19 Jun 2023
19 June 2023
Mr Morris Tidball-Binz
Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions
Mr Matthew Gillett
Vice-Chair on Communications of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
Ms Margaret Sattherthwaite
Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
Mr Fernand de Varennes
Special Rapporteur on minority issues
Dear Special Procedures Mandate Holders,
I refer to your Joint Urgent Appeal (“JUA”) dated 25 April 2023 [Ref: UA SGP 2/2023].
Singapore’s position on capital punishment and its use against drug-related offences has been reiterated on numerous occasions to the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council.[1] We have also explained why the trafficking of large quantities of drugs constitutes a “most serious crime” for Singapore, and provided empirical evidence of capital punishment’s effectiveness as a deterrent, including in our latest response to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on 28 April 2023.[2]
I would like to address certain allegations about the case regarding Tangaraju s/o Suppiah (“Tangaraju”) and about Singapore’s criminal justice system, made in the JUA, some of which have been addressed in our previous responses.
Clarifications on Tangaraju’s Case
You cited information alleging that Tangaraju “had asked for a Tamil interpreter for the statements taken during the police investigation, which was refused by the relevant authorities at the time of the interrogations”. You suggested that Tangaraju’s right to a fair trial had been compromised as a result.
These allegations are false. During the trial, the High Court heard the claim that Tangaraju had been denied access to a Tamil interpreter when his statement was taken during investigations. The High Court found the claim to be “disingenuous”; Tangaraju had admitted during cross-examination that he had not requested an interpreter for any of the other statements that were subsequently recorded from him. The High Court also noted that Tangaraju had not raised this claim prior to his cross-examination.
Tangaraju was accorded full due process under the law. He was convicted of abetting the trafficking of 1,017.9 grammes of cannabis and sentenced to capital punishment after an extensive trial in the High Court. Tangaraju appealed against his conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal. Throughout the process, Tangaraju had access to legal counsel. At all times, he also had the right to seek a pardon of his sentence under Article 22P of the Singapore Constitution.
Singapore’s Criminal Justice System is Fair and Impartial
Regrettably, you repeated the allegation that Singapore’s criminal justice system discriminates against ethnic minorities and the economically disadvantaged, despite our previous clarifications.[3] Singapore’s laws apply equally to all, regardless of race and nationality. Ethnicity and socio-economic status play no part in the professional discharge of duties by law enforcement agencies, in the prosecutorial decisions of the Public Prosecutor, and in the decisions of the Courts. Those who break the law do not receive differentiated treatment based on race, nationality, socio-economic status, or any other demographic characteristics.
In Singapore, capital sentences are imposed only after a rigorous legal process with stringent safeguards. For example:
You may wish to note that Singapore has consistently been ranked 1st in East Asia and the Pacific and amongst the top seven countries in the world for “Criminal Justice” in the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index over the past 10 years.
Drug Offences Pose Severe Harm to Society
Capital punishment in Singapore is only applied against the most serious crimes which cause grave harm to others and to society. This includes the trafficking of large amounts of drugs.
Drug abuse is a problem with severe consequences for not only individuals but the entire society. It has caused a host of social, economic, and health-related problems, including increased crime rates, lower productivity, and a greater burden on healthcare resources. For example:
Singapore cannot afford such high costs to our society and our people.
It is unfortunate that you have neglected to consider the severe harms of drug abuse and the right of people to live in a drug-free environment, and chose instead to focus only on the circumstances of the drug traffickers, which is a result of their own decisions to traffic drugs.
Capital Punishment has Deterred Serious Crimes
You claim that “there is no convincing evidence worldwide” that capital punishment has a deterrent effect on the commission of crimes, including the trafficking of large amounts of drugs. In Singapore’s experience, capital punishment has had a clear, deterrent effect on serious crimes. For example:
Both offences are now extremely rare in Singapore.
Capital punishment has also proven to be a strong deterrent against drug trafficking:
More recently, a study in 2021 which surveyed over 7,200 people from countries in the region where the drug traffickers arrested in Singapore mostly originate, found that:
It is therefore not true that capital punishment “has never been proved to be an effective deterrent for crimes, including drug related offences”.
No Customary International Law against Capital Punishment
There is no basis to assert that the imposition of capital punishment for drug offences is a breach of international law. There is no international consensus against the use of capital punishment when it is imposed in accordance with the due process of law and judicial safeguards. There is also no international consensus that capital punishment amounts to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as you have alleged.
Every country has the sovereign right to determine its own criminal justice system, considering its own circumstances and in accordance with its international law obligations. This right should be respected.
People in Singapore desire to live in a drug-free society. Singaporeans know the immense harms that drugs can bring. There is strong public support for our laws against drug trafficking.
Singapore’s position on capital punishment has been longstanding and consistent. We will continue to implement measures that have worked well for us in our fight against drugs.
Yours sincerely,
UMEJ BHATIA
Ambassador and Permanent Representative
[1] The record of Singapore’s responses to the Special Procedures can be found at the following weblink: https://www.mfa.gov.sg/Overseas-Mission/Geneva/Mission-Updates/2022/09/Singapore-Reply-Joint-Urgent-Appeals-from-SPMH-16-Sep-2022.
[2] Singapore’s response of 28 April 2023 to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights can be found at the following weblink: https://www.mfa.gov.sg/Overseas-Mission/Geneva-UN/Mission-Updates/2023/04/RAVINA-SHAMDASANI-ON-SCHEDULED-EXECUTIONS-IN-SINGAPORE.
[3] I had addressed similar allegations in previous JUAs from the Special Procedures in my replies dated 16 May 2022 and 16 September 2022 to UA SGP 05/2022 and UA SGP 08/2022 respectively.