MISUSE OF DRUGS (AMENDMENT) BILL

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Order for Second Reading read.

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

Sir, the tragedy of drug abuse has been presented in terms of the individual drug abuser and his family. The irreparable damage caused by drug addiction to the health and career of the drug abuser and the sorrow, anxiety and the shame caused to the family has often been emphasised. This, therefore, need not be elaborated upon here.

But what is not sufficiently appreciated is the threat that drug addiction poses to national security and viability. If drug abuse were to be allowed to grow unchecked, particularly among our youths, we would eventually be faced with a dangerous national security problem. In no time we would find that it had penetrated right into the vital and sensitive institutions of the State, like the Police and the Armed Forces.

This, in fact, happened in South Vietnam during those tortuous years of undeclared war and was a major factor leading to its eventual collapse. Drug addiction became rampant and uncontrollable there. It not only sapped the spirit of the soldiers to fight but also undermined their fitness to act out what little spirit that was left in them. Thus from the very onset they had no chance at all despite their superiority in firepower, military hardware and sophisticated gadgetry.

We have some indications that there is a Communist plan to use narcotics to corrupt and soften the population of the various states in South-East Asia for the purposes of subversion and eventual take-over. It is, therefore, vital that we take the severest of action now to forestall it and stop the supply of narcotics into the country and check the spread of drug addiction.

Rampant drug addiction among our young men and women will also strike at the very foundations of our social fabric and undermine our economy. Once ensnared by drug dependence they will no longer be productive digits contributing to our economic and social progress. They will not be able to carry on with their regular jobs. Usually for the young men, they turn to all sorts of crime, and for the girls, to prostitution to get money to buy their badly needed supply of drugs. Thus, as a developing country, our progress and very survival will be seriously threatened.

Singapore, as it is situated, is in a rather vulnerable position. The "Golden Triangle" straddling Thailand, Laos and Burma, which is the source of supply of narcotics, is not far from Singapore. Being a busy port, an important air communication centre and an open coastline easily accessible from neighbouring countries, it makes detection of supplies of narcotics coming in difficult. Further, the manufacture of morphine and heroin is not a complicated process and can be done in as small a space as a toilet. Our Central Narcotics Bureau has intelligence information that much of the heroin brought into Singapore has been manufactured in illicit laboratories clandestinely established in a neighbouring country. The Central Narcotics Bureau also reported that there was an abortive attempt to set up an illicit heroin laboratory in Singapore itself.

Heroin is one of the most potent and dangerous drugs. In the first half of 1974 only nine out of 1,793 drug abusers arrested consumed heroin. In the corresponding period this year 1,007 out of 1,921 drug abusers arrested consumed heroin. Thus the number of heroin abusers arrested increased by almost 112 times in 12 months. This is an explosive increase by any reckoning. Equally significant is the fact that the number of traffickers arrested for dealing in heroin had also increased from six in the first half of 1974 to 26 in the corresponding period this year.

These statistics show clearly that existing penalties under the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1973, have not been a sufficient deterrence to traffickers. In 1974 the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act was invoked to detain traffickers and financiers, and 31 major traffickers and financiers have been detained so far. Despite this threat of indefinite detention, trafficking is still rife. This is because it is lucrative and syndicates are prepared to look after the interests of traffickers and their dependants whenever they are caught and imprisoned.

Clause 13 of this Bill, therefore, seeks to amend the Second Schedule of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1973, so that the death penalty will be imposed for the unauthorised manufacture of morphine and heroin irrespective of amounts involved. The death penalty will also be imposed for the unauthorised import, export or trafficking of more than 30 grammes of morphine or more than 15 grammes of heroin.

A number of countries, including Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Burma, Egypt, Nigeria, Turkey and Iran, have imposed the death penalty for the unauthorised manufacturing, importing, exporting and trafficking of hard drugs such as morphine and heroin. The death penalty provided in the Second Schedule of the Bill is a close parallel to the provisions in the Iranian law in that the death penalty is imposed for the unauthorised manufacture of morphine and heroin irrespective of amounts involved, but in the case of unauthorised trafficking, importing and exporting of those drugs the death penalty is imposed only when the quantities exceed a specified weight.

Under the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1973, trafficking is defined as selling, giving, administering, transporting, sending, delivering and distributing drugs. It is not intended to sentence petty morphine and heroin pedlars to death. It is, therefore, necessary to specify the quantity by weight, exceeding which the death penalty will be imposed. The weights refer to the pure substance. For heroin any quantity in which the pure heroin content is above 15 grammes will attract the death penalty. Such an amount when mixed with adulterants is sufficient to spike some 500 heroin cigarettes. One heroin-spiked cigarette is usually shared by a few beginners. Thus 15 grammes of pure heroin can do considerable damage and ruin a very large number of our youths. As a comparison, Iranian law provides for a mandatory death sentence where the trafficking only involves more than 10 grammes of heroin.

Let me also allay the fear of those who may have the impression that drug addicts might inadvertently be hanged as a result of their having in their possession a controlled drug which contains more than 15 grammes of pure heroin. The heroin that is commonly used by drug abusers and addicts in Singapore is referred to as Heroin No. 3. This is currently sold in little plastic phials, at $32 per phial. It is usually mixed with other substances in the proportions of about 40% pure heroin and 60% adulterants. Each phial contains about 0.8 grammes of the mixed substance. Therefore, a person will only be in danger of receiving the death penalty if he has in his possession some 37.5 grammes of adulterated heroin which contains 40% of pure heroin. This works out to 47 phials. And it costs about $1,500 to buy this amount at the current retail price.

It is, therefore, most unlikely for a person who is in possession of so much heroin to be only a drug addict and not a trafficker. An addict uses between half to one phial of heroin a day. Even if he is rich and can afford it, he does not buy more than two or three phials at a time for fear of being arrested and convicted as a trafficker.

It is not possible to determine the addictive dosage of heroin and morphine to equate the weights of these two drugs for the purpose of imposing the death sentence. This is because the addictive dosage varies from one addict to another depending on the individual's physiology and psychological make-up. Therefore, medicinal dosage is used to differentiate the weights. Since every gramme of heroin is equivalent in medicinal doses to two grammes of morphine, it is provided that trafficking, importing and exporting of a controlled drug containing more than 30 grammes of pure morphine will attract the death penalty.

Although traffickers of morphine and Clause 4 of the Bill makes statutory heroin dealing in quantities up to but not provision for the appointment of the exceeding the specified weights will not be hanged, the Bill provides for heavier sentences for them than those in existence. Similarly, the maximum sentence for the unauthorised trafficking, importing and exporting of opium, cannabis and cannabis resin above a specified quantity is enhanced. For example, the unauthorised trafficking of heroin from 10 grammes to 15 grammes, morphine from 20 grammes to 30 grammes, opium exceeding 6 kilogrammes, cannabis exceeding 10 kilogrammes and cannabis resin exceeding 4 kilogrammes carries the maximum sentence of 30 years imprisonment and 15 strokes of the rotan. Without the amendment such offences would at most be punishable with 20 years imprisonment or a fine of $40,000 or both and 10 strokes of the rotan. The minimum sentence for such offences after the amendment will he 20 years imprisonment and 15 strokes of the rotan. The existing minimum sentence is three years imprisonment or a fine of $5,000 or both and two strokes of the rotan. These stiffer penalties for the lesser offences are introduced to harmonise with the imposition of the death penalty.

Opportunity is also taken to include other amendments in this Bill. I need mention only the more important of these amendments. Clause 5 reduces the quantity of morphine from 5 grammes to 3 grammes and diamorphine (heroin) from 5 grammes to 2 grammes for invoking the presumption of trafficking in these drugs provided in section 15 of the Act. . The morphine and heroin retailed in Singapore contain an average of 40% adulterants and 60% adulterants respectively. Taking this into consideration, the weights are lowered so that the weight of the pure substance is used consistently in defining the offence as well as for specifying the penalties. Director and other officers of the Central Narcotics Bureau, and clause 8 confers on them all the powers of a police officer under the Criminal Procedure Code in relation to an investigation into a seizable offence. Clause 6 introduces a presumption that a person whose urine is found to contain a controlled drug as a result of a urine test has consumed a controlled drug unless the contrary is proved. Further, clause 11 provides the Director of Central Narcotics Bureau with the power to require a person to attend an approved institution for treatment or rehabilitation if, as a result of a urine test, he deems such a course of action necessary. Clause 7 amends section 22 of the Act to make clear that a person arrested by an officer of the Bureau may be taken to the Bureau. All these provisions are to strengthen the hand and facilitate the work of CNB officers in dealing with drug addicts with a view to treatment and rehabilitation.

Although the more severe penalties and some of the other provisions in the Bill are meant to provide the necessary deterrence to drug traffickers and pushers, there will be no slackening in the Government's programme to deal with the drug problem on other fronts. On the one hand, there will be greater deterrence to traffickers to cut off the supply of narcotics, and on the other, every effort will be made to treat and rehabilitate those who have already been hooked on to the drug habit by improved rehabilitation facilities. The Drug Rehabilitation Centre at St John's Island has been enlarged and its facilities upgraded to take in a total number of 600 inmates at a cost of $900,000. The female section of the Centre has been completed and can accommodate 120 female addicts. Now that the Vietnamese refugees have left, the drug addicts are now back at the Centre.

Recently, the Government made available to the Singapore Anti-Narcotics Association a former police post at Rumah Miskin to be used as a half-way house. This half-way house will be used as temporary abode for drug addicts who are unable or not ready to go back to their home environment upon discharge from the Drug Rehabilitation Centre. A comprehensive programme covering enforcement, penalties, treatment and rehabilitation is being built up to combat our drug problem.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

6.20 p.m.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Speaker, Sir, the shocking statistics the Minister has just quoted prove that this Bill needs to be passed. However, I am rather surprised, in fact, shocked, that "this Bill will not involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure."

"Clause 4 makes statutory provision for the appointment of the Director of Central Narcotics Bureau and other officers of the Bureau." This will necessitate an increase in staff to ensure that this drug problem is solved. Certainly, with the present staff that the CNB has, it will be impossible for a solution to be arrived at.

Again, "clause 11 extends the power of the Director of the Central Narcotics Bureau to send any person to an approved institution for treatment and rehabilitation." With this amendment, the Director will most certainly send as many people as deserved to be rehabilitated and treated to the approved institutions. This will cost money.

It is therefore surprising that the Minister has not taken this extra financial expenditure into consideration to ensure that this problem is solved.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill on the misuse of drugs where the maximum penalty for this offence carries a death sentence.

The Bill is being introduced at a very timely and apt moment when drug offences in the Republic have increased greatly in the last few months. It has become a common offence. If this lucrative business of drug trafficking is not nipped in the bud, our Republic may be accused of being a distribution centre of drugs in this region. This will affect the good name of our Republic.

In recent months there has been an increasing number of unauthorised trafficking of drugs in the Republic, and press reports confirm that more offenders have been brought' to book. One way of stopping this trade from spreading is to impose the death sentence. This will give second thoughts to anyone indulging in this unauthorised trade.

Sir, although I support this Bill, I would like to state that a situation may arise where as a result of surprise checks by officers of the Narcotics Bureau, innocent people without their knowledge may he found in possession of drugs. These innocent victims may have been fixed, and this might even cost them their lives. So the question of benefit of the doubt should be carefully considered.

Let me cite a few instances. Recently, I came across an article in the press that an apprentice in an electronics firm was charged and convicted to a jail sentence for possession of heroin. The accused was also reported to have put drops of heroin in his fiancee's bowl of mutton soup without her knowledge in order to get her sexually aroused. She was also nabbed by the narcotics officers. Fortunately, during the trial the accused admitted that he had put the drug in her bowl of soup without her knowledge, and the magistrate therefore acquitted the girl. If the accused had denied this fact, she could also have been jailed, though innocent.

Another case involved a foreign architect who was fined by a magistrate's court after he was found guilty of possession of drugs in his flat. He denied that he had taken drugs or had allowed any guest to do so in his flat because of his status. He claimed that social parties had been held in his premises before it was raided and that drugs could have been left there by his guests, some of whom had overstayed on different occasions before he left Singapore for a short visit abroad.

Sir, these two cases leave room for doubt. The accused could be guilty or innocent. Therefore, when the death sentence is introduced, care must be taken to see that innocent people are not convicted. Genuine drug pedlars could fix innocent people by placing drugs in their possession without their knowledge and then tip off the Central Narcotics Bureau for an investigation. Arid if a victim is unable to prove his innocence, he is in for trouble.

Sir, I support this Bill for the sake of discipline in the country.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the two hon. Members for supporting this Bill. First of all, let me assure the Member for Anson that if a person is innocent and that he is being framed by someone who tries to fix him by putting controlled drugs in his premises, he need not have any fear. There will first be a thorough investigation and if he is found innocent he will not be prosecuted. Even if he were prosecuted, there is the second line, which is the court. A court will not convict any person if it has a reasonable doubt that the accused is not guilty of the offence charged. So I can assure the Member for Anson that persons found innocent will not be prosecuted and sentenced.

The Member for Potong Pasir raised the point that in the explanatory statement to the Bill it is stated that "it will not involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure.'.' May I explain to him that the introduction of the Bill itself does not involve any extra expenditure. It does not mean that the Government will not have to spend any money on employing more enforcement officers if we want to step up our enforcement action against traffickers. Even if this Bill had not been introduced, if we want to increase enforcement action more enforcement officers will have to be employed and the Government will have to spend more money. So he can be rest assured that there is no contradiction in the statement at the end of the Bill.

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.

6.30 p.m.

Clauses I and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3 -

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 2, line 9, to leave out the full-stop and insert - `; and (c) by inserting immediately after the word "thereunder" at the end of the definition of "traffic" appearing therein the expression "; and "trafficking" has a corresponding meaning".'.

Sir, this is a formal drafting amendment.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to seek clarification here. I wonder whether this Bill has been thoroughly scrutinised during its drafting stage. I notice that the Minister has filed a series of amendments which are not only consequential but substantial in nature. I would just like to get an assurance from the Minister that the Bill has been carefully considered.

A Bill of this nature which introduces the death penalty should, in the first instance, be carefully thought out, planned, and drafted, and there should be no cause for subsequent amendments as we do now have. Surely there was ample time for all these subsequent amendments to be incorporated in the draft Bill itself.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I shall explain the reasons for my amendments. The Member for Punggol has jumped the gun by asking for clarification so soon after I have moved the first amendment to clause 3. Some of the amendments are merely formal, as in the case of this amendment to clause 3. The amendments to clause 5, however, are not formal, and I will explain the reason at the proper time. Apart from the formal amendments, the other amendments are to make the provisions in the Bill very clear.

I agree with the Member for Punggol that since the Bill introduces the death penalty we have got to be very clear about its provisions. For this very reason careful thought has been given in looking over the Bill and we would like to make it still clearer. Hence, these amendments. So it does not mean that no careful thought has been given to the Bill. In fact, a great deal of thought has been given to it. If the Member will bear with me, I will explain the amendments as they are moved.

Amendment agreed to.

The Chairman: There is a consequential amendment to be made:

In page 2, line 3, to leave out "and".

This will be done.

Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the

Clause 5 -

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 2, to leave out lines 21 to 26 inclusive and insert-

'(a) by deleting paragraph (b) thereof and substituting thereof the following:-

"(b) 3 grammes of morphine contained in any controlled drug; and

(b) by deleting paragragh (c) thereof and substituting thereof the following:-

"(c) 2 grammes of diamorphine (heroin) contained in any controlled drug; or".'.

Sir, this amendment is necessary to make it clear that the quantities of morphine and heroin which are specified for the presumption of trafficking in section 15 of the Act relate to the quantities of these substances contained in any controlled drug. Morphine and heroin are not dealt with in their pure state in practice.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 6 -

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 2, line 32, after "drug", to insert "in contravention of paragraph (b) of section 6".

Sir, this is a formal drafting amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 7 and 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 9 -

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 3, line 21, after "Class C drug", to insert ", except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection".

Sir, this is a formal drafting amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 3, line 24, to leave out from "committed" to "and" in line 26 and insert-- "---- (i) in the case of unauthorized manufacture, in relation to such specified controlled drug as is mentioned in the second column; and (ii) in the case of unauthorized traffic or import or export, in relation to a specified quantity of such controlled drug or to a controlled drug (except opium) containing such quantity of morphine or diamorphine as is mentioned in the second column;".

Sir, this amendment is to make it clear that the quantities of morphine and heroin which are specified for the imposition of the death penalty and other enhanced penalties in the Second Schedule relate to the quantities of these substances contained in any controlled drug. Here again, morphine and heroin are not dealt with in their pure state in practice.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 10 to 12 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 13 -

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 5, lines 4 to 6, to leave out the heading "Specified drug or specified quantity thereof involved" and insert "Specified drug or quantity thereof or drug with specified content involved".

Sir, this is an amendment consequential to the amendment to section 29(2) in clause 9.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 5, lines 16 to 18, to leave out "Unauthorized traffic" in morphine where the quantity is -" and insert "Unauthorized traffic in controlled drug (except opium) containing such quantity of morphine being -".

Sir, the reason for this amendment is to make it clear that the quantities of morphine which are specified for the imposition of the death penalty and other enhanced penalties for unauthorised traffic in morphine relate to the quantities of this substance contained in any controlled drug. Morphine is not dealt with in the pure state in practice. In fact, it is not intended to impose the death penalty for unauthorised traffic in opium and as opium also contains morphine it is excluded. This is to make the provision clear.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 5, lines 25 to 27, to leave Out "Unauthorized traffic in diamorphine where the quantity is-" and insert "Unauthorized traffic in controlled drug containing such quantity of diamorphine being -".

Sir, the reason for this amendment is also to make it clear that the quantities of diamorphine (which is, in fact, heroin) which are specified for the imposition of the death penalty and other enhanced penalties for unauthorised traffic in diamorphine relate to the quantities of this substance contained in any controlled drug. Heroin is not dealt with in the pure state in practice.

Amendment agreed to.

6.45 p.m.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 6, lines 4 to 6, to leave out the heading "Specified drug or specified quantity thereof involved" and insert "Specified drug or quantity thereof or drug with specified content involved",

This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is a consequential amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 7, lines 4 to 6, to leave out the heading "Specified drug or specified quantity thereof involved" and insert "Specified drug or quantity thereof or drug with specified content involved".

Sir, this is also a consequential amendment.

Amendment agreed to

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 7, lines 7 to 10, to leave out "Unauthorized import or export of morphine where the quantity is -`` and insert "Unauthorized import or export of controlled drug (except opium) containing such quantity of morphine being -".

Sir, here again, the amendment is to make it clear that the quantities of morphine which are specified for the imposition of the death penalty and other enhanced penalties for unauthorized import or export of morphine relate to the quantities of this substance contained in any controlled drug. Morphine is not dealt with in its pure state in practice. It is not intended to impose the death penalty for unauthorized import or export of opium, and as opium also contains morphine it is excluded.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 7, lines 17 to 20, to leave out "Unauthorized import or export of diamorphine where the quantity is -`` and insert "Unauthorized import or export of controlled drug containing such quantity of diamorphine being -".

Here again, Sir, the explanation is similar, i.e. to make it clear that the quantities of diamorphine (or heroin), which are specified for the imposition of the death penalty and other enhanced penalties for unauthorised import or export of diamorphine, relate to the quantities of this substance contained in any controlled drug. Heroin is not dealt with in its pure state in practice.

Amendment agreed to

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 8, lines 4 to 6, to leave out the heading "Specified drug or specified quantity thereof involved" and insert "Specified drug or quantity thereof or drug with specified content involved".

Here again, Sir, this is an amendment consequential to clause 9 which amends subsection (2) of section 29.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 8, lines 28 to 31, to leave out -

"Maximum 20 years or $40,000 or both

Minimum 3 years or $5,000 or both"

and insert a dash.

Sir, this is a formal drafting amendment.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, may I seek clarification from the Hon. Minister regarding the insertion of a dash against the originally proposed punishment of a maximum of 20 years or $40,000 or both and a minimum of 3 years or $5,000 or both, in respect of an offence for the cultivation of cannabis, opium, coca plant. I ask this question because in this Misuse of Drugs (Amendment) Bill, heavy penalties are to be imposed for those who are involved in drug trafficking. This is rightly so. Therefore, I do not know why the Minister is proposing to leave out the punishment provisions. For myself I do not think it should be deleted, otherwise it destroys the spirit of the entire Bill because the person who cultivates cannabis, opium, coca plant is indirectly involved in drug trafficking. And as the Hon. Minister has rightly pointed out, it will undermine the moral fibre of our society, the very structure of it. This will help destroy our society. So I think if we are to leave out these punishment provisions, it would not do any good. In fact, it should stand as it is.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, it is not intended to delete it.

The Chairman: It is a transfer of the penalty provisions from one column to another.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Yes. This is a formal amendment. It is not a deletion. It is a drafting error which is being corrected.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, if there is no intention to delete, then I am all for it. I am asking this question because, as I mentioned just now at the beginning of the Committee stage, there are so many amendments to this important Bill.

The Chairman: Amendments (9) and (10) are connected, Mr Ng.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, this is a formal amendment to correct a drafting error.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 8, line 28, to leave Out the dash in the seventh column and insert -

"Maximum 20 years or $40,000 or both Minimum 3 years or $5,000 or both".

Sir, as I have explained, this penalty provision is deleted in amendment (9) and transferred to the next column in amendment (10). So I can assure the Member for Punggol that it will be there.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I beg to move,

In page 9, lines 4 to 6, to leave out the heading "Specified drug or specified quantity thereof involved" and insert "Specified drug or quantity thereof or drug with specified content involved".

This, Sir, is again a consequential amendment.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Sir, on page 9, line 10, I would like the Minister to tell me what "punisable" actually means.

The Chairman: It should be "punishable". This will be corrected.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: It is obviously a typographical error and will be corrected.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 13, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported with amendments.

Third Reading

Mr Speaker: Third Reading, What day?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Now, Sir,I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time."

Question proposed.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I would like to seek clarification from the Hon. Minister on the matter of administering the punishment of the rotan on those convicted for drug trafficking. I would like to know whether the number of strokes of the rotan are administered at one and the same time or are they meted out over different periods.

I ask this question, Sir, because in a discussion with some hon. Members I got the impression that if a convicted person gets the rotan punishment all at one time, then the impact is felt. But if the punishment is given over a period of time, then even a penalty of 100 strokes of the rotan will not have any deterrent effect at all.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, may I explain that the strokes of the rotan when imposed by the court are administered in Prison under the authority of the Director of Prisons, under the Prison regulations. Usually they are administered at one session. But when the strokes are administered, a medical officer will be there to decide whether or not there should be any respite.

Question put, and agreed to.