Teo Soh Lung: ‘too simplistic’ to believe death penalty will solve Singapore drug crimes

SINGAPORE: Following the Singapore Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) rebuttal and renewed defence of the city-state’s harsh stance against drugs on Tuesday (21 May), Ms Teo Soh Lung, a Singaporean lawyer and activist, penned a response to the MHA, defending her initial comments and clarifying her position on several key points.

Regarding the Singapore government’s ongoing policy of capital punishment for drug traffickers, Ms Teo reiterated her belief that the death penalty is not an effective solution to drug problems.

She argued that people resort to drugs for various reasons and that harsh penalties have not eradicated drug trafficking in Singapore, as evidenced by the continued arrests despite nearly 50 years of enforcing the death penalty.

“To believe that the death penalty will solve Singapore’s drug crimes is too simplistic, ” said Ms Teo.

MHA defends firm drug policies amid Ms Teo’s criticism of minister’s speech

On 17 May 2024, MHA responded to criticisms by Ms Teo regarding Minister for Home Affairs and Law K Shanmugam’s statement on Singapore’s drug policies, which was delivered in Parliament on 8 May 2024.

The former lawyer expressed her concerns in a Facebook post dated 12 May 2024, condemning the government’s approach as ineffective and accusing Mr Shanmugam of abusing parliamentary privilege.

In his parliamentary speech on 8 May, Mr Shanmugam described Singapore’s anti-drug efforts as a “war,” highlighting the immense human cost traffickers inflict by profiting from the drug trade.

He emphasized the grave consequences of the drug problem, characterizing it as a battle with a significant toll on lives.

Mr Shanmugam defended Singapore’s stringent narcotics policies, asserting their effectiveness and broad support among Singaporeans.

However, he criticized certain groups for baselessly attacking these measures and assisting inmates in manipulating legal processes to evade just penalties.

On 12 May, Ms Teo lambasted the ministerial approach, stating, “Minister Shanmugam and many PAP ministers are fond of misusing parliament. ”

“They know that whatever statements made in parliament are privileged. The parties wronged by them would not be able to respond.”

She further lamented the presence of former drug abusers in Parliament, saying, “I don’t know if they would be happy, proud and grateful to him for doing that. But there they were in parliament being entertained by the minister!”

In response, the MHA clarified the intent behind inviting former drug abusers to Parliament: “MHA invited former drug abusers to Parliament to celebrate their courage and resilience in their rehabilitation journey. ”

“They were moved by the tribute given to them in Parliament, and many are now helping other drug abusers to kick the habit as well. Their families were invited too, to recognise the critical role that they played in helping their loved one turn over a new leaf.”

The MHA’s statement also defended the strict drug policies. The MHA acknowledged that while the drug problem cannot be completely eradicated, the goal is to reduce the number of abusers and save lives.

MHA emphasized the negative consequences seen in countries with lenient drug policies, including increased overdose rates and drug-related crime and violence.

The MHA reiterated that the 8 May Ministerial Statement (MS) provided factual accounts of court cases, highlighting unmeritorious applications often filed last-minute to obstruct sentences.

The MS included references to anti-death penalty activists who assisted in these applications and mentioned the issuance of POFMA notices for falsehoods related to these prisoners.

Criticism of consistent harsh treatment and ineffective targeting of major drug dealers

In a statement issued on 21 May, Ms Teo rejected the allegation that she thought “poorly of former drug abusers.”

She emphasized her history of advocating for the weak and her role in founding the Criminal Legal Scheme of the Law Society. She also highlighted her past stance against the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew when he undermined the Law Society.

Ms Teo clarified that her concern about the television coverage of former drug addicts and their families was based on the sensitivity surrounding their past.

She accepted that her concern was unnecessary, given the minister’s assurance that all individuals were aware of the media coverage.

On tackling drug issues, she asserted that the death penalty is not an effective solution to drug problems.

“People resort to drugs for many reasons. To believe that the death penalty will solve Singapore’s drug crimes is too simplistic. ”

She criticized the consistency in the harsh treatment of drug offenders under successive ministers, noting that while the laws severely penalize drug mules, the major drug dealers often evade capture.

“And so it is hard for me to accept that the death penalty works. If it did, no one should be caught for drug trafficking today as the death penalty has been our law for nearly 50 years now. ”

Ms Teo expressed solidarity for activists who stand up for the powerless, particularly those assisting death row prisoners.

She defended the practice of filing last-minute legal applications to save lives, citing the example of Yong Vui Kong, whose life was spared due to such efforts. She argued that dismissing these applications as unmeritorious overlooks the potential to save lives.

While Minister Shanmugam waived his parliamentary privilege regarding the Ministerial Statement, allowing anyone to take legal action if they find the contents actionable, Ms Teo highlighted a recurring issue with many PAP ministers: their reluctance to engage in debates.