ILLEGAL ENTRY OF THAI WORKERS

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Home Affairs how is it that about 10,000 Thai foreign workers could slip into Singapore and work here with forged documents undetected by his Ministry's enforcement officers.

Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, the 10,000 Thai foreign workers did not slip into Singapore with forged documents. Almost 80% of them entered Singapore lawfully with valid travel documents, ostensibly as tourists and then overstayed illegally in order to work here.

Immigration officers handle about 45,000 arrivals per day at the Woodlands Checkpoint. In 1988, they refused entry to 13,500 persons who could not satisfy Immigration Officers that they were bona fide tourists. However, Immigration Officers cannot detect every visitor who intends to overstay and work illegally, no matter how vigilant they may be.

As this House was informed during the debate on the Second Reading of the Immigration (Amendment) Bill in January, this matter was brought to the attention of this House. And the Government has been very concerned with the problem of illegal immigrants for the past two years. It knew the numbers were large. This House was informed that, in 1988 alone, 4,120 overstayers were arrested. This House was also informed that 17% of our prison population were immigration offenders. For every overstayer arrested, many more were evading detection.

The Police and Immigration Departments would have required a sustained massive effort to round up all these illegal immigrants. Illegal workers, including those with forged work permits, move from worksite to worksite, merging with other foreign workers who have proper work permits. Errant employers deliberately keep no records to avoid being implicated.

This was why the Government amended the Immigration Act to provide for caning for illegal immigrants who overstayed more than 90 days, and for a presumption clause to enable us to prosecute their employers. Those 10,000 illegal immigrants and overstayers virtually voluntarily surrendered to be repatriated before the amendments came into force shows that these measures were both necessary and effective.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Could the Minister please comment on the report that many of them who overstayed had forged documents. How does this come about?

Prof. Jayakumar: This comes about because there are syndicates who are engaged in forged documents. And when we catch them, they will be severely punished. Indeed, quite a number of cases are being investigated and are dealt with by the Commercial Crime Department. In other words, forgery of work permits is an offence. Investigations also are commenced whenever we have information on individuals or syndicates working in forged work permits. In fact, some of those who are trafficking in illegal immigrants are also engaged in forgery of work permits, and action will also be taken against them.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, this question is put because of the large number of overstayers and also ---

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, can you ask your question?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, What is more important is that these people who overstayed, according to the reports, were able to go undetected because of the documents which they have. So I thought the Minister's reply should give us a clearer view as to what exactly is done to get rid of these syndicates. I mean if there are a lot of foreigners around here with forged documents, it is a serious problem for Singapore.

Prof. Jayakumar: Indeed, Sir, it is a serious matter and it is because the Government felt it was a serious matter that we came to this House to ask for more powers, more penalties, to enable us to deal effectively with this serious problem. I recall the Member speaking against the measures to introduce caning. He was not the only one. Others too. But if we had not adopted those measures, a question which Members must ask themselves is: would they have voluntarily surrendered? As I said in my answer, these persons who came into Singapore at the checkpoint had valid passports and valid travel documents. It is after they enter Singapore on valid social visit pass that they decide to overstay and work illegally, some without any forged documents, some with forged documents.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, the Minister will remember that during the debate on the amendment to the Immigration Act he did not mention or even give a hint that so great a number of illegal immigrants were moving around Singapore with forged documents. There was no hint of that. So if the Minister had said, "Look, about 10,000 of these immigrants, which is a large number, moving around Singapore with forged documents ---

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, can you ask your question? I think you are engaging in a debate. Ask your question.

Mr Chiam See Tong: The reason I did not support the Bill is because it is a draconian step.

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, what is your question?

Mr S. Chandra Das (Cheng San GRC): You support now?

Mr Chiam See Tong: So I think the Minister has not really given a proper answer as to the seriousness of this problem. I think he has not dealt with it.

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Chiam is a lawyer. He should know that under the Immigration Act it is clearly defined that an overstayer is a person who came in on a valid social visit pass and has overstayed. Whether or not he has a forged work permit or not, he still is an overstayer.

Mr Chiam See Tong: That was not a problem. That was never mentioned.

Prof. Jayakumar: As far as immigration is concerned, if he had overstayed, he had committed an offence, whether or not he has any other forged documents. If you are an illegal immigrant and you have entered Singapore either without travel documents or with forged travel documents, then that is an offence of illegal entry. What happens after you enter into Singapore, whether you managed to get a forged document is irrelevant for the purpose of investigating and apprehending that person. If he has entered Singapore with travel documents he is an illegal immigrant. If he has entered Singapore validly and thereafter overstayed, he has committed an offence of overstaying. What he does after that is irrelevant, he has still committed an offence, and that is how the problem arose and was put to this House.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Can the Minister tell us whether or not these 10,000 were, in fact, employed originally by the MRTC? Or employed to construct the MRT? Now that the project for the MRT has been completed, they have stayed over.

Prof. Jayakumar: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am really surprised that a Member of this House ---

Mr Chiam See Tong: I am asking you.

Prof. Jayakumar: I will give him the answer. I am surprised that a Member of this House should come here and repeat such unfounded allegations ---

Mr Chiam See Tong: Then say so.

Prof. Jayakumar: --- made in a foreign press, critical of Singapore.

Mr Speaker: Order. I would like to inform Mr Chiam, if you have asked the question I think you should wait for the reply before interjecting again. You may continue, Prof Jayakumar.

Prof. Jayakumar: Thank you, Sir. The innuendo is that we knew of these offenders and deliberately did not take any action, which is not true. As early as November 1987, the Singapore Embassy in Bangkok issued a statement of the penalties which were then in force and informing all those who were reading the Thai newspapers and this was published in the Bangkok Post. This was as long ago as 1987. In February 1989 the Thai MFA issued further press releases. So it is not a case of suddenly taking action only now.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I think I have to put on record that the Minister should not take objection to me asking that question. He should thank me for it because now he is given the opportunity to clear the air and put aside all rumours. I think the Minister should thank me for it.

Mr Chandra Das: We thank you for rumour-mongering.