a light-hearted relief. “Look at Me!” - Narcissistic Personality Disorder Politicians are well known to be obsessively concerned about their real or imagined image which, by itself, is nothing serious since in the general population, there are a fair number of narcissists of varying degrees. It is when this narcissism goes into overdrive that it may become a disorder. Might not those politicians who by virtue of their position and salaries, infer upon themselves, that they are a breed superior to anything on earth, be a sign of such a disorder? The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder) IV has the following to say about Narcissistic Personality Disorder. -   Expects to be recognized as superior and special, without superior accomplishments -   Preoccupied with thoughts of great success, enormous attractiveness, power, intelligence -   Lacks the ability to empathize with the feelings or desires of others -   Is arrogant in attitudes and behavior -   Has expectations of special treatment that are unrealistic Such narcissists believe they are inherently better than others but, actually have a fragile self-esteem that cannot handle criticism. They compensate by belittling or disparaging others to validate their own sense of themselves.  Could this last description be apt for the sensitivity to criticism of the political elites of authoritarian democracies who are unused to being questioned? “One up on you, Dad!” - The Oedipus-Father Complex It is well known that among the male gender of the human species, some are hell-bent on outdoing or opposing their fathers.  This too is nothing decidedly unusual but in extreme, there may be consequences. In the ancient Greek play, Oedipus Rex, Oedipus killed his father Laius and possessed (unwittingly) his own mother, Jocasta. Sigmund Freud coined the term Oedipus Complex to theorise that men subconsciously experienced jealousy of their fathers in childhood, seeing the father as an authoritarian figure and as a rival to his mother’s affections. In adulthood, this may develop into a desire to outdo the father or metaphorically kill him. As a Negative Father Complex, the son may on the contrary develop self-doubt and inadequacy vis-à-vis the father which causes the son to take excessive actions to correct the perceived inadequacy but which impairs his judgment and his relations with others. In conjunction to the narcissistic personality, the Oedipus-Father Complex may be a heady combination of emotions and impulses that may be rejected from awareness but still influence behavior. Sub-consciously, the subject may feel no moral limitations to do whatever necessary just so to prove his superiority over his father or to gain his approval. “What? They didn’t vote for me?” - Cognitive Bias and Cognitive Dissonance Politicians have a tendency to love the sound of their own voice and those who speak and think like them. But politicians had often been dumbfounded when the majority did not vote them. This is where cognitive bias results from the all too human tendency to create one’s own subjective social reality from dwelling too comfortably with the like-minded. Cognitive bias is essentially a deviation in judgment whereby inferences about people and situations are drawn in an erroneous fashion, shaped by the individual’s subjective reality. It leads to perceptual distortion, poor judgment and illogical interpretation, all too common failings of the political class. Might the elites of a society in which open political debate is severely circumscribed and where media is organized to serve their political agenda, be especially disposed towards cognitive biases? A defeated politician, surprised at the outcome, may think to himself “I am the smartest, the bestest, everyone said so but why didn’t they elect me?”  In resolving this contradiction, the politician may decide that since he is the “smartest and bestest”, then the voters must be illogical or mean. Thus he has stumbled into cognitive dissonance whereby an individual, faced with inconsistency among his cognitions (i.e. beliefs, opinions) seeks to eliminate or reduce the dissonance.  But dissonance theory does not state this actually works, only that individuals in a state of cognitive dissonance will take steps to reduce their dissonance even if such steps are illogical. Is this an explanation for the mythical “silent majority” or the “vocal minority” when there is a citizen backlash? “It is true, it must be” - Delusional Psychosis Imbibing too much from a captive media may cause an over-ingestion of political ideology to induce delusional psychosis. This involves the misinterpretation of perceptions or experiences which may result in holding to certain beliefs despite evidence to the contrary. In reality, the situations are either not true at all or highly exaggerated. The true-believer incurred an inability to tell what is real from what is imagined and hold unshakeable beliefs in something untrue. Disclaimer The writer vehemently denies and disavows that the above amateurish concepts in psycho-analysis are in reference to any particular individual of any political party anywhere for his own health and safety concern. Readers are relied upon to make inferences with a sense of humour. Chris K *  Chris K holds a senior position in a global financial centre bigger than Singapore. He writes mostly on economic and financial matters to highlight misconceptions of economic policy in Singapore.  Read More →