VOLUNTARILY CAUSING HURT AS NON-SEIZABLE CRIME

VOLUNTARILY CAUSING HURT AS NON-SEIZABLE CRIME:

(Review of non-seizable classification): 14.

Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether his Ministry will review or refine the classification of voluntarily causing hurt as a non-seizable crime, especially in cases where the victim has suffered injuries requiring medical treatment.

The Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, it is not necessary to review the classification of the offence of voluntarily causing hurt (VCH) as a non-seizable offence at this time. Last year, 8,288 cases of alleged voluntarily causing hurt were reported to Police. Making the offence a seizable one will tie down Police's resources considerably and hamper its delivery of service in more critical areas. But more than just the numbers, these are cases where the facts may not be easily established.

However, it does not mean that an aggrieved party has no recourse. He has. Let me explain. The offence of VCH covers a wide range of behaviour, involving differing severity of hurt and encompassing entirely different factual matrices: some involve disputes between neighbours, family members and even

Column:234

friends; others involve domestic workers or public transport employees. Currently, Police takes a calibrated approach which gives it the latitude to deal with each case on its particular circumstances to derive a positive outcome.

Even though a non-seizable offence is one where Police may not ordinarily arrest without warrant, this does not, however, mean that Police does not take any action in relation to such cases. This is because when a VCH case is reported, Police will respond to the scene to gather preliminary evidence. Based on this, they will make an assessment as to the proper course of action to take. Cases where the hurt is not serious are best resolved without extensive Police involvement. For example, in the common scenario involving a dispute between neighbours or friends in the heat of the moment, Police will usually try to persuade the parties to reach an amicable resolution without escalating the matter.

When the dispute is not amicably settled and the aggrieved party wishes to pursue the case, Police will advise him to make a Magistrate's complaint in the Subordinate Courts as provided for under the law, and furnish him with the requisite form to do so. There have been instances where, once the heat of the moment has passed, the aggrieved party calms down and decides not to pursue the matter further. If a complaint is lodged, the Magistrate may decide to send the disputing parties for mediation, for example, under the auspices of the Community Mediation Centre. It is appropriate that other stakeholders, such as Justices of the Peace and community mediators, be involved in these relational disputes. The Magistrate may also direct Police to further investigate the case, which was done for about 10% of the reported VCH cases last year.

Over the past three years, for about 10% of the reported cases, as there was

Column:235

clear harm to the public interest and safety, particularly in a situation where the perpetrator takes advantage of someone weak or vulnerable or someone performing a public service, Police initiated action on behalf of the victim and applied for an order from the Public Prosecutor to investigate the matter. In some other cases, the victim may suffer injuries which, though falling short of being grievous as defined by the law, may still require hospitalisation for medical treatment. In such instances, Police will consider initiating action.

Ms Sylvia Lim (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have four supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State.

The first is regarding the rising trend in the number of reported VCH cases. In a written answer to me in October last year, I was told that in 2005, there were about 5,500 cases; in 2006, it jumped about 900 cases to 6,400; and now in 2007, we were just told that it has come to 8,800 cases, which is a jump of more than 2,000 cases. So, my first question is: does this significant increase in the number of cases not suggest that tougher actions need to be taken in respect of VCH as a crime?

Secondly, Sir, there have been indications that the public does not quite agree with the Ministry's stand on this matter as, apart from the cases of familiarity, there have also been quite violent stranger transactions. For example, most recently in December, a businessman had his head smashed against a car in Wheelock Place and it was classified as VCH, even though he needed four stitches in that instance. Does maintaining the status quo not undermine the public's sense of safety, since VCH has such a wide coverage in terms of the scenarios envisaged?

Column:236

Thirdly, Sir, there may be a need for us to recalibrate how we classify seizable and non-seizable cases. Just to take an example - if I were to scratch Prof. Ho's car, it will be vandalism and it will be seizable; but if I punched him in a private capacity and his nose bled, then it is not seizable. I think the public finds this rather non-sensible, and there may be a need for us to re-look at VCH.

Last of all, I have a suggestion. If the Ministry is not minded to be persuaded that at least when it comes to classification of grievous hurt, perhaps we could re-look at what amounts to grievous hurt. Under the Penal Code, currently, you need to be emasculated, to have bone fractures or to be out of action for about 20 days before grievous hurt is made out. Is this bar not too high? Are we setting too high a tolerance for violence?

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: On the first point about the rising number of incidents of people disputing and causing hurt to each other, I think that is a situation where, as a society, we should take note. As a society, different parties can play different roles. That is why, for example, the CMCs have been formed, so that people who are in dispute, even before they hurt each other, at an early stage, they themselves or the grassroots leaders can persuade them to settle their dispute. We have recognised this long ago as a function of living in an urbanised society, fairly high pressured, where people live in close proximity in some instances and, therefore, the numbers of relational disputes have risen.

But, having said this, it has not therefore changed the fact that the nature of the dispute is still essentially one where two parties hurt each other, sometimes in circumstances where it is difficult for the Police to establish fault or liability because

Column:237

they are not there. They were not there to see how it started or who provoked who and what happened. Therefore, these are disputes where it is good to interpose third parties. I think that is the nub of this process where, unless grievous hurt is caused or in instances where public safety is involved, ie, road-bully cases, or where the victims are vulnerable (like young children, infirm or mentally-challenged people), the Police has initiated action. Or, like I said, when somebody from a public service (eg, bus captain, car park attendant) has been hurt.

In the other cases where it does not constitute grievous hurt, third parties are interposed so that the aggrieved party who is a complainant is given an opportunity to ventilate his complaint. In fact, over the last few years, Police has made it easier for him to lodge a complaint with the Magistrate, helping him furnish a form and, in fact, letting him know who to contact at the Police station if he or she needs help. Then, he decides for himself whether he wants to initiate that process. Because he may calm down and, in some cases, after calming down, the parties decide they will not want to go ahead. And if he lodges a complaint, the Magistrate then assesses what is the best course of action to take. The Magistrate, in many instances, will direct the Police to investigate, because the Magistrate feels that, given the nature of the hurt, the circumstances in which the hurt has taken place, yes, there should be further investigation. So, he decides after due deliberation. Or the Magistrate may think that this is a case that he should send for mediation. So, mediation involves the community mediators, Justices of the Peace. In many of these cases that are sent for mediation, the parties actually make up, which is better. Because, otherwise, if it goes to Court, some of these cases where hurt takes place, in

Column:238

fact, this is a situation where it is better for the parties to make up.

So, interposition of the third party is important. Causing hurt - I would agree with Ms Sylvia Lim - is serious. But that does not naturally therefore mean that we should classify it as voluntarily causing grievous hurt. We have signalled the fact that we do view causing hurt as serious because we amended the Penal Code and we raised the punishment from one year to two years (maximum punishment), fine of $1,000 to $5,000, if I am not wrong. I stand corrected. But I think that is the enhanced punishment.

But still, in terms of the process, the process must remain like that because do not forget, if we make cases where the hurt is not discernible, visible and clear, what it means is that we are empowering the Police under the Penal Code to have special powers, if it is classified as voluntarily causing grievous hurt, ie, powers of arrest or powers to summon witnesses. In some of these altercations between neighbours, for example, or between family members, in fact, it may be difficult for the Police to ascertain who is at fault and therefore who to arrest. Just because the complainant lodges the complaint does not mean that the other party should be the party who is arrested because he or she is at fault.

We have thought very deeply about this situation. We know that there are Singaporeans out there who feel that the Police should do more. But I think I should paint this context, that the Police is not deaf to these calls and, therefore, in the appropriate case, the Police will indeed investigate and they have done so in many of these cases.

Mr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim, last question.

Ms Sylvia Lim: Sir, last two questions. Yes, I acknowledge that in the last Penal Code review, the punishment for VCH has

Column:239

gone up but the classification as a non-seizable case still remains. In fact, in letters written by the public to the press recently, they were basically asking, "If they witness such an incident and is non-seizable, should they even bother to call the Police?" Because they are basically setting themselves up for disappointment and it jeopardises their sense of safety. So I think the classification of whether it is seizable or not is still relevant. And if the Ministry has concerns about what kind of relationship should be in or out, we can discuss that further.

Mr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim, please ask your question.

Ms Sylvia Lim: Yes. Sir, the last point is that there has also been public sentiment that somehow hurt caused to public officials is taken much more seriously than hurt caused to the ordinary citizens, and there is an indication that they feel that, somehow, they are treated as less valuable. What is the Minister's comment to that?

Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: I think, clearly, the case must be that if a person is performing a public service and he is hurt in the process, like a bus captain or carpark attendant, the Police has every reason to initiate action. Otherwise, it will undermine their ability to perform the public service. I think that is very clear. But on the other side, I would say the Police is prepared to be more flexible in cases where, like I said, it may not constitute grievous hurt, in terms of the hurt that is caused. But in terms of the situation that arises, if the offence, for example, takes place in a public place where there are other witnesses involved and where if the hurt is not as high or as grievous but it is serious enough, in those situations, I would expect the Police to at least seriously consider initiating action.