GENEVA CONVENTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL

GENEVA CONVENTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL: Order for Second Reading read.

3.10 pm

The Minister for Health (Mr Khaw Boon Wan): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

In times of armed conflict, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 lay down basic humanitarian rules to be observed by all parties. One such rule is to recognise certain universal symbols which confer protection on authorised emergency relief agencies. These include military medical services and the international relief organisations.

Under the Geneva Conventions, the Red Cross and the Swiss flag, which is the Red Cross with colours reversed, were the original protected symbols. But while the original intention of the Red Cross was to be a universally-recognised neutral emblem, several Islamic countries had objected to its usage. As a result, Red Cross societies were not recognised in these states. In order to enable emergency relief efforts in these states, the Red Crescent and the Red Lion and Sun emblems were created and added to the Geneva Conventions. But these new emblems were themselves viewed by others as possessing religious connotations.

Given these difficulties, the Geneva Conventions introduced another emblem, the Red Crystal. It was designed to be easily recognised and devoid of religious connotations, such that it can be accepted by all countries, regardless of religious orientation. A new protocol, the Third Additional Protocol (APIII) to the Geneva Conventions, was introduced in 2005 to recognise the Red Crystal as an additional universal symbol.

Column: 2529

Singapore subscribes to the Geneva Conventions and we have signed the APIII. To date, 87 countries have signed the APIII and 19 have ratified it. To play our part as an international citizen, my Ministry therefore proposes that Singapore's Geneva Conventions Act be amended and ratified to extend legal protection to all these emblems.

Let me now take this House through the amendments.

First, the use of any of these emblems, including colourable imitations, will not be allowed in Singapore from now onwards unless approval is given by the Ministry of Health. Organisations and businesses, which currently use trademark symbols similar to these distinctive emblems for their products or services, will be given a grace period of up to a year to take the necessary measures to comply with the Act.

Second, the maximum penalty for misuse of any of the emblems will be increased from $1,000 to $10,000.

Third, the amended Act will allow for the appointment of public officers as Inspectors to investigate offences in relation to the misuse of the emblems.

These amendments are necessary to ensure that the distinctive emblems are readily recognised and respected in Singapore as trusted symbols of protection and humanitarian aid.

My Ministry will work with the Singapore Red Cross Society to educate the general public, businesses and other organisations on the importance of respecting these distinctive emblems.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Column: 2530

Dr Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, I rise in support of the amendment Bill.

The Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun and the Red Crystal represent international humanitarian movement emblems with millions of volunteers worldwide whose stated mission is to protect the human race without any discrimination based on nationality, race or religious beliefs. The existence of these movements is aimed at promoting mutual understanding, friendship, cooperation and lasting peace among people the world over. Thus, efforts by the Government to protect all these emblems from being misused are indeed welcome.

I wish to highlight, Sir, that there are many and a variety of organisations and products currently using, in whole or part, some of the emblems in discussion. These may include private ambulance companies, non-Governmental organisations, pharmaceutical companies on the best of healthcare responders to mass casualty and disaster events, and even on T-shirts. No doubt the 12-month grace period is given, but I would like to ask that the Ministry come up with a public awareness and education programme, which I hear they are going to work with the Red Cross Association, on a wide scale to enhance and increase the spread of information to ensure compliance. Perhaps we can also consider writing in to the companies and organisations which are affected informing them of this decision. It could also be publicised on relevant websites as indicated.

Sir, many medical units still have their men carry the Red Cross logo on their arms and armbands and also on their uniforms, essentially to depict that it is a medical response team, or even on the medical response vehicles. It appears to be a universal medical or medical

Column: 2531

response sign. Thus, for this enforcement to be effected and effective, we need that awareness creation, adequate explanation and formal information to be given out adequately. The essence of it all is that the new legislation will prevent any misuse on the use of such symbols. In fact, it is important to have symbols that are easily recognisable; yet, at the same time, acceptable to all people of different faiths and beliefs. It is also only through common acceptance that we can promote better understanding of one another. While we want to encourage our people to be more creative, we would never allow them to break the law

and apply "artistic licence", so called the wrong way, by using these logos for commercial purposes. We should protect these emblems as a symbol of assistance, disaster response and service to vulnerable people. Sir, yesterday there were two members of the public who approached me and asked whether the tone and the shade of the red on the cross would make any difference, and I told them certainly it would. It would again be useful for the Ministry to clarify that publicly.

The appointment of public officers as inspectors to investigate offences in relation to the misuse of the emblems is indeed practical and necessary as it underlies our true intentions of safeguarding and protecting the emblems from being misused. Finally, Sir, would it be possible for the Ministry and perhaps the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore, or IPOS, to assist with the provision of a toll-free number that will allow members of the public to call and inform if they notice any improper use of the emblems.

On that note, Sir, I reiterate my support for the Bill.

Mr Khaw Boon Wan: I thank the Member, Dr Fatimah, for her support of

Column: 2532

the Bill and I certainly agree with her that the Ministry, together with the Singapore Red Cross and IPOS, would raise public awareness and educate the public, especially the companies, corporations and NGOs, not to abuse the law. This morning, while coming to work, three ambulances from three different nursing homes overtook me. I gave way of course. But I paid particular attention to the logos they used. None of the them flouted the Geneva Conventions as they used different but acceptable symbols to do with health, like the traditional serpent. One of them used a red cross, but a stylised cross and in a different colour. So, I think they are permissible symbols. Certainly we will work with IPOS, through their website as well as through their Trademarks Office, to publicise this more.

But I thought I should make a clarification that our SAF medical troops are entitled under the Geneva Conventions to use the Red Cross logo. That is precisely why the Geneva Conventions were formulated for them. So, they are not flouting the law in any way.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Khaw Boon Wan].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.