[ad_1]
SINGAPORE: Speeding up the trial process for economically vulnerable foreign nationals would not be fair to Singaporeans who have also been charged with crimes, as doing so would make the latter “wait even longer,” the Home Affairs Minister said on Wednesday. Right, K Shanmugam (November 4).
Mr. Shanmugam was responding to a parliamentary question from Leong Mun Wai, a non-constituent member of Parliament for the Progress Singapore Party (PSP), as part of a ministerial statement on the case of former Indonesian servant Parti Liyani.
READ: Police, AGC had reason to take action against Parti Liyani; aspects of the case could have been handled better, says Shanmugam
The minister said that the average time that the trial process of a criminal case takes is 15 months, from the moment the accused is accused in court until the sentence is handed down.
Factors that influence time are the nature of the case, the availability of attorneys or deputy prosecutors, documents and witnesses, and the time required for deliberation.
State courts handle about 600 criminal trials a year, a “heavy burden” for the 55 judges, Shanmugam said. About 22 percent of these cases involve foreigners, he added.
“If we expedite a case for a foreign person, then a Singaporean defendant will have to wait even longer,” the minister said. “So, with a criminal case pending, why should we make Singaporeans suffer disproportionately more?”
Shanmugam cited an example of a 51-year-old Singaporean who was indicted in March this year on two counts of shoplifting. The Singaporean demanded trial and was placed in preventive detention.
In June, the Attorney General’s Office (AGC) assessed that his period of preventive detention, three months at that time, could exceed his sentence. At the request of the Public Ministry, the trial was brought forward and “was carried out urgently,” the minister told the Chamber.
He was later found guilty and sentenced to 16 weeks in jail.
READ: The High Court’s inference on a key factor in Parti Liyani’s acquittal is ‘quite different’ from what she said: Shanmugam
“There will be many other cases like this,” said Mr. Shanmugam.
“But even if there is no specific pretrial detention situation, if you pass some people in the queue, the others in the queue will have to wait longer,” he added.
“I don’t think it’s fair for Singaporeans to do what Mr Leong suggested.”
LABOR RESTRICTIONS
Mr. Shanmugam also reiterated the issue of manpower limitations in the Singapore Police Force (SPF), in response to a question from People’s Action Party MP Louis Ng.
Mr. Ng had asked whether the authorities would consider allowing foreign domestic workers and other work permit holders to be accompanied by non-legal personnel during police interviews, an arrangement similar to the Appropriate Adults Program.
The minister said that from 2015 to 2019, an average of 2,741 foreign domestic workers with work permits were arrested each year.
“Interviews must be done quickly,” he explained. “I said before, the police are already very uptight. We won’t stretch them anymore. “
He added that providing an appropriate adult for each foreign worker during a police interview would be a “very difficult exercise.”
Last year, these adults attended 2,300 activations that involved minors and mentally vulnerable people.
“If we were to provide AA (appropriate adults) for each foreign worker interviewed, we would have to at least double the current pool of volunteers, provide the training and resources, and some might require more than one statement,” he said.
“This will become a real limitation and burden on the police.”
Also, if each interview required an appropriate adult, “the interviews will be delayed if the AA is not available,” he added. “The evidence could disappear. There are other problems. “
READ: Parti Liyani case: Liew Mun Leong’s son is investigated for possible crimes, including perjury
“Foreign workers are adults. The key is for the police to make sure that foreign workers understand the questions and that their answers are properly recorded, and it should be open to scrutiny in court, which is, ”said the minister.
Mr. Shanmugam provided more statistics on the SPF workload.
For example, around 66,200 criminal cases were handled by approximately 1,100 investigating officers in 2016.
In Singapore, there are around 13,200 police officers, including full-time national military personnel. This means that the ratio of police officers per population of the country is 0.23%.
By comparison, New York has a ratio of 0.42 percent, while London is 0.34 percent and Hong Kong is 0.39 percent.
To keep up with those cities, Singapore would need more police officers. For example, to have the same ratio as New York, the SPF will need about 11,000 more officers, Shanmugam said.
“So that members can understand and appreciate the burden on our officers,” said Mr. Shanmugam.
“My concern is that there is a limit to what our officers can do with the increased workload and increased expectations, but without a commensurate increase in manpower.”
LEE: Shanmugam says that Liew Mun Leong has no influence in the Parti Liyani case; handled like other robbery cases
INTERPRETATION SERVICES
In response to another parliamentary question previously raised by Leong, Shanmugam said that the SPF currently employs a pool of interpreters for the three official working languages, as well as more common dialects such as Hokkien, Teochew and Cantonese.
Mr. Leong asked whether steps are being taken to strengthen the interpreter service at the SPF in light of the findings of Ms. Parti’s case.
“The police will hire the services of interpreters if the interviewee cannot understand the language used by the interviewer or vice versa,” Mr. Shanmugam said.
READ: Parti Liyani seeks compensation order for robbery trial, says she suffered losses of around S $ 71,000
For foreign languages, the police will hire the services of foreign language interpreters “on an ad hoc basis,” said Mr. Shanmugam.
“There is a framework for assessing the suitability of interpreters, including their qualifications and relevant work experience,” explained Mr. Shanmugam.
“In (Ms. Liyani’s) case, she was asked. He said he could speak Malay, ”added Mr. Shanmugam.
“The question is: does the interviewee understand the language that is being used? And like I said before, the police have been told that they really need to verify this.
‘SOME HARD QUESTIONS’
On the subject of the Criminal Legal Assistance Program (CLAS), Mr. Shanmugam said that his preference was to maintain the “pro-bono spirit”, with a small number of lawyers specifically employed by CLAS and lawyers from the private sector.
This would be the “best approach,” he said.
CLAS aims to provide legal assistance to individuals facing non-capital charges and is administered by the pro bono services of the Law Society.
“Our focus has been: legal assistance for those who really need it, with public-private partnerships taking advantage of the excellent pro-bono spirit of our attorneys, and should we give it up?” Mr Shanmugam asked.
“But we are not completely satisfied with the current model either. Here are some tough questions: How can we best help those who cannot afford attorneys and yet make sure we don’t follow the path other countries have traveled? ”.
Noting that CLAS covers the bottom 25 percent in terms of family income, Mr. Shanmugam said he would be “happy” to hear what members had to say about whether the number could be expanded and that suggestions would be “seriously considered. “.
“We must aim to have a structure that helps those who really need help, but does not become an unacceptable strain for the Treasury. And those who can afford to pay the lawyers, the taxpayer should not have to pay for them, ”added Mr. Shanmugam.
Responding to a question from PAP MP Carrie Tan, Mr. Shanmugan noted that the Ministry is “seriously considering” a public defender’s office, where the government pays and employs lawyers in a “separate structure”. These attorneys then act in criminal cases to defend the accused.
“We will study the details and the feasibility of this further in consultation with the Law Society and the Bar Association,” he added.
THE NEED FOR A COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION
Addressing another question from PSP’s Mr. Leong on whether an Investigative Committee will be appointed to investigate the conduct of the SPF and the AGC, the minister said that he does not have the power to do so by the AGC, as “it is not an agency that it depends on (him) ”.
READ: Karl Liew will be charged with providing false evidence and false information to a public servant in the Parti Liyani case
However, he is ready to recommend the creation of a “high-level” commission of inquiry to the Cabinet.
“I am willing to recommend to Cabinet that we have a Commission of Inquiry, but the member must first tell us what he wants this Commission of Inquiry to examine and must confirm that he will come to the Commission of Inquiry and state his position,” Mr. Shanmugam said.
This is because the agents involved “have categorically confirmed that there is no undue pressure” and that this case was “treated as a routine case”.
The minister added that the facts he had laid out in his ministerial statement showed “a good prima facie case to proceed.” There will also be a disciplinary tribunal that will investigate Ms. Liyani’s complaint against agency officials.
“Therefore, before we have a Commission of Inquiry which is a serious matter (that) will consume resources and a lot of time… the member must specify what part of this matter continues to cause him to reasonably believe and question that undue influence was used by the Liews, ”said Mr. Shanmugam.
Mr. Leong replied that he was aware of the difference between a commission of inquiry and a commission of inquiry, but added that it is “still important” to have an independent survey.
Pressured by the minister to explain the specific issues he would like the commission to examine, the NCMP cited as an example the five weeks it took the police to attend to the evidence.
“Even if the workforce situation is difficult, do they need five weeks to attend the tests, for example? I cite this as an example because I think there are many aspects that need further investigation so that we can … look at all the systemic aspects of the criminal justice process so that we can find a better solution. “
To that, Mr. Shanmugam stressed that he has asked for an explanation and that “there is no excuse for (the) five weeks.”
“The police in no way seek to defend him,” he said.
With this matter ready for examination, he added that he would not recommend a Commission of Inquiry for this purpose.
READ: Timeline: How former maid Parti Liyani was acquitted of robbing the family of the chairman of Changi Airport Group
The back and forth lasted about 15 minutes before Mr. Leong reiterated his point that the case “probably requires further investigation … and interpretation of the facts.”
“But if you think that is sufficient, I will withdraw my proposal or recommendation for an independent investigation,” he said.
When asked by the new PAP deputy Xie Yao Quan if he felt Ms. Liyani was guilty, Shanmugan declined to comment.
Shanmugam said, “It’s a very crude question: is Ms. Liyani guilty? She has been acquitted by the High Court and I said that we must proceed on that basis and not reopen that issue.
“I think we left it at that and I don’t want to comment on the decision.”
