THE contours of Singapore's legal framework and policy towards human rights are shaped and informed by State objectives and development goals. While our death penalty laws have been harshly criticised beyond our shores, Singapore's human rights are qualified by invoking "Asian values", in which community interests are prioritised over individual rights.
The courts in Singapore have consistently reaffirmed the constitutionality of our death penalty laws, signalling the importance of balancing the rights of the criminally accused against the community's right to live peacefully. It is a delicate balance between the need for strong deterrence and compassion in sentencing.
It is often easy to narrowly focus on the plight and rights of the individual, but such a stance boldly overlooks the broader implications should our death penalty laws were relaxed. As far as individual rights should be respected and not lightly encroached upon, Singaporeans should appreciate that our strict laws are a necessary deterrent and ensure that, for example, children cannot freely get drugs.
Therefore, the appeal to communal values is sound, as our society values the public good and support laws designed to serve communal interests in public morality, decency, order and health - some of which might, to a foreign observer, unduly restrict civil liberties.
It is evident to Singaporeans that our strict death penalty laws have certainly made Singapore among the safest places in the world to live in.
As such, we should be more cautious about stubbornly advocating for a rights-oriented society, as the trade-off between saving the life of an accused for the sake of a more "humane" punishment while possibly sacrificing many other potential lives is a serious reality. The right signal must be strongly sent out to the hardcore drug barons.
I for one am certain that the fight against drugs is definitely not a lost one, and this tough stance ensures our nation's sustainable future. (google news - 2/5/10)
The courts in Singapore have consistently reaffirmed the constitutionality of our death penalty laws, signalling the importance of balancing the rights of the criminally accused against the community's right to live peacefully. It is a delicate balance between the need for strong deterrence and compassion in sentencing.
It is often easy to narrowly focus on the plight and rights of the individual, but such a stance boldly overlooks the broader implications should our death penalty laws were relaxed. As far as individual rights should be respected and not lightly encroached upon, Singaporeans should appreciate that our strict laws are a necessary deterrent and ensure that, for example, children cannot freely get drugs.
Therefore, the appeal to communal values is sound, as our society values the public good and support laws designed to serve communal interests in public morality, decency, order and health - some of which might, to a foreign observer, unduly restrict civil liberties.
It is evident to Singaporeans that our strict death penalty laws have certainly made Singapore among the safest places in the world to live in.
As such, we should be more cautious about stubbornly advocating for a rights-oriented society, as the trade-off between saving the life of an accused for the sake of a more "humane" punishment while possibly sacrificing many other potential lives is a serious reality. The right signal must be strongly sent out to the hardcore drug barons.
I for one am certain that the fight against drugs is definitely not a lost one, and this tough stance ensures our nation's sustainable future. (google news - 2/5/10)
COMMENTS =)
In our opinion, having a death penalty sends a strong message. The parliament is effectively telling our court judges they do not have enough faith in them to exercise their discretion.
That said, it is our opinion that the current supreme court chair and table (panel) is more than capable of exercising their discretion, and any tries by the lawmakers to tie their hands ought to be unacceptable.
Be that as may be, deference to the legislature is never a not unhealthy thing.
That said, it is our opinion that the current supreme court chair and table (panel) is more than capable of exercising their discretion, and any tries by the lawmakers to tie their hands ought to be unacceptable.
Be that as may be, deference to the legislature is never a not unhealthy thing.
Done by: Luke JinHua, Ardy Kartolo, Leuven Kim, Keith Ho, Nathanael (10S23)
4 comments:
Death penalty had indeed cause Singapore to be a safer place since many are afraid of facing death.
However, I feel that death penalty should only be use as a last resort. In some cases, some innocent people may be accused of crimes and are sentence death penalty, would it be all right to sentence someone to death penalty when there is a chance of the "criminal" be innocent?
Furthermore, I feel that people should be given a second chance after conselling and observations of these criminals. Some may have regret their actions in the past. Shouldn't we give them support to lead a new life again? They could have become someone that would contibute much to Singapore after being given a second chance.
I feel that death penalty should only be given as last resort, if criminals refuse to change and are not regretful of their actions.
In life we've always heard about second chances and one turning into a new leaf. Hence, I think Singapore can give leeway to death penalties. Criminals who are given death penalties while serving their term might change for the better because of their family members and they might really be regretful over the crime they have done. However, how many of us are willing to forgive a criminal who has done something of death sentence. We are all afraid that the crimes they have done will be repeated and might be a threat to us. Even if criminals are not given death penalty but short sentences, we all already stereotyped these people as the "bad guys". However, once one has done something unlawful, his crime can never be erased and his "bad guy" image will never be taken away in people's eyes because I think it's human nature. Even if criminals of death penalties are given second chances, there would be much objections.
The death penalty in Singapore is indeed a sentencing that puts across a strong message to both Singaporeans and foreigners that Singapore's rules and regulations are not something to be trivial with. Undeniably, due to this harsh punishment being meted out by the supreme court, many illegal activities such as drug trafficking have decreased substantially over the years. This certainly ensures that Singapore's security is being taken care of.
However, what the article did not mention was that the fact death penalty is against a person's human rights and that it is imperative for us to consider other possible factors that led to the accuse in committing the offense. In my opinion, we cannot simply just narrow down on the offenders criminal acts and use that as a basis for a punishment. He could have acted out of his own will, but the question is who will believe him? Who will believe that he was forced to do so? In the supreme court, only evidences will allow you to defend yourself, but what about evidences that cannot be proven but yet it is still valid?
My point is, the supreme court may be seen as a platform where equality and justice is balanced and that every verdict is a fair one. However, when human rights factor come into play, it goes beyond just looking at the offense itself but rather, looking into human's moral values.
When the court issues a death penalty on a person, a life is lost. We are all human being with equal status. It does not matter what title or rank you're holding in an organization, everyone is equal regardless of race, language or religion. No one in the world has the authority or rights to judge a person's life. When a death penalty is given to an offender, it is the same as killing that person. So, isn't that an offense in itself?
I'll leave everyone with that question in mind. Do ponder about it and then judge for yourselves whether a death penalty is really necessary in any society.
Daryl Chew
10S16
Post a Comment