If we are to believe that Singapore is a land of promise where dreams are fulfilled, we must also take into account the number of human rights violations committed by its government.
Singapore is believed to have the highest per capita execution rate, relative to its population. It is not known how many prisoners are currently on death row, but the shocking death toll continues to rise.
Official information on the use of the death penalty is shrouded in secrecy. Some, but not all, executions are reported to the press.
In Singapore, we clearly see the absence or moral limitations and deterrence as well as the incapacitation agenda joining forces to raise the levels of punishment beyond what is not normally seen elsewhere.
It is not known how many people the Singapore government sends to the gallows each year. These people include foreign nationals, many of whom were convicted of drug-related crimes, such as becoming an involuntary and unwitting drug mule.
Under the Sinapore Drug Abuse Act, anyone found to be importing, exporting or in possession of more than the prescribed amount of drugs receives the death penalty. The Act reverses the usual burden of proof to some extent in common law jurisdictions. Under the law, anyone found in possession of a human being is presumed to be trafficked.
The Drug Abuse Law contains a series of presumptions that shift the burden of proof from the prosecution to the accused. This conflicts with the universal belief in the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Concern has also been expressed that the Drug Abuse Act allows secret informant evidence to be used during trials. The use of the testimony of an anonymous witness violates the right of the accused to confront or examine the testimony of the witness because he is deprived of the information necessary to question the credibility of the witness.
Using evidence from anonymous witnesses can make the entire trial unfair.
What then would happen to the innocent person found in possession when the anonymous witness turns out to be the real drug dealer?
It should come as no surprise when the Singapore government sees a utilitarian need to do so, it does not hesitate to create broadly defined offenses called “driftnet” offenses. Such an example of a “driftnet” offense is drug trafficking, in which, under the Drug Abuse Act, trafficking is defined as “selling, giving, managing, transporting or delivering”.
The Singapore courts have practically interpreted the words literally. As long as you are in possession or intend to pass possession to someone else, that is trafficking. If severe punishment is intended for street vendors and drug dealers, then mere possession would not be trafficking, but would only constitute the crime of possession, a much less serious crime.
To that end, by punishing the innocent for the mere possession of any drug, the Singaporean government is allowing real traffickers to escape conviction and continually resume their heinous activities.
There is practically no public debate on the death penalty in Singapore. The government has consistently maintained that this is not a human rights issue. Therefore, we are led to believe that taking a person’s life, even if the original offenders use it unknowingly and unintentionally, is in no way an impediment to the commission of a crime. Indeed, we are led to believe that the cost of effective crime prevention is the accidental punishment of a few innocent people, that at the same time the price must be paid.
A frank value judgment on Singapore’s official position is this: even if an innocent person is caught and caught, the projected benefits in crime prevention still outweigh the cost of that eventualit. Indeed, it is better to set 10 culprits free than to convict one innocent.
The Criminal Law Act is a powerful piece of legislation, allowing the Home Secretary to detain a person suspected of criminal activity without charges being brought, no trial or sentence handed down. This, in effect, is a violation of the right to due process and the right to a fair trial. This is a great contradiction of everyone’s right to a fair trial. Executive detention is, in the government’s view, an exception to the right to a fair trial.
By imposing death sentences and carrying out large numbers of executions, Singapore goes against the global trend towards abolishing the death penalty.
The United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU) have criticized his use of the death penalty.
The Singapore government has consistently defended its position by saying that the death penalty is not a human rights issue. So we are led to believe that taking a person’s life is in no way an issue related to the United Nations Human Rights Council.
The Singapore government maintains that the death penalty is primarily a matter of criminal justice and therefore is a matter of the sovereign jurisdiction of all nations; the right to life is not the only right … and it is the duty of societies to balance the rights in conflict with each other.
Therefore, we see before us the very essence of perverted implications and the absence of moral values.
Singapore’s criminal justice system degrades the rights of the individual to life, liberty and the right to a fair trial.
Examine this thought that I impose on you.
“It is never the real criminals who are caught and punished. Those who are caught and hanged are often poor, desperate people who are taken advantage of. By hanging them, we are in effect helping to perpetuate the plan of the real. Traffickers They use people who can afford to lose. If we allow the Singapore government to continually abuse the rights of all Filipinos who work there, we will allow the real criminals to escape and the problem will never be solved. “