CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Third Reading read.

2.56 p.m.

The Minister for Law and the Environment (Mr E. W. Barker): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. "That the Bill be now read a Third time."

The Select Committee's Report on this Bill was presented to Parliament on 24th June, 1976, as Paper Parl. 4 of 1976 and the Bill as set out in the Report and now tabled before this House embodies the recommendations of the Committee.

The vital clause in the Bill and the one which attracted the greatest interest is clause 5 which seeks to do away with the legal requirement to caution a person under arrest and to restrict the right of silence of the accused. From its provisions flow a number of other important provisions which enable inferences to be drawn from the accused's failure to mention relevant facts when charged and from his failure to give evidence when or should his defence be called upon. The Law Society of Singapore, noting that the abovementioned provisions introduced a completely new concept in the administration of justice, added that in principle it supported this concept but recommended certain safeguards. Some of the recommendations of the Law Society were accepted and the original Bill has been amended accordingly. For instance, the proviso to subsection (5) of section 121 of the Criminal Procedure Code appearing in clause 5 of the Bill has been amended to remove the discretion given to the court to refuse to admit a statement obtained by inducement, threat or promise. The Select Committee also deleted from clause 6 of the Bill the provision enabling adverse inferences to be drawn from the accused's failure to state relevant facts when questioned by a police officer before he is charged with an offence or officially informed that he may be prosecuted for it.

Acting on the recommendation of the Law Society the Select Committee amended the original Bill to make inadmissible hearsay statements made after the commencement of investigations to prevent people fabricating evidence. Another amendment made extended the safeguards contained in subsection (2) of the proposed new section 371 D to trials in the Subordinate Courts so that, without the leave of the court, hearsay statements may not be given in evidence at trials before the High Court as well as before the Subordinate Courts unless a notice containing the required information has been served on the other parties to the proceedings within the prescribed time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, due weight was given to every representation received and if any recommendation was not accepted, the Select Committee had good reasons for rejecting it.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed.