A New Record for Singapore?

Singapore could be the world's most vocal advocate for the death penalty.

ST Nov 17, 2007
UN resolution calls for capital punishment to be suspended
Singapore leads the charge against non-binding resolution that polarises members

UNITED NATIONS - A UNITED Nations General Assembly committee has passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on executions with the ultimate goal of abolishing the practice.

The non-binding resolution was given the green light on Thursday after two days of fractious and often bad-tempered debate - with Italy leading the anti-execution camp and Singapore heading the charge for the other side.

The draft proposal was introduced by 87 countries, including 27 European Union (EU) states.

In the end, 99 countries voted for a suspension of capital punishment worldwide, 52 voted against and 33 abstained.

In arguing against the resolution, Singapore said capital punishment is a criminal law issue which should be left to countries to decide.

Singapore's permanent representative to the UN, Mr Vanu Gopala Menon, said ahead of the vote that the EU co-sponsors were trying 'to impose a particular set of beliefs on everyone else'.

'How else can this behaviour be described other than as sanctimonious, hypocritical and intolerant,' he said.

"You are so intolerant!" Mr Menon cries out to 99 countries in the world. "Why won't you let me kill people just the way I please." No doubt Mr Menon would think that I am sanctimonious, hypocritical and intolerant too. After all, I am against the death penalty.

There are so many worthy causes in the world that Singapore could potentially champion. Singapore could, for example, use the United Nations to lobby for more coordinated international action to deal with global warming - this is very relevant for us, since rising sea levels pose a threat especially to small island states.

Instead we go to the United Nations, and we forcefully devote our energies into arguing for our sovereign right to kill people. How shameful - and stupid.
Gadis Bispak Imut

• Lihat Foto
• Lihat Foto

Self-Delusion

ST Forum May 11, 2007
Singapore stance correct on global war on terror

I REFER to the letter, 'Singapore's stance may offend friendly nations' (ST, May9), by Mr Retnam Thillainathan. The writer is alarmed at Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong expressing his strong support for the United States' continued presence in Iraq, as he is afraid of a backlash from other countries against the occupation.

As a dynamic and pragmatic politician, PM Lee will surely be well acquainted with the reasons put forth by President George W. Bush to justify the rationale for war. These include ending Saddam Hussein's almost 40 years of human rights abuse; his track record of waging wars against his neighbours such as Iran and Kuwait; his production of weapons of mass destruction; his use of chemical weapons on Kurdish and Iranian civilians; his proven contacts with terrorist groups in the past; and warnings from Russia that Saddam was planning terrorist attacks against the US before 2003.

Among the other reasons are protecting the United States' allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait; helping Iraq's transition to democratic self-rule; ending sanctions against Iraq (which hurt civilians the most); and delivering humanitarian support after the end of these sanctions.

The invasion of Iraq was touted by the US as part of the global war on error, launched as a result of the Sept 11, 2001 attacks. As a staunch ally of the US and knowing that Singapore, an iconic global city, is an attractive target for terrorists, PM Lee has clearly made his stand on the war on terror.

In Iraq, the government, police and military are unlikely to restore law and order any time soon. Bombings, murders and kidnappings continue to take place daily. A complete pullout of US soldiers will surely plunge the country into anarchy and civil war.

A fledgling nation's transition to self-rule, already in motion, will take time after nearly 40 years of tyranny.

I applaud our PM for boldly coming out in support of one of our staunchest allies. It sends a strong signal to the international community that Singapore is a sovereign nation, which does not bend in the direction of the wind generated by other friendly countries, and we have a leader who is not afraid to speak his mind.

Edmund Khoo Kim Hock

Should the US stay on in Iraq? And should Singapore express support for the US, if the US chose to do so? You could argue these questions either way, and either way, there is room for reasonable, intelligent arguments. Edmund Khoo's arguments, however, are severely misguided.

If I were PM Lee, I'd cringe. I would prefer to have no readers writing to the press to support me, than to have a reader like Edmund Khoo writing to the press to support me with such embarrassingly mistaken arguments.

I feel a bit exhausted looking at Edmund's letter. It makes so many errors I don't know where to start correcting them. History is so badly twisted in his letter that it doesn't even feel like history anymore, more like a tale from a parallel universe in a science fiction novel.

I feel like a teacher confronted with the ultimate F essay, an essay written by a student so stupid it's wrong to want to smack his head. I think I'll take the easy way out and let Jimmy Mun do the talking.

Gadis Bispak Imut

• Lihat Foto
• Lihat Foto

More on Extradition

At this point in time, I don't have much to say on this topic. I'm posting the two articles below for my future reference. From the Jakarta Post:

S'pore extradition treaty and fight against corruption
Opinion News - Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Adnan Topan Husodo, Jakarta

Indonesia finally signed extradition and defense treaties with Singapore on April 27. Indonesia had previously signed similar extradition treaties with Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Philippines, Australia and Thailand. China and Canada are the next targets.

The new treaty reaffirms the public conviction that corruption is a transnational crime. It is undeniable that embezzlers have so far been free to carry the fruits of corruption out of Indonesia. They have even been able to launder that stolen money through various investments and businesses, which are -- to a certain extent -- very profitable for these people's host countries.

On one side, this kind of activity is very damaging to the country where the corruption originally takes place (locus delicti). Stolen state wealth can no longer be allocated for the social and economic needs of the population.

On the other side, that same money helps develop the economy of the country where corruption fugitives end up. As long as there is no international cooperation to combat corruption, imbalances and inequalities will remain between countries. This is what has happened between Singapore and Indonesia.

The extradition treaty between Indonesia and Singapore as a result needs to be looked at with the collective awareness that corruption can not only be eradicated in the country where the crimes take place. This is in line with the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC, 2003), which emphasizes the importance of international cooperation in combating corruption. No less than 138 countries have ratified the convention.

Unfortunately, Singapore is not one of them.

However, Singapore's goodwill in signing the extradition treaty deserves our appreciation. The signing also shows Singapore's successful diplomacy and a more open attitude to solving problems related to transnational crime.

There are at least three important points of substance in the extradition treaty.

First is the list of economic crimes agreed to by Indonesia and Singapore.

Second is the 15-year retroactive period, which enables the government to hunt embezzlers from the Soeharto era, along with their assets.

The last is the agreement to return the assets to Indonesia. Because this is a reciprocal treaty, Singapore can also in theory get the same from Indonesia.

For the Indonesian government, there are some important things to take into account. The extradition treaty with Singapore will not automatically facilitate the legal processes to bring the corrupt to justice.

There are examples where Indonesia's extradition treaties have failed.

There is the example of banker Hendra Rahardja, an Indonesian tried in absentia for corruption while living in Australia. Hendra remained in Australia until his death because the Australian courts would not allow the banker to be deported to Indonesia out of mistrust of the integrity of
Indonesian courts.

Each country has its own different legal mechanisms. This factor can influence the process by which extradition treaties are realized.

Indonesia needs to anticipate from the outset all possible technical and legal barriers to extradition. This is important because many Indonesians expect much from the government to bring these fugitives back to Indonesia.

This extradition treaty is a strategic bilateral mechanism to effectively combat corruption. There are a lot of mega-corruption cases out there, both from the past and the present day. In particular its worth remembering the Bank of Indonesia emergency liquidity funds scandal (BLBI), which inflicted huge financial losses on the government.

Most of the BLBI suspects have fled Indonesia. One of their safe havens is Singapore. According to Indonesian Corruption Watch's (ICW) records, 43 of them are now residing abroad, 13 in Singapore. Some of them have become permanent residents.

Although we have already signed the extradition treaty, it would be impossible to depend on Singapore's political will alone to eradicate corruption. The government needs to be much more serious about bringing the crooks to justice. There is widespread public suspicion that criminals have been easily able to run away from Indonesia with the help of government officials.
This can happen because of poor coordination among state agencies, as well as bribery.

We hope the extradition treaty with Singapore will accelerate the process of legal reform in Indonesia. If we fail to do that, other countries will conclude that Indonesia is not serious about eradicating major corruption. If that is the truth, why should they help us?

The writer is member of the working committee of Indonesia Corruption Watch. He can be reached at topan@antikorupsi.org.

And from the Straits Times:

ST May 9, 2007
Jakarta seeks extradition of 15 over 'stolen funds'
New A-G lays out his priorities; getting those believed to be 'hiding millions in S'pore' among them
By INDONESIA CORRESPONDENT, Salim Osman

JAKARTA - INDONESIA will seek the extradition of 15 businessmen believed to be hiding millions of dollars in stolen state funds in Singapore, its newly-appointed Attorney-General said yesterday.

The extradition issue was on Mr Hendarman Supanji's 'to do' list when he laid out his priorities before reporters yesterday after being named Attorney-General in a Cabinet reshuffle the day before.

The top priority, according to a report in the Suara Pembaruan evening daily, was to set his own house in order by 'cleaning up' the prosecutors' office.

'One of my first tasks...is to take firm action against unscrupulous prosecutors who abuse their positions and break the law of the land,' said Mr Supanji.

He was referring to strings of cases involving prosecutors accused of demanding bribes and extorting money from suspects.

As for the extradition cases, he did not release details of the 15 on his wanted list.

But local media have identified them as ethnic Chinese Indonesians, many of whom owned commercial banks when the banking system collapsed nearly a decade ago during the Asian financial crisis.

An extradition treaty was signed with Singapore last month, but it has not yet become law. The document covers 31 crimes - including terrorism financing, bribery and related acts of corruption - and applies retroactively to crimes that took place up to 15 years ago.

Indonesia has also signed similar pacts with Malaysia, the Philippines and Hong Kong, and is negotiating similar treaties with China and Canada.

Mr Supanji became the top prosecutor in a Cabinet shake-up under President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono aimed partially at countering allegations of being weak on corruption.

He made it clear yesterday that he would come down hard on other areas where dodgy practices are rife. His office would soon summon a number of businessmen who had not settled their loans from the state through Bank Indonesia's credit facilities, or BLBI, which caused trillions of rupiah in state losses.

The Koran Tempo daily website also quoted him as saying that he would target misappropriation of funds at government agencies and aim to stop 'leaks' from state budgets.

The new Attorney-General also pledged that his office would press ahead with a probe into the use of a Justice Ministry bank account for the release of millions of dollars to former president Suharto's son, Tommy, while he was in prison for murder.

Gadis Bispak Imut

• Lihat Foto
• Lihat Foto

The Hungry Island

In early February, the Singapore government announced its plans to eventually support and sustain 6.5 million people on our little island. Right now we're already the 2nd most crowded country in the world.

Blogger Alex Au (aka Yawning Bread) was not too concerned about this. In his analysis, he considered three broad areas - housing, transport and leisure. Alex gave examples of how it could or would be possible to create adequate space in Singapore for 6.5 million people. For example, build taller flats; build more train lines; build more linkways between buildings; build taller shopping centres and cineplexes.

All his suggestions share one common element - build. Perhaps that's what has recently terrified Indonesia. Construction requires concrete, and concrete requires sand, and Singapore has little of its own. So we must get what we need from our neighbours.

According to the Times article below, in 1965 Singapore was 581 sq km (224 sq miles); but by 2007, it had grown to 650 sq km and also plans to acquire another 100 sq km in the next 30 years. Furthermore it is not merely that our surface area is expanding; we are also building underground (eg more and more MRT lines) and upwards (taller and taller buildings) and all these activities require natural resources.

When we see things in this light, we may begin to realise that Indonesia may have genuine environmental concerns about Singapore grabbing its sand. Sometimes we may be overly inclined to think of Singapore as the poor whipping boy of its big, nasty neighbours. We might also see the recent sand ban as Singapore's latest whipping. But if you were Indonesia, wouldn't it be legitimate for you to be a little concerned about your vanishing islands?

TIMES March 17, 2007
Singapore accused of land grab as islands disappear by boatload
Richard Lloyd Parry, Asia Editor

With more than 17,000 islands — from the jungly expanses of Borneo and Sumatra to unnamed rocks jutting out of the sea — you may think that Indonesia would not mind if a few of them went missing. But the huge South-East Asian nation has become caught up in a furious dispute with Singapore, its tiny neighbour, which is accused of literally making off with its territory.

Indonesia has banned the export of sand and imposed strict controls on shipments of gravel, after fears that its islands were being loaded on to ships and carried away to Singapore. In its thirst for building materials and landfill to reclaim new territory from the sea, Indonesians allege, Singapore has been stealing the land beneath their feet.

The dispute reached a climax this week after 24 tugs and barges, carrying granite chips, were intercepted by the Indonesian authorities as they sailed home to Singapore. Jakarta announced that future exports would be allowed only if the granite could be certified as environmentally friendly.

Since Indonesia announced its ban on sand in February, the price of a cubic metre of it has increased more than seven times, from S$6.5 (£2.18) to S$50. The Indonesian Navy has mobilised 18 ships to intercept gravel pirates and sand bandits.

“Some of these islands are reduced to islets, and could even disappear below the surface,” Hendropriyono, Indonesia’s former intelligence chief, has said. “This could theoretically lead to a cartographic zero-sum game in which Singapore’s gain could be at Indonesia’s territorial loss.”

Relations between Singapore and its neighbours have been tense since the city state became independent from Malaysia in 1965, and disagreements often arise over natural resources. The Singaporean achievement was to create an affluent, highly educated society in a swampy, jungly, malarial island with a population of 4.5 million people at the tip of the Malaysian peninsula.

Singapore’s reliance on its neighbours gives them powerful leverage over it — in the past Malaysia, with whom relations are particularly prickly, has threatened to cut off water supplies across the Straits of Johor. But the sand sanctions are equally threatening.

After years of stagnation, Singapore is undergoing a construction boom, with an increased demand for sand for the manufacture of concrete. The island also has long-term plans to ease its overcrowding by reclaiming land from the sea.

At independence, Singapore was 581 sq km (224 sq miles); now it is 650 sq km and plans to acquire another 100 sq km in the next 30 years. It gets through 1.5 billion cubic metres (2 billion cubic yards) of dredged silica a year — 333 cubic metres for each man, woman and child. The Government has been forced to draw on its strategic sand reserve, which Singapore hoards as other nations keep stocks of oil and food.

There may be more to Indonesia’s position than a sudden rush of environmental conscientiousness. If Indonesia really does lose islands, it also risks losing the rights to the ocean surrounding them. “The Convention on the Law of the Sea dictates that national territory is traced according to the coastal base line, and if islands near Singapore disappear, then the base line is pulled closer to the mainland,” says Mr Hendropriyono. “As it now stands, Singapore is only 20 kilometres from Nipah island, which has been especially eroded by the loss of sand.”

Gadis Bispak Imut

• Lihat Foto
• Lihat Foto