Last Time, NS Defaulter /Deserter = S$5K Fine. Now NO MORE!
-
SINGAPORE: A national service defaulter, who had been sentenced to 18 months' jail, had his punishment reduced to a S$5,000 fine instead on Wednesday.
Seow Wei Sin, who's 48, had defaulted on his NS liability for more than 23 years and was arrested last year.
But his lawyers argued that the jail term was excessive as he had left Singapore for Malaysia when he was just one year old and had not enjoyed any benefits as a citizen here.
Since leaving, Mr Seow had set up a business in Malaysia, married a Malaysian and had five children, who are all Malaysians.
His lawyers also argued that previous similar cases were also given fines.
Taking these previous cases in account, Justice of Appeal Chao Hick Tin felt Seow's case did not warrant a custodial sentence.
He will issue his reasons for doing so in a written judgement later.
Under the Enlistment Act, NS defaulters can be fined up to S$5,000 or jailed up to three years.
- CNA/vm
-
He got away too lightly. But he never enjoy benefits of being Singaporean.
-
Those who are liable to serve national service but refuse are charged under the Enlistment Act. If convicted, they face three years' imprisonment and a fine of S$10,000.
Controversy arose when the penalties were increased in January 2006 after Melvyn Tan, who was born in Singapore, received a fine for defaulting on his National Service obligations. Tan left for London to study music during his enlistment age and later acquired British nationality. In parliament, Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean provided some illustration of the punishments defaulters would face:
- Where the default period exceeds two years but the defaulter is young enough to serve his full-time and operationally ready NS duties in full, MINDEF will press for a short jail sentence.
- Where the defaulter has reached an age when he cannot serve his full-time NS in a combat vocation or fulfil his operationally ready NS obligations in full, a longer jail sentence to reflect the period of NS he has evaded may be appropriate.
- Where the defaulter has reached an age when he cannot be called up for NS at all, a jail sentence up to the maximum of three years may be appropriate.
Each year, a small number of people are convicted for their failure to enlist or refusal to be conscripted. Most of them were Jehovah's Witnesses, who are usually court-martialled and sentenced to three years' imprisonment, but they are usually held in a low-security detention facility and separated from other conscription offenders. The government does not consider conscientious objection to be a legal reason for refusal to serve NS.
-
technically its his caregivers who made the decision to take him out of SG...1 year old...U expect him to tell U he wants to serve NS?
-
i think a fine is fair in this case.
-
He really suay... For nothing... $5000.. should fine the parents instead. LOL...
-
This enlistment act is nonsense. He has been in Malaysia since 1 years old. So Singapore expect him to fight for Singapore when there is a supposed war between Singapore and Malaysia? His family, properties and friends are all in Malaysia. If one is to fight for the safety of his family, friends and properties, where does his alignment lies? It is a joke.
-
me thinks guy who made spore ns law comes from another solar system in another galaxy.spore is only country on this planet and in this solar system with this kinda strange laws.
check see if any guy in ministry of defence has 3 lungs or bigger upper body areas.
-
this guy left sg when he could hardly walk and the judge initially sentenced him to 18 mths jail. Quite stupid huh the judge?
-
When he left Singapore, we were still part of Malaysia. The NS act hadn't been passed yet either.
-
$50 fine would hav been more appropriate.
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:
When he left Singapore, we were still part of Malaysia. The NS act hadn't been passed yet either.
Good point.
-
"His lawyers also argued that previous similar cases were also given fines."
why do I always feel that whenever in court cases, the lawyers will pick out all related cases and then ask for similiar, lighter punishment? or just I watch too much lawyer shows? :P
-
case law ma.....precedence is very important in law.
-
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
benefits of being Singaporean.
so cheem...
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:
When he left Singapore, we were still part of Malaysia. The NS act hadn't been passed yet either.
but in another pov it's tat when the enlistment act was passed in 1967, Singaporeans at e age of 18 was affected i.e. borned in 1949.But yeah, when he left Singapore, it's a state of the Malaysian federation.
-
This case is a little disturbing. It seems to be implying that every male citizen born in Singapore has an obligation to serve right from the day of birth.
-
Originally posted by PsycheSoma:
This case is a little disturbing. It seems to be implying that every male citizen born in Singapore has an obligation to serve right from the day of birth.
Boys born to mixed-nationality couples are still expected to serve even if they grow up somewhere else.
-
I think it would be more fair to default his citizenship. Since he's claiming to not enjoy any benefits of being a citizen since he practically never really resided in Singapore. If he really feels that losing his Singaporean citizenship is no big loss then, by all means let him go off with a light sentence. Actually, take away his fine altogether and let him walk scott free.
Its odd that the government expects people of this background to serve NS despite his close ties to malaysia but still routinely discriminates against Malays and Muslims.