News @ AsiaOne

Extra cane strokes in prison

Prisons can give additional cane strokes to a prisoner, more than what had already been meted out to him in court. New rules now ensure any extra punishment is not excessive. -TNP
Andre Yeo

Wed, Sep 17, 2008
The New Paper

A YEAR after a little-known fact about the prison system was reported in this newspaper, changes have been introduced.

In August last year, The New Paper reported how prisons can give additional cane strokes to a prisoner, more than what had already been meted out to him in court.

In the past, the superintendent of a prison could give up to 12 additional strokes, but it had to be approved by the Prisons director , who could also alter the punishment.

New rules have been introduced.

From yesterday, more checks have been instituted to ensure that the extra punishment is not excessive.

There will now be external committees to decide if the additional strokes are too much. Each committee will consist of a maximum of four members, led by a chairman.

The Prisons director must refer the case to the relevant committee for its opinion before he confirms or changes the punishment.

The Straits Times reported yesterday that committee members are likely to be former judicial officers, justices of the peace and community leaders.

There will be no prison officers in the committees.

Criminal lawyers welcomed the changes, which come under the Prisons Act and the Misuse of Drugs Act, saying they will ensure a fairer punishment system.

Independent

Mr Subhas Anandan, president of the Association of Criminal Lawyers, said the changes would act like a barrier as there would be independent people on the committee who will look at the facts and clarify them if they had any doubts.

The head of the criminal department at Khattar Wong & Partners said: 'Superintendents are also human and there is a possibility that they are not trained to weigh the evidence given by prison officers against the prisoners objectively.

'Prison officers who make complaints against prisoners may exaggerate the offence because they have a grudge against the prisoner.'

Lawyer Lim Kia Tong, 56, who has been in practice for 28 years, said the setting up of external committees was a step in the right direction as they would ensure that a decision to inflict any additional strokes on a prisoner would be carefully deliberated upon by a panel.

He said: 'It would be well considered and balanced before four members rather than one person. Every stroke inflicts its trauma and medical and emotional complications on a person.'

Mr Lim added the prisoner might feel the superintendent may not have considered certain aspects of his case and may end up with a feeling of bitterness instead of fairness.

Mr R S Bajwa said anything that acted as a check on the Prisons director's discretion to mete out punishment was a welcome move.

The lawyer said: 'Too much power in somebody's hands is not good so you need a committee to ensure there is fairness of the punishment.

'A prison officer will look at the prisoner's offence only from the point of view of maintaining discipline because of his training and background.'

According to the Prisons Act, serious offences in prison that warrant caning include fighting, mutiny and attempting to escape.

The New Paper had reported that inmates could also complain about any punishment to visiting justices, who are eminent citizens with the authority to make surprise inspections on the conditions of prisons.

The visiting justices could also order a prisoner to be given up to 24 strokes of the cane, twice the number the superintendent is authorised to give.

Transparency

Corporal punishment is not meted out to women, those sentenced to death and any man above 50 years old.

A Prisons spokesman told The Straits Times the additional checks would promote transparency in the punishment process.

That is why Mr Anandan felt no one should have anything negative to say about it.

He said: 'Nobody should complain about these changes because they are good for the prisoner and for the superintendent.

'No one can make blind accusations against him about being biased. So, he is also protected.

'It's good for the system and it's very transparent. Anybody who complains about this must be out of his mind.'

This article was first published in The New Paper on September 16, 2008.

 
 
 
Copyright ©2007 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn. No. 198402868E. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement Conditions of Access Advertise