|
 |
|
SPEECH BY DR NG ENG
HEN,MINISTER FOR MANPOWER AND 2ND MINISTER FOR DEFENCE, AT SECOND
READING OF THE ENLISTMENT (AMENDMENT) BILL, 3 APRIL 2006, 4.30 PM
AT PARLIAMENT HOUSE |
|
|
Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, ¡°That the
Bill be now read a Second time.¡± |
|
The Bill before this House seeks to amend
the Enlistment Act to increase the maximum quantum of fines for
Enlistment Act offences and to provide for the extension of Exit Permit
controls to pre-enlistees aged 13 till 16½. |
|
The Enlistment Act applies to all
Singaporeans and Permanent Residents from age 16½ to age 40, or age 50
in the case of officers. The Act covers the registration and enlistment
of those liable for National Service. It also covers the requirement to
apply for Exit Permit or notify MINDEF when going overseas. |
|
Those who fail to comply with the provisions
of the Enlistment Act are dealt with in the civil courts. On conviction,
they are currently liable to face a jail sentence of up to 3 years, a
fine of up to $5,000, or both. |
|
In line with the recent review of the SAF
Act we have also reviewed the Enlistment Act to update the penalty
regime. In addition, MINDEF is proposing amendments to effect changes to
the exit control measures governing pre-enlistees so as to facilitate
the application for biometric passports by pre-enlistees. |
|
Review of Penalty Regime |
|
Let me first deal with the penalty regime.
As Minister Teo Chee Hean has said in his Ministerial Statement on 16
January this year, the case of Melvyn Tan has highlighted an inadequacy
in the penalties imposed on NS defaulters, especially those who default
for long periods. |
|
MINDEF has reviewed the current penalties
and considered whether the 3-year maximum jail sentence is adequate,
whether we should specify a mandatory jail sentence and whether the
maximum fine that can be imposed is adequate. |
|
Our conclusion is that the maximum jail
sentence of 3 years is adequate, as it is longer than the current
full-time National Service duration of two years. |
|
Whether or not a particular offence merits
the maximum punishment of 3 years imprisonment would be a matter for the
Courts to decide, based on the facts of each case. |
|
As for minimum mandatory jail sentence, we
do not consider it necessary at this time, as the circumstances of the
cases vary widely. |
|
However, as explained in the Ministerial
Statement, MINDEF will be asking the public prosecutor to press for a
jail sentence in serious cases of NS defaulters, and explain why we
consider a jail sentence appropriate in a particular case. |
|
Serious cases include those who default
on their full-time National Service responsibilities for two years
or longer from the time they were required to register or enlist, or
from the time their exit permits expired for those granted
deferment, whichever is later. |
|
We believe that it is in the public
interest that such NS defaulters face a jail sentence, unless there
are mitigating circumstances. |
|
I would like to provide some
illustrations of what MINDEF considers to be sentences appropriate
to the nature of the offence or commensurate with its gravity: |
|
¡¡
a.
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.
b.
Where
the defaulter has reached an age when he cannot serve his full 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.
c.
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. |
|
In all instances, we expect that the
Court will take into account whatever aggravating or mitigating
circumstances there may be in each case to determine the appropriate
sentence. |
|
However, the maximum fine quantum has
remained unchanged since Dec 1970, while salaries and wages have
increased substantially over the years. It is therefore timely to
update the maximum fine quantum in order to maintain the deterrent
value of the fines. |
|
To this end, this amendment bill seeks
to raise the maximum fine quantum provided for under the Enlistment
Act from the current $5,000 to $10,000. This is in line with the
maximum fine quantum provided for in the amended Singapore Armed
Forces Act. |
|
Review of Exit Controls |
|
Let me now move on to the amendments
pertaining to exit control, which are prompted by the impending
switch to Biometric Passports. |
|
Currently, pre-enlistees from age 11
till 16½ are issued passports that are valid for only 2 years at a
time. |
|
If they require passports of extended
validity, their parents will have to furnish a bond as a guarantee
that they will return to fulfil their NS obligations. The bond
quantum is $75,000 or half the combined annual income of both
parents, whichever is higher. |
|
From age 16½ till enlistment, the exit
control is tighter. Passport validity is restricted to only 1 year
at a time and those going overseas for 3 months or longer will have
to apply for Exit Permits under the Enlistment Act. |
|
They are also required to furnish a bond
of the same quantum as applicable to those below 16½ ¨C $75,000 or
half the combined annual income of both parents, whichever is
higher. |
|
In view of the introduction of the
biometric passport later this year, MINDEF has reviewed the exit
control regime for pre-enlistees. |
|
One of the features of the biometric
passport is that its validity period is encoded in its chip in the
passport, and in accordance with international requirements, cannot
be changed once it is issued. Thus, unlike the current passports,
the biometric passport cannot be extended by stamping and would have
to be replaced on expiry. |
|
What this means is that if we continue
with the current passport control regime of restricted validity of 1
or 2 years, pre-enlistees will have to apply for new passports every
1 to 2 years at some cost and inconvenience to them. |
|
To reduce costs for pre-enlistees,
MINDEF has decided to allow pre-enlistees to have passports of the
normal full validity period. |
|
However, as exit controls are still
necessary to deter potential NS defaulters and to serve as a strong
psychological reminder of their NS obligation, MINDEF will require
pre-enlistees aged 13 to 16½ to apply for Exit Permits if they
intend to be away from Singapore for 3 months or more. |
|
Those who require Exit Permits of 2
years or more will be required to furnish a bond. This is similar to
the current arrangement where a bond is required if the pre-enlistee
requires a passport validity of more than 2 years. There will be no
change to the Exit Permit and bonding requirements for pre-enlistees
aged 16½ till enlistment. |
|
As Exit Permits are required only for
long trips of 3 months or more, the majority of pre-enlistees will
not be affected by this. In fact, the majority of pre-enlistees will
benefit from the new exit control regime, as they will be relieved
of passport controls, and given the full passport validity of 5
years. |
|
Currently, pre-enlistees from age 11
till 16½ are not covered under the Enlistment Act. Therefore, to
effect the changes that I have just mentioned, pre-enlistees aged 13
to 16½ have to be brought under the ambit of the Enlistment Act.
They will however not be subject to other provisions in the
Enlistment Act. |
|
The penalty regime for Exit Permit
offences for those aged 13 to 16½ will be only a fine of up to
$2,000, with no custodial sentences. They will however be subject to
heavier penalties should they continue to be in breach of the
Enlistment Act after that age. |
|
We also recognise that some young
pre-enlistees may not be sufficiently mature to understand their
obligations under the Enlistment Act, or that their parents or
guardians may have been instrumental in making decisions affecting
such pre-enlistees which resulted in contravention of the Enlistment
Act. |
|
We will thus be introducing a new
offence in the Enlistment Act under which parents and guardians can
be made liable for the Exit Permit offences of their children or
wards of ages 13 to 16½ so that the penalty can be imposed on their
parents or guardians when the circumstances warrant it. The penalty
regime for the offence will also be a fine of up to $2,000. |
|
Key Aspects of Enlistment (Amendment)
Bill |
|
Sir, I would like now to highlight key
aspects of the Bill. |
|
Clauses 2 and 4 propose to increase the
maximum fines that may be imposed by the court for Enlistment Act
offences from $5,000 to $10,000. The higher maximum fine will allow
for an appropriate level of punishment to be meted out based on the
seriousness of the offence committed. |
|
Clause 3 proposes to extend the
requirement for Exit Permit to pre-enlistees aged 13 to 16½. A
pre-enlistee who contravenes this requirement shall be liable on
conviction, to a penalty of a fine not exceeding $2,000. Clause 3
also makes each parent, guardian or person having custody of a
pre-enlistee aged 13 to 16½ accountable for the pre-enlistee¡¯s Exit
Permit offence. Those found guilty of the offence shall be liable on
conviction to a fine not exceeding $2,000. |
|
Conclusion |
|
The amendments of the Enlistment Act
will ensure that the penalty regime for NS defaulters remains
effective. It will also allow MINDEF to effect changes to the Exit
Permit requirements governing pre-enlistees, so that they would not
be inconvenienced when the biometric passport is introduced. |
|
Together, these measures will help to
deter potential NS defaulters and ensure that those who default on
their National Service responsibilities are adequately punished
under the law. |
|
Sir, I beg to move. |
|
Source:
www.mindef.gov.sg News
Release 3 Apr 2006 |
|
 |
|
Important
Notice |
|
Our FrontPage
Editions are a historical record of our Web site and reflect
the changing of the times, and also of our Web site through
time. We do not and will not update the links and stories on
these FrontPages even if they have become obsolete. |
|
FrontPage Edition: Thu 6 Apr 2006
All rights reserved
