On homosexuality, religious offences and marital rape
The recent Penal Code review was the most comprehensive in 23 years. Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng shares with LI XUEYING the thinking behind some of its key changes Straits Times, The (Singapore)
Insight
November 9, 2007
Author: Li Xueying 
THE e-mail messages poured in. So did the snail mail letters.
They came from individuals, organisations, ordinary Singaporeans.
And Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng read them all.
They were about the proposed Penal Code amendments. Among them were those that called for the repeal of Section 377A which deems sex between men a crime. Others were against it.
He 'read every one of them', he tells Insight in an e-mail interview, before forwarding them to his staff to be evaluated and consolidated as feedback.
He also chaired numerous meetings with his staff in the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to decide which parts of the Code to retain and which parts to rewrite or repeal.
This was followed by papers to Cabinet, which approved the proposed amendments.
The Home Affairs Minister revealed the process to make the point that the outcome of the Penal Code review was not one reached lightly.
This included the decision on Section 377A - that it would stay.
Ultimately, 'the decision we made reflects the pragmatic attitudes of the majority of Singaporeans - we live and let live', he says.
'It maintains the balance by upholding a stable society with traditional heterosexual family values, but with space for homosexuals.'
It has certainly been a busy year for Mr Wong.
He is occupied with not just the Penal Code under his portfolio as Home Affairs Minister, but also population issues, in his capacity as chairman of the National Population Committee.
He has been tasked by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong with tackling Singapore's population problem - identified as one of the country's key long-term challenges.
So far, the results have been encouraging.
Figures Mr Wong released during the interview indicate that Singapore is likely to hit a new record this year in wooing new citizens and permanent residents to settle here, boosting population numbers.
Public consultation significant in reviewTHE review of the Penal Code - Singapore's main piece of criminal law with more than 500 provisions - is the most comprehensive in 23 years.
Four provisions were repealed; 77 provisions expanded, updated or clarified; and 21 new offences introduced.
It was three years in the making, and included revisions made after public feedback was hoisted in.
Indeed, it was this aspect that Mr Wong counts as one of the significant achievements of the review - 'the active participation of Singaporeans'.
'All views received were considered,' he said.
He gave a few examples:
There were concerns over potential female abuse of vulnerable males. Thus, it was made an offence for a woman to engage in sexual activities with a boy or a man with a mental disability.
Another new offence was introduced to address concerns over the vulnerability of minors to sex predators prowling the Internet.
In particular, Mr Wong focused on Section 298A, which punishes those who knowingly commit an act aimed at causing religious or racial disharmony.
'While there was strong support for these amendments, there were concerns over the seemingly broad scope of the offence,' he said.
'In response to this feedback, we added the requirement of 'knowingly promotes' in Section 298A that mirrors the requirement of 'deliberate intention of wounding' in Section 298. This showed that we were prepared to listen and make further refinements,' he said.
Preserving racial and religious harmonyIN THE brave - and sometimes reckless - new world of the Internet, 298A is 'important because we want to preserve racial and religious harmony', said Mr Wong.
Previously, the law could not be used to deal with actions likely to cause racial disharmony, nor could it be applied against offensive blogs or other Internet media.
Prosecutors had to deal with such cases under the Sedition Act, legislation to punish seditious activities which incite rebellion against the state.
'The new section covers deliberate promotion of both religious and racial disharmony, and would cover Internet and other publications,' said Mr Wong.
The amendments therefore enabled such offences to be investigated under the Penal Code, he added.
However, some observers have asked if the law is the best recourse with such offences, arguing that Singapore should strengthen its social immune system such as by naming and shaming the culprit instead.
Asked if the latter might have been a better way forward, Mr Wong said the laws 'complement' efforts to promote racial and religious harmony, such as Racial Harmony Day and inter-faith events. There are also websites promoting racial harmony.
Marital immunityMOVING away from religion to rape, Mr Wong touched on the law on marital immunity.
Previously, a man could not be charged with raping his wife at all under the law.
While this is now changed to allow the authorities to go after the husband in certain circumstances - such as when the wife has applied for divorce, or if she has applied for a legal protection order, MPs during the Parliamentary debate on the Bill were clearly dissatisfied.
Rape is rape, they said. Make it illegal for husbands to rape wives altogether.
Asked about this, Mr Wong said it is a 'difficult and delicate issue'. As the family is the basic building block of society, 'we were therefore very careful about making laws that would intrude into the relationship between man and wife'.
Total abolition of marital immunity 'was not currently desirable as it would mean the law will henceforth regard the husband no different from a stranger whether they are married or in an otherwise happy marriage', he said.
Thus, MHA's approach tries to strike the right balance between the two extremes.
'Wives will be protected. But at the same time, we do not want to unwittingly create an arrangement that could encourage the breakdown of the basic family unit.'
Such an approach 'empowers the wife', he said, as she can take action to signal marital breakdown by taking one of the prescribed steps so the husband neednot second-guess the demise of their union.
'Our stance has always been to preserve the marriage and family, and as much as possible, facilitate the reconciliation and restoration of marriages and families.'
More robust debates to comeLOOKING back, the review saw robust debates such as that over Section 377A.
And Mr Wong expects more of such vigorous exchanges to come.
'As the society matures, we will see such robust debates when we make decisions that not all Singaporeans will agree with.
'It is critically important that we continue to maintain a rational, mature and pragmatic attitude, so the different views do not polarise our society or cause irreparable rifts.'
Singaporeans should work to 'expand the common space for all citizens to live harmoniously together, rather than dwell on the differences in views or lifestyles among segments in our community'.
The most significant achievement of the review is that it 'reflected present realities and addressed the changing nature of crime, while ensuring adequate protection for the more vulnerable members of our society such as our young and mentally disabled', said Mr Wong.
On whether Singaporeans will have to wait another 23 years for the next review, he said there is no fixed date.
However, 'we will constantly monitor our laws to keep them up to date and relevant', he promised.
[email protected]Copyright, 2007, Singapore Press Holdings Limited