CRIMINAL LAW (TEMPORARY PROVISIONS) (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read. 5.00 p.m.

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

The Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act has been an effective piece of legislation in suppressing criminal activities, such as secret society activities and drug trafficking. Secret societies and drug distribution networks have been smashed. However, remnants exist and they must not be allowed to lure others into joining them or ex-criminal law detainees rejoining them. We are now putting greater emphasis on the rehabilitation of detainees.

As part of their rehabilitation, detainees have a choice to pursue their studies or work in prison. On 28th February, 1981, 93 detainees were doing full-time studies in the prisons. In the last three years, 96 of them sat for the 'O' level examinations and obtained certificates. Fifty-eight of them obtained three or more 'O' level passes. Another seven detainees obtained partial 'A' level certificates.

After an initial period of strict regimentation, those who want to work are given work. On 28th February, 1981, 598 out of 946 detainees or 63% were working in prisons. Of these 598 detainees, 167 were doing maintenance work and 431 were working in the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (SCORE) workshops. They made rosewood and rattan furniture, electronic capacitors, digital radio clocks, electronic calculators, etc.

This is to achieve two very important objectives of rehabilitation. They are to instil in them work discipline and to enable them to improve themselves through studies or the learning of new skills. This will not only give them a better chance to get a good job and go straight when released but also help them to regain their own self-esteem.

However, detainees released from an institutional environment often find it difficult to rejoin society. One of the main obstacles is the difficulty in getting a regular and proper job. They have no difficulty in getting jobs, such as bar bouncers, debt collectors and odd jobs but these soon get them into trouble again. In order to overcome this problem and better prepare the detainees for total release, my Ministry has worked out a Day Release Scheme. This Scheme will bridge the gap between the strictly controlled regime in the prisons and the completely free environment outside. It is based on the principle of a halfway house.

Under the Scheme, a Day Release Camp or Camps will be set up. Detainees who are considered ready for day release by an Advisory Committee appointed by the Minister, will be transferred to the camp. They will be found jobs outside the camp by a Job Placement Unit and be paid wages at current market rates. They may also be self-employed provided the work is legal and proper. They have to return to the camp every day after work. If they misbehave at their place of work or breach any of the camp rules, they will be sent back to prison. After about a year's stay in the camp, the detainees will be released under police supervision.

This half-way house will enable the detainees to gradually adjust to the environment outside, earn normal wages and thus resume some of the obligations of a free man, such as supporting their families and build up their self-respect. It will be a test of their preparedness to rejoin society as useful and law-abiding citizens.

The Scheme will be similar to the day release scheme for ex-drug addicts which was introduced on 1st September, 1979. In fact, the idea of this Scheme for criminal law detainees came about as a result of the success of the day release scheme for ex-drug addicts. 1,145 ex-drug addicts have so far gone through the scheme successfully. Most of them have no difficulty in finding their own jobs after their release from the day release camps. Preliminary results of a comparative study of ex-addict supervisees who have gone through the day release scheme and those who have not, suggest that the recidivism rate of those who had the benefit of day release has gone down by about 25%.

Initially, as in the case of ex-addicts, we may have some difficulty getting jobs for the detainees because of the prejudice of some employers who are chary of employing detainees. However, as in the case of ex-addicts, we have to demonstrate to these employers that the detainees are good and able workers. In addition, those who employ detainees will be assured that if any of the detainees misbehave they will be sent back to prison. In such a situation or when a detainee absconds, a replacement will be sent to the employer straightaway. In return, we expect the employers to treat them fairly and no differently from their other workers. Employers who participate in the Scheme will be making an important contribution to the total rehabilitation of the detainees.

To implement this Scheme, section 42 of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act has to be expanded to enable the detainees to be temporarily released from custody so that they can engage in employment outside their places of detention. The amendment is also to enable the Minister to grant them leave, for example, home leave during weekends.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Prof. S. Jayakumar (Bedok): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like, with your permission, to comment on certain general principles of this Bill. I would like to start off by saying that I support the Bill in its general principles. It has a progressive approach in our treatment of criminal detainees but it raises certain interesting implications not only for the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act but also for all those who are detained.

When I studied the Bill, I was wondering what aspects of our national interests are being advanced by this amendment, i.e. what particular interests are being promoted. Was it to rehabilitate the detainees? Was it to contribute to alleviating our labour shortage problem? Was it intended to solve some financial problems of the detainees and their families? I think that doubt has been resolved by the Minister's statement that the primary intention of the Bill is to rehabilitate the detainees.

My first observation, Sir, is that this scheme for the release of detainees for purposes of employment is limited to criminal law detainees under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act. Speaking generally, I think it can be said that there are at least three broad categories of persons who are detained in our prisons. The first category would be those who are detained pursuant to a jail sentence imposed by a court of law after a person has been charged for an offence, undergone a trial and duly found guilty by a judge and then sentence is imposed. In that category, of course, there is a fixed duration of jail sentence. He knows exactly when he will be released.

The second category would be the category of preventive detention detainees, such as the category of detainees referred to by the Minister, and it would also cover the other category of detainees under the Internal Security Act who are also preventive detention detainees. The significance of this category is that they are detained under preventive detention provisions on the rationale that they are a special category and classification by themselves and cannot be subjected to the normal criminal law processes and trial procedures. In the case of detainees under the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act, I presume the difficulty of getting a conviction under the normal court processes is because witnesses are not willing to come forward to testify for fear of victimization. We have these two broad categories and, of course, there is a third category where drug addicts are sent to drug rehabilitation centres. We are not concerned with them.

My comment, Mr Speaker, is that here we are introducing a scheme for release of criminal law detainees for employment purposes but the scheme has not been applied to those detained under the first category, that is to say, persons who are in jail serving a period of jail sentence for a variety of offences for which they have been found guilty. The Hon. Minister has told us that the detainees are supposedly engaged in rather serious activities, i.e. secret society activities and drug-trafficking, both of which are quite abhorrent to our society. Logically, if we want to release them, a case can be made out for considering a similar release scheme for those in the first category, i.e. those being detained pursuant to a court decision or conviction, particularly those who are serving fixed jail sentences for offences which are not associated with crimes of violence or offences which are not otherwise abhorrent to society. I wonder whether the Hon. Minister would care to comment on that and to indicate whether what we are witnessing now is a step in a series of further reforms in this direction.

My second observation is that in a scheme of this nature, it is absolutely important to have safeguards. Here I am not talking about safeguards of the public when detainees are released but safeguards for the detainees. The Minister did point out to us that employers will be assured that the detainees will have to behave themselves. But bearing in mind that these detainees have no pre- determined period of detention and that their detention could be extended, the detainees will be under tremendous pressure and they could be exploited by unscrupulous employers. I am thinking of situations where unscrupulous employers, fearing that they would lose the employment of these detainees, might threaten the detainees with false reports of their work and the detainees might then fear that their period of detention might be lengthened unfairly. I am sure this is a point which the Minister must have considered and he might have some measures in mind.

Thirdly, Mr Speaker, a scheme of this nature can work if there is an incentive and detainees must have some indication that if they do their work well there will be some indication of an earlier release. If the Minister could comment on this, I would be very grateful.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Member for Bedok for taking an interest in this Bill and also for his support on the general principles of the Scheme. He has made three very valid points. The first is whether unscrupulous employers will take advantage and exploit the detainees who have accepted employment. As I have said, before we launch the Scheme we had nearly 18 months' experience of a similar scheme for ex-drug addicts. We are, therefore, quite conscious of the fact that such a situation might arise. But as far as ex-drug addicts are concerned, the employers have been fair. They have been on the level and have not taken advantage of them or exploited them.

We have a Job Placement Unit as far as ex-drug addicts are concerned, and they have been closely monitoring the whole situation. I am sure that with such close monitoring, any employer would not like to take the risk of exploiting them and then be shown up. The public is very conscious of what is going on with the day release scheme. In fact, the press is quite interested in it and I do not think any employer would be foolish enough to expose himself to adverse publicity if he attempts to take advantage of the ex-drug addicts. I think that is not the problem. The problem is to convince the employers that, whether they be ex-drug addicts or criminal law detainees, they will be good workers; that they will not be a burden but instead make a contribution and, in return, be entitled to a fair wage.

The other point is why we have not included the prisoners, as the hon. Member has said, prisoners who have been sentenced for a fixed term. The difficulty has arisen precisely as a result of the conviction. If we want to include them, then we have to make certain changes in the law to vary the position. Perhaps we have to involve the Judiciary because, as far as the prisoners are concerned, their term of imprisonment is determined not by any executive authority but by the court. Therefore, if we wish to include the prisoners, we must make changes to the law. As I have said before, we are, in fact, implementing this Day Release Scheme without any precedent to go by. We are doing it slowly, step by step, and learn from experience. I cannot find any precedent in any part of the world where criminal law detainees are being put on a day release scheme. We have only the benefit of our experience with the day release scheme for ex-drug addicts, and so we are now extending it to the criminal law detainees. If it is successful, we will certainly extend it to prisoners. But, as I have said, it is a little bit more complicated because it involves the judicial system as well.

Lastly, with regard to incentives, of course, incentive is a very important aspect of rehabilitation, apart from instilling self-respect and discipline. We always have incentives in mind. If the detainees were to work well, behave themselves and demonstrate to the employers and to the rehabilitation officers that they should be released earlier, a recommendation will certainly be made and the detainees will be released earlier.

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.