MARTIAL ARTS INSTRUCTION BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

4.08 p.m.

The Minister for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Chua Sian Chin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Hitherto, the Government has adopted a laissez-faire policy towards martial arts organisations in Singapore. This is because these organisations like the Chinese pugilistic organisations, the bersilat and judo clubs, etc., have been in existence for many years and have become part of the cultural life of our population. Hence any exponent of these arts is free to practise or to impart his skill to whoever wants to learn the art. The Government considers that the discipline and the training provided in acquiring the skill will develop a "healthy mind and healthy body" and thus help to build a rugged society in our Republic. These organisations were, therefore, allowed to function without impediment.

In recent years there has been a proliferation of martial arts organisations in Singapore. At the end of 1973, there were 128 martial arts organisations registered in Singapore compared to only 32 in 1963. It is difficult to estimate the number of trainees learning martial arts, although this has been placed between 13,000 to 18,000. New arts like karate and taekwondo have emerged in Singapore, and variations of these arts like akido, kendo, jiu-jitsu, as well as the different Chinese pugilistic arts have been developed. The rapid growth of these organisations and the increasing number of trainees learning different martial arts can be traced to their popularisation by Chinese films especially from Hongkong and Taiwan in the late 60's which glorify the use of martial arts. These films which emphasise violence and bloodshed were one of the contributory factors resulting in an increase in the crime rate and a rise in violence in the commission of crimes. It is noted that between 1967 and 1969 when these films were widely shown in the Republic, the number of new pugilistic organisations which applied to the Government for registration increased at the rate of 11 to 15 each year compared to very few in the 50's and in the early 60's. Although the Government has imposed strict censorship on these films last year, the number of martial arts organisations applying to the Government for registration has not abated. Up to March this year, there were 133 registered martial arts organisations with 11 new applications under consideration.

The increasing interest amongst our population in martial art training has made many of these organisations become commercial concerns. Some pseudo martial arts organisations have also sprung up to exploit the market. Since there is little or no control over these organisations, any instructor who professes sufficient knowledge of any martial art can organise a class and apply for registration to the Registrar of Societies or the Registrar of Business Names by payment of a small fee. Both the Registrars have no means of checking whether such an instructor is qualified to teach this skill or to whom he should impart his knowledge. Similarly, instructors will readily accept any trainee as a student with scant concern about his background, his purpose in acquiring the art and whether he would benefit from it, so long as he is prepared to meet the fee required for receiving such training. There is, therefore, little control as to who is qualified to teach or who can learn the art.

Because of the laxity in admission and the general availability of these martial arts organisations to the public, many of these organisations have been penetrated by secret society members and the criminal elements who learn martial art to further their own ends. These secret society members use the art in gang clashes to glorify the triad which they belong and also to cow innocent victims from whom they extort money. In a recent study on some 115 pugilistic organisations in Singapore, it was found that 33 of these have been penetrated by secret society elements and 10 of them have elements with adverse security records.

Although it is not the intention of Government to deter anyone who requires martial art training to build up a healthy body and for self-defence, it is recognised that organisations which teach martial art, be it a Chinese pugilistic art, or karate or taekwondo or judo or bersilat, in effect, equip their members with a potential weapon which, if abused, can have serious consequences for their victims and serious implications for the maintenance of law and order. As such, in the interest of society, Government has found it necessary to institute proper controls to regulate the activities of such organisations and to ensure that those whom they teach are not likely to abuse the art that they have acquired. In other words, the knowledge and skill of martial arts in the hands of disciplined and law-abiding persons can be of benefit to both the exponent and society. But if such knowledge and skill were allowed to fall into the wrong hands it can be very dangerous and detrimental to society. Hence, the Martial Arts Instruction Bill before the House.

Martial arts, as defined in the Bill, include karate, taekwondo, judo, akido, kendo, bersilat, kung-fu, jiu-jitsu, or a combination thereof. However, in view of the fact that new forms of martial arts or variations of existing forms of martial arts are introduced into Singapore from time to time, this definition of "martial art" cannot be comprehensive. However, the Minister is empowered by clause 2 (2) to declare any other art of pugilism, fighting, boxing or self-defence to be a martial art for purposes of the Act.

The administration of the Act will be in the hands of a Controller of Martial Arts. Assistant Controllers will also be able to exercise all the powers conferred on the Controller, subject to such limitations as he may impose (clause 3).

Clause 5 of the Bill requires all martial art associations to be registered. The Controller shall refuse registration in the circumstances stipulated in clause 4 (3) and may refuse registration in certain other circumstances stipulated in clause 4 (4). An unregistered martial art association, which is organised in Singapore and whose officers, employees or members provide instruction in any form of martial art in Singapore, will be deemed to be unlawful. It will be an offence for a person to pursue certain activities in connection with unlawful martial art associations (clauses 5, 15, 16, 17 and 18).

Clause 11 empowers the Controller to order any registered martial art association to furnish him with such information as he may require concerning the provision of instruction in any form of martial art at a place of instruction provided by the association or with any document, account or book of the association relating thereto.

Clause 19 seeks to disallow any person from holding office in a registered martial art association if he has been declared, in writing, by the Controller to be unfit to act as an officer of a martial art association. The Controller may make such declaration upon any of the grounds stipulated in clause 19. Any person who acts in contravention of this clause will be liable, on conviction, to a maximum fine of $500 or to a maximum term of imprisonment of six months or to both such fine and imprisonment.

Whenever it appears to the Minister that any officer, employee or member of a registered martial art association provides instruction in any form of martial art at a place of instruction provided by the association in an unlawful manner or for unlawful purposes or for purposes prejudicial to public peace, welfare or good order in Singapore, the Minister may order the cancellation of the registration of the association. A similar power is conferred upon the Minister where the association has contravened any provision of the Act or any regulations made thereunder.

No person except an instructor who is in possession of an instructor's certificate issued under the Act may instruct any person in any form of martial art (clause 21). The Controller will be responsible for granting instructor's certificates. Clause 25 (3) stipulates the grounds on which the Controller may refuse to grant an instructor's certificate. Clause 26 empowers the Controller to revoke, cancel or suspend an instructor's certificate for any of the reasons stipulated in that clause.

No person may receive instruction in any form of martial art from an instructor unless he is registered as a trainee under the Act (clause 22). The Controller will be responsible for the registration of trainees. Clause 22 stipulates the grounds on which the Controller may refuse to register any person as a trainee. Clause 24 empowers the Controller to revoke, cancel or suspend the registration of a trainee for any of the reasons stipulated in that clause.

Clause 31 provides the Controller and Police officers with the powers of entry, search and arrest, in circumstances where there is reason to believe that an offence has been committed under the Act.

Clause 34 empowers the Minister to exempt any organisation, person or class of persons from any or all of the provisions of the Act. The Minister may also make regulations generally for carrying out the purposes and provisions of the Act (clause 39).

There are transitional provisions in the Bill to cater for those martial art associations which are in existence and for those instructors and trainees who are providing or receiving instruction in any form of martial art, as the case may be before the commencement of the Act (clauses 40 and 41).

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

4.20 p.m.

Mr Seah Mui Kok (Bukit Ho Swee): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Martial Arts Instruction Bill. I would like to inquire from the Minister for Health and Home Affairs whether he would consider encouraging members of the Police force to undergo training in all the various forms of martial arts because in Singapore at the present time a lot of bad hats have some experience in various forms of martial art. Members of the Armed Forces too have a duty to enforce law and order. Therefore, it would be advantageous and necessary, if it is possible, for all members of the Armed Forces to be trained in the martial arts. If there are sufficient instructors, members of the Vigilante Corps should also be encouraged to undergo this kind of training.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill. In recent years the various forms of martial arts, such as the Chinese pugilistic art, Western boxing, wrestling, taekwondo, judo and many others have been found to be very popular with the younger generation. More and more people are learning some form of martial art. The Bill introduced by the Minister, therefore, seeks to exercise certain control over the instruction and training of the various forms of martial art, so as to ensure their proper guidance and development.

The Chinese pugilistic arts have a very long history, whereas the development of martial arts in Singapore has been very active only in recent years. I remember a few years ago after a Chinese martial art organisation was formed, much assistance was given to its various members. Its members have contributed to many items of activity for our National Day celebrations and other festivals. I refer to the Singapore Federation of Pugilistic Association. Their contributions include the lion dance, the dragon dance and other performances for our various celebrations, particularly on National Day.

The Bill requires instructors and members of any martial art organisation to be registered and perhaps screened so that there can be proper control over them. This is very good indeed because those people who learn the martial arts comprise all kinds of people, including dubious elements. So if by legislation we can ensure that the members of these organisations are all disciplined and law-abiding people, then it is a law that will indeed do good for Singapore.

I have several suggestions to make to the Minister. The Bill provides for the appointment of a Controller of Martial Arts who will have to exercise administrative control over martial arts. However, I would like to know whether he will be someone well versed in the martial arts. I suppose he is expected to be conversant with all forms of martial arts. If not, he should at least be conversant with certain forms of martial arts, so that he will be capable of exercising judgment when reviewing applications. Secondly, with regard to the registration of private martial art organisations, or institutes as they call them, I understand some of these organisations are recruiting trainees in kung-fu or some kind of pugilistic art. I would like to ask whether these martial art institutes have to be registered under the Bill before they can carry out their enrolment exercise.

4.28 p.m.

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon (Tiong Bahru): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, following the call by the Government to all citizens to be strong and healthy, many martial art organisations have sprung up, and more and more people are joining these institutes to take up martial arts. But these people have different motives. Some learn it as a form of exercise to improve their health; while others have ulterior motives. So the introduction of this Bill is very timely and also very useful.

However, there are several points which I would like the Minister to clarify. First, the definition of martial arts. For instance, the so-called kung-fu, as I understand it, is a Chinese form of pugilistic art. However, its connotation is very wide. There should be a more clear-cut definition of kung-fu. Another instance is tai-chi. It should be made clear whether or not tai-chi, or shadow boxing, is to be classified under this definition. There are many old folks performing the tai-chi in the parks and other places. They even include old crones, grandmothers and grandfathers, and they go to the Botanic Gardens as well. Therefore, there should be a proper definition of martial arts so that the Director of Botanic Gardens will not mistake the exercises of these old people for something unlawful. Secondly, with regard to instructors which the Member for Sembawang has also touched upon, they have to apply to the Controller for an instructor's certificate. Before the Controller of Martial Arts issues such certificates, he has to be satisfied with the applicant's character and morals. But, in addition to this, the Controller should also make sure that the applicant is well qualified in the particular martial art in which he wishes to instruct.

The third point is about registration of trainees. The Minister has given a detailed explanation on this point. The idea is to exercise some control over these people so that they may not utilise their skill for criminal purposes. Therefore, the registration of trainees is very important. I remember that in the past, when one wished to be enrolled for the boxing or weight-lifting classes run by the community centres, one's name would be sent for screening. But such practice has ceased now. I think it is necessary to revive such practice.

Another aspect is that if a community centre wants to provide instruction in certain forms of martial art, the centre concerned must first take its environment into consideration whether or not such form of martial art is worthwhile to be introduced to the people around. For illustration purposes, I would like to quote one example of the community centres in my constituency. Martial art classes, such as karate, etc, are conducted in the Tiong Bahru Community Centre, and many people have been taking part in these classes. A number of people who live around the Kim Tian Community Centre have also requested for such classes to be conducted there. But I opposed the suggestion because we frequently read in the newspapers about gang fights among secret society members around that area. So I feel that martial art classes should not be allowed in certain areas.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the hon. Members who have spoken in strong support of the Bill. There is nothing more for me to add except to answer a few queries which Members have brought up. The first is from the Member for Bukit Ho Swee. He asked whether some form of martial art training is being given to Police officers. In fact, in the training of Police officers, they are given training on what is called unarmed combat. With regard to the VCs, particularly those who are now engaged in the community security force policing, they are also being taught or given training in unarmed combat as well.

With regard to the queries brought up by the Member for Sembawang, who I understand is an honorary adviser to a pugilistic association, he asked whether the Controller of Martial Arts will be a person well versed in martial arts. May I say that he would have knowledge of martial arts but he need not necessarily be an exponent of martial arts.

The Member also asked whether all martial arts associations must be registered. If they come within the definition of "martial arts" as has been defined in the Bill, they will have to be registered.

The point brought up by the Member for Tiong Bahru is with regard to the definition of martial arts. I have in my speech given the definition as provided by the Bill. "Martial art" is defined to include taekwondo, judo, akido, kendo, bersilat, kung-fu, jiu-jitsu or a combination or variation thereof. However, as I have also stated, the definition cannot be exhaustive because it has a very wide meaning, and therefore the Minister has been given powers to declare any other art of pugilism, fighting, boxing or self-defence to be a martial art for the purposes of the Act. The purpose of the Act is to control the people who have acquired the skill so that they would not use it for their own ends, in other words, for criminal purposes. That is the wide basis on which the definition is made.

The Member brought up the specific example of tai-chi, or shadow boxing. I do not know very much about tai-chi. From what I can gather, tai-chi is actually a form of exercise and not necessarily a form of self-defence where one can cause injury to another person. If it is brought to my notice that it can cause injury, then I will exercise my powers under the Bill and classify it as a martial art. If it is just a form of exercise and cannot cause injury, then I will not consider it as a form of martial art. The word "martial" means "pertaining to warfare". So it must be an aggressive art, although used in self-defence. But I think an exponent of martial arts will be able to advise me whether tai-chi should or should not be considered a martial art. I do not want to decide on the matter right now.

With regard to the point brought up by the Member for Tiong Bahru about what sort of instructors will be issued with certificates, of course, firstly, they will be screened and if they have a criminal record, then they will not be issued with instructors' certificates. Secondly, on the question of what sort of skill they should have, unless we have a board of examiners, we are unable to judge the skill of an instructor. But so long as an applicant has genuine skills and is not a pseudo, he may be certified as an instructor.

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 Chua Sian Chin].

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.10 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.42 p.m. until 5.10 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.10 p.m.