MURDER OF JOEL MATTHIAS PETER (Setting up of Committee of Inquiry)

Dr Kanwaljit Soin asked the Minister for Community Development if he will give the background information on (i) the case of the murdered 2 year-old Joel Matthias Peter in relation to his custody and with special reference to his Ministry's assessment of the suitability of returning the child to the parents' home and (ii) the evaluation of the follow-up visits and in relation to this matter, whether his Ministry will consider the setting up of a committee of inquiry.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Mr Speaker Sir, let me start with the background on Joel's placement with the Ministry of Community Development (MCD). Joel was referred to the Ministry on 15th January 1993 by his private babysitter as his natural parents defaulted payment of fees and did not contact the babysitter for 1 1/2 months previous to that.

The Ministry sought the assistance of the police to locate the parents. As the parents could not be located and the babysitter did not want further responsibility, Joel was placed under the care of a foster mother registered with the Ministry's Fostering Scheme on 5th February 1993.

The parents were subsequently traced on 30th April 1993. Our investigation revealed that the parents stopped making contact with the babysitter as they were in financial difficulty and could not pay the babysitter. Although the parents requested the return of Joel on the grounds that the father had found employment and claimed to be financially secure, the Ministry still did not return Joel to them as they had a housing problem and the mother was in an advanced stage of pregnancy. They were advised that Joel would be returned to them when they had resolved their housing problem and the father's employment was more stable. This was also to allow the mother time to take care of the birth of Joel's sibling.

In November 1993, the parents requested the return of Joel again as they had settled their housing arrangement. Joel was subsequently returned to the parents in March 1994, that is, about five months after the request, after the Ministry was satisfied that the father was really gainfully employed and their housing problem resolved. The parents' relationship with Joel was also observed to be good during the visits arranged by the Ministry for the parents and child.

Upon Joel's discharge back to his parents, regular visits were also made by MCD officers to their residence to observe Joel's adjustment. The parents also came down to the Ministry for discussions with my staff. During such contacts, Joel and the parents were observed to be adjusting well and there was no indication of difficulty expressed or experienced by the parents. Neither was Joel observed to be anxious or withdrawn in the presence of his parents.

The case was subsequently closed on July 1994 on the following grounds:

(1) the parents were financially stable;

(2) they had a proper home; and

(3) they showed interest in Joel and Joel in turn was observed to be adjusting well at home.

In our assessment, the follow-up visits and procedures subsequent to the return of Joel to his parents were adequate. I am not sure what the Committee of Inquiry is supposed to do or achieve, as asked by Dr Kanwaljit Soin. Frankly, I do not see the need for a Committee of Inquiry. If the Committee of Inquiry is to investigate into the murder of the said child, this is the task of the police and they are already investigating the case. To discuss the case further will be sub judice.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, in view of the fact that Joel was bashed to death six months after being returned to his parents and the fact that the mother said that he had often been beaten by the father, at least from the newspapers, would the Minister be able to say how, in the assessment by the Ministry officials, this fact was overlooked? Could this be prevented in future if we had a Committee of Inquiry to look into the adjustment and not into the facts of the murder of Joel?

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Sir, it is really a question of how long we would want to monitor the case. In this case, as I have mentioned earlier, between the request and the return of Joel, it was four months. And even after the return, it was five months of monitoring by the Ministry. Within these five months the Ministry was able to establish that there was enough evidence for the parents to be able to take care of Joel and there was very good adjustment between Joel and the parents.

The question really is how long we want to follow up with the case. Is it a year or two years? Of course, if the Ministry suspects that something is wrong, the Ministry would continue to monitor. But in this particular case, the Ministry at that point in time was able to assess that the parents were able to take care of the child and Joel himself was able to adjust to his parents.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, would the Minister agree that it is not just the time but the quality of assessment? Without questioning the officers' competence, I would like to ask the Minister to consider whether more training could be given to the officials who monitored the child and the relationship between the parents, because the child was battered to death soon after the officials stopped monitoring and there was a history of repeated violence towards the child. How could we have missed this? And could we make sure that this does not happen again? In the light of that, would the Minister consider a Committee of Inquiry?

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Sir, I still do not think that a Committee of Inquiry is necessary. It is a question of the efficiency of the officers looking into the case and, as I said, it is a question of time. Because at that point in time, nobody could really say for sure what would happen and whether the problem would recur or not. Based on the facts available then, it was established that Joel was able to return to his parents. But certainly, we will continue to look into ways where we can better monitor such cases, especially in the light of this case.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, would the Minister tell the House whether the officials were able to find out whether there was any physical violence in the home or they were satisfied that the violence was contained? Or did they find no history and no evidence of physical violence towards the child?

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Sir, as I remember, at that point in time when my officers went to visit the child and the parents, there was no evidence of assault. If assault had happened after that, and unless we continue to monitor the child on and on and year after year, we will not be able to find out whether there was any lapse in the relationship between the parents and child.